O’Reilly Lambasts ‘Despicable’ Media Coverage Of The Ft. Hood Massacre
On Friday night’s episode of The O’Reilly Factor the host pulled no punches, launching directly into an especially vicious Talking Points segment aimed at Ft. Hood gunman Major Nidal Malik Hassan, but mostly the media’s portrayal of the killings. O’Reilly was indignant as he called out the “far left loons” who questioned the role that public policy played in these “vile crimes.”
Armed with examples, O’Reilly began by incredulously showing a New York Times headline that read “Told Of War Horror, Gunman Feared Deployment” and continued with examples from the Washington Post (“For Hood has felt the strain of repeated deployments”) and even Dr. Phil’s appearance on Larry King Live. “The fear got him and he just snapped,” said the “dopey” doctor.
Blaming foreign policy for mass murder, O’Reilly said, is “unbelievably stupid and insulting to the military.” Hassan is “a coward” — either “a Muslim terrorist or a crazy person,” according to O’Reilly. “That’s it — those are the choices,” and for Newsweek to claim that “the two wars currently being waged are taking a psychological toll” is offensive. ”Media that use tragedy to ram home political points are despicable,” he said.
O’Reilly was incensed enough to conjure the name of murdered abortion specialist Dr. George Tiller, claiming that after his murder, the left wing media blamed only the Fox News host, due to the ”problem with personal responsibility” on the “far left.” Guest ally Bernie Goldberg called it a “politically correct virus” in the “lamestream media.”
O’Reilly then touted his huge viewership numbers from the previous night — something covered extensively by Mediaite — claiming that Fox News had wiped MSNBC and CNN “off the face of the earth,” before stating, “The guard has changed in this country — the media guard has changed.” And looking at the numbers, it’s hard to deny. O’reilly’s justification for this, though, is far more debateable.
To hear him tell it, cable news viewers knew that Fox News would provide the honest take — spin-free, of course — without any of the… healmostsaidabadword! But you get the idea. On the other hand, there may be reason to believe that consumers of the news are flocking toward partisanship, eager to hear their beliefs echoed back to them. Whatever the case, numbers don’t lie.
Check out O’Reilly’s entire Talking Points segment and interview with Golberg in the clip below:
23 comments
Jim R says: Pot, meet kettle.
straitshooter says: O’Reilly’s right about this one. The press simply can’t resist any chance to to avoid assigning personal blame. This guy is a terrorist, either domestic or foreign. It doesn’t matter. This reminds me of when people tried to say the Columbine shooting was about violent video games, Marilyn Manson music or the epidemic of bullying. That shooting, like this one, is about evil people doing evil things.
Hassan deserves no mercy, and he will get none from the bulk of the American people. Now it’s just a question of who can execute him faster: Texas for murder or the Feds for treason. Either way, put him down like the rabid dog he is.
BethDonovan says: This guy, Hassan, cannot use any of the excuses that the Left is giving him. He knew exactly what he was doing. He planned it. He gave away his belongings that morning, before he drove to Ft. Hood, because he had a plan to attack and kill as many US soldiers as he could – in the name of his “god”, allah. He shouted “Allahu Akbar” as he opened fire on unarmed soldiers and civilians.
And yet, idiot talking heads say there is no proof this act had anything to do with his Islamic beliefs.
That the US Government let him continue as a Field Grade Officer despite his attempts at converting his patients to Islam, despite his known disagreement with US policy in the MIddle East and despite his claim that he is a Palestinian despite being born in the USA, is a ridiculous bow to political correctness gone mad.
Hassan is a traitor, no more, no less. And what he did was an act of terror. Anyone who denies that must have his or her head where the sun don’t shine.
JunkJunk says: BillO obviously doesn’t watch FOX and Frauds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8l5kGWwHlbk
chicharrone says: “That the US Government let him continue…” you wouldn’t be referring to the U.S. Army by any chance, would you? and who was commander-in-chief personally responsible for his continued employment when he converted to islam? a certain recently retired president by any chance? i am a little confused by the aspersions being cast, beth.
dregs says: I am beginning to wonder what the purpose is of posts like these. No question, once in a while, a FOX host like O”Reilly makes perfect sense – the first diagnosis given for the shootout by the MSM was wrong in so many ways. But why does Mediaite turn to a loud, xenophobic, homophobic, ambushing bully in times like these – instead of making an intelligent analysis itself? Posts like these feel like “see, O’Reilly’s not so bad,” just because his knee-jerk conservative pandering happens to align with the emerging picture, which is rare and irrelevant in the broader context of his work. How about this: the mainstream media (which has a tad more Muslim viewers than FOX) was not eager to jump on the religion angle in the first day of the shooting. They did, with deadlines and airtime to fill, immediately jump on the angle that I think most minds would when they hear “soldier goes berserk on base, kills a dozen fellow soldiers.” There is no need for conspiracy here. Some outlets will be more apt to avoid religion, but others will tackle it in a more politically sensative way when official details emerge and more interviews are granted with those who knew the shooter, etc. But FOX has the advantage here: good taste and patience have never been their standard operating procedure, and if they are ever going to jump to conclusions to fill airtime (remember the stuff about Obama attending a terrorist training camp?) they just happen to be different than those of their competitors.
So how about another option in your poll: “The media’s coverage sucked – but that didn’t transform Bill O’Reilly into Edward R. Murrow.”
SFPhoto says: It’s obvious to anyone who actually watches Bill O’Reilly that he is NOT “a loud, xenophobic, homophobic, ambushing bully.” Like most media people he makes perfect sense a great deal of the time, and when he doesn’t, it’s because I don’t agree with him. And he is NOT homophobic! He’s not onboard the accepted gay agenda, but a lot of my gay friends aren’t onboard 100 percent either. Gay activists don’t really speak for the gay community, most are self-appointed, and most have agendas of their own.
BethDonovan says: chicharrone – the first reports were that he converted to Islam – that was quickly proven wrong- he was born a Muslim and described himself as a Palestinian long before President Bush was in office.
Political correctness was in vogue long before President Bush was in office, also.
What made the FBI not take reports of this guy’s feelings more seriously? They got those reports 6 months ago – with Justice under Eric Holder.
You just can’t blame everything that goes wrong on President Bush forever.
ChrisNH says: You know the old media–the ones called out here by O’Reilly–are in trouble when they start inventing their own talking points rather than having them spoon-fed by their friends on the Left. As far as I can see, these ‘theories’ are largely media-created since none of these wailing media ‘experts’ have thus far gone in to the hospital to ‘chat’ with their little friend.
ImNotBlue says: To hear him tell it, cable news viewers knew that Fox News would provide the honest take — spin-free, of course — without any of the… healmostsaidabadword! But you get the idea. On the other hand, there may be reason to believe that consumers of the news are flocking toward partisanship, eager to hear their beliefs echoed back to them. Whatever the case, numbers don’t lie.
Man, this site just can’t avoid taking shots at FNC. No matter the story, no matter the situation, they’ve got to appease the haters (like “dregs”) who just want to avoid reality, in an effort to perpetually bash FOX. Was that line necessary? Did it ad to the story? No… just a cheep shot to say, “Hey, I’m not really complimenting or agreeing with O’Reilly… I’m still one of you guys. Pathetic and cowardly.
I just love how FNC hosts bitch and moan about the “media” or the “MSM” in the same breath as touting their huge numbers and their victories over other outlets. The cognitive dissonance is breathtaking.
If you’re constantly feeling the need to trumpet how powerful you are and how you have so much better ratings than other media outlets — something that’s always seemed more than a little defensive, to say nothing of classless — then do so. But memo to BillO et al: you *are* the “mainstream media.” You can’t play the victim card AND the winner card at the same time.
dregs says: “It’s obvious to anyone who actually watches Bill O’Reilly that he is NOT “a loud, xenophobic, homophobic, ambushing bully.” Like most media people he makes perfect sense a great deal of the time, and when he doesn’t, it’s because I don’t agree with him. And he is NOT homophobic! He’s not onboard the accepted gay agenda, but a lot of my gay friends aren’t onboard 100 percent either. Gay activists don’t really speak for the gay community, most are self-appointed, and most have agendas of their own.”
Maybe you’ve been watching the wrong show. This is a guy who has repeatedly said that children should be shielded from the fact that homosexuality even exists, that in public – in view of children – gay couples should refer to one another as “friends” and avoid even hand-holding. Not a big deal to you, I’m sure, but if you were gay, and had school-age children, how would you feel about the popular TV commentator who believed your relationship was akin to sexual indecency, especially if the idea it existed came anywhere near a classroom. This is homophobia – you might agree with it, but at least be honest about your opinion.
m says: O’Reilly is a coward, and is either a satyriasist or a crazy person. That’s it — those are the choices.
>And he is NOT homophobic! He’s not onboard the accepted gay agenda, but a lot of my gay friends aren’t onboard 100 percent either. Gay activists don’t really speak for the gay community, most are self-appointed, and most have agendas of their own.
Anyone who use the term “gay agenda” to describe homosexuality lean closer towards the side of homophobia than anything else. It’s just plain archaic.
SFPhoto says: M, you are an idiot. I am a very happy gay man, I have worked for years in the Gay Community, and my FACES OF AIDS photo exhibit has traveled all over the world with The Quilt as the first photo exhibit to humanize people with AIDS. I like Bill O’Reilly. I don’t always agree with gay activists. The last time I checked, this was a free country and people are entitled to have their own opinions.
Sunnyr says: O’Reilly is right.
Muslim radicals call Hasan
‘Officer and a Gentleman’
13 deaths were ‘pre-emptive attack;’
‘We do NOT denounce his actions’
Posted: November 06, 2009
By Bob Unruh
WorldNetDaily
Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan
A website run by radical Muslims today honored Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the man accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood in Texas, as an “Officer and a Gentleman,” saying his actions should not be denounced.
The massacre yesterday, which also left more than two dozen injured, was called a “pre-emptive attack” by supporters of the Revolution Muslim website.
Hasan, a Muslim psychiatrist who reportedly had been disciplined for pushing Islam on his patients at one point in his career, had given away his furniture and handed out Qurans before going to the military base and firing on soldiers at a processing center where soldiers prepared to deploy.
Why the left loves tyrants, terrorists – $4.95 today only! Save $21 on Jamie Glazov’s acclaimed exposé ‘United in Hate’
There were multiple reports he had objected to being placed in the position of possibly having to fight fellow Muslims by his scheduled deployment to the Middle East.
“Get Well Soon Major Nidal We Love You,” said the website run by radicals who follow an imam once jailed in Britain. “Major Nidal Hasan M.D. An officer and a gentleman was injured while partaking in a pre-emptive attack.”
The website lists as its imam Sheik Abdullah el-Faisal, who in February 2003 was sentenced to nine years in jail, reduced to seven on appeal, after being convicted of soliciting murder and inciting racial hatred in England.
According to reports in the London Guardian at the time, hundreds attended his lectures, possibly including James Ujaama, a U.S. citizen accused of trying to help the Taliban in Afghanistan; Richard Reid, who attempted to detonate a bomb in his shoe while crossing the Atlantic in a jetliner; and Zacharias Moussaoui, jailed for the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks on the U.S.
The reports said el-Faisal, who later was released and returned to his home in Jamaica, suggested Muslims attend training camps to gain the skills to wage jihad on the West.
He was recorded praising Osama bin Laden and saying, “You have to learn how to shoot and fly planes and drive tanks.”
El-Faisal also said chemical weapons should be utilized to “exterminate non-believers” and said Muslim mothers should buy toy guns for their children to providing training opportunities.
“We do NOT denounce this officer’s actions, we do however apologize for the following acts committed by our country,” the U.S.-based website’s supporters said. They listed: “Bay of Tonkin, The East Timor Massacre by USA Supported Suharto, 1902 Samar Massacre in the Philippines by the USMC, 1,000,000 Dead Iraqis, Afghani & Pakistanis Killed by the USA, Starvation of Africa & Rape of it’s (sic) Resources by the USA, Support of the Brutal ‘Israeli’ Occupation Entity, Etc. Etc.”
“Every day is Fort Hood for the world community due to USA policies and their tyrant totalitarian puppet regimes,” the activists proclaimed. “Rest assure (sic) the slain terrorists at Fort Hood are in the eternal hellfire and it is not to (sic) late for YOU to change your policies,” they said.
The website’s mission statement states, “Revolution Muslim is a message and movement grounded in the sayings, deeds, actions and understanding of Ahlus Sunnah wal jama’ah (The collective body of those Muslims that adhere to the ways of the Prophet (SAWS) and the first four generations of Muslims).”
It continues, “We pray that we may witness the dismantlement of western, secular dominance across the world as we hold it to be pagan and idolatrous in the majority of its presumptions. We seek a resurrection of the just example set forth by centuries of Islamic rule throughout the ages and we hold it to be self evident for the objective soul and mind that Allah is One and that Muhammad ibn Abdullah is His Prophet and that the religion offers the solution to all of the world’s ills and afflictions.”
The base commander said soldiers reported they heard Hasan shout “Allahu Akbar,” or “Allah is the greatest,” while he was shooting.
The site is disdainful of other Islamic organizations, citing a condemnation from the Islamic Society of North America regarding the shootings.
“ISNA – The house dog, barks once more to please its kafir Masters,” Revolution Muslim wrote.
Hasan was born and raised in Virginia, but has family outside of Jerusalem. He enlisted and obtained his education from the military. He spent most of his career at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington until he was sent to Fort Hood this year, from where he apparently was to be deployed.
While I largely agree with O’Reilly’s either/or, most of the segment with Goldberg was off the mark.
The headlines cited were accurate. They may have played a different angle than O’Reilly or Goldberg would’ve highlighted, but they were still true based on the information available.
As I commented to a different post, the evening FoxNews numbers were just a little above their norm, which implies that anyone looking for a synopsis of the story and who have turned to Fox in the past, tuned-in that evening like I’m sure a lot of other people did for Nightline.
It didn’t show that the masses were fed-up with other outlets or that they dropped the ball, it simply demonstrated that those who would ordinarily watch Fox for their coverage decided to watch their preferred network for that day’s story.
I mean, five million people is a miniscule segment of the population. It’s in the ballpark of the least-watched evening news broadcasts and though O’Reilly beat his cable competitors in that timeslot, it still means that if you add-up all viewers to all cable, the overwhelming majority of people didn’t care enough about the story to interrupt their primetime.
Oh, and all magazines are having problems because their readership has migrated to the less-profitable online and not because they’re content has slipped. IMHO
Sunnyr says: GLENN BECK WAS RIGHT ABOUT BARACK OBAMA!!
Muhammadan or Racist? Or both?
ATLAS SHRUGGED
Obama on Major Muslim, Born in Virginia, sent to medical school by the U.S. Army, the psychiatrist was disciplined for proselytizing to his patients about Islam. Asked his nationality, he didn’t identify himself as an American but as a Palestinian. He spoke approvingly of the shooting death of a Little Rock Army recruiter in June and reportedly was heard saying “maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Times Square.”He screamed allah akbar before he mowed down scores of patriotic Americans and gave away Qurans with his business card before his act of jihad. He gave his landlord two weeks notice …………
Obama says don’t jump to conclusions on shooting
“We don’t know all the answers yet. And I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts,” Obama said in a Rose Garden statement…”
Obama’s rush to judgement of a white cop doing his job:
“But I think it’s fair to say, No. 1, any of us would be pretty angry; No. 2, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, No. 3 … that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”
The incident, Obama said, shows “how race remains a factor in this society.”
From the left Dregs says “But why does Mediaite turn to a loud, xenophobic, homophobic, ambushing bully in times like these. . . ?”
From the right imnotblue says in response to this same post “Man, this site just can’t avoid taking shots at FNC”
Hmmm. . . then maybe just maybe we are doing something right?
and Sfphoto I think you think you threw your critics for a loop with your disclosure and response.
Nachi says: Sick. And getting sicker.
>Hmmm. . . then maybe just maybe we are doing something right?
Attracting the idiots on both sides to dominate the comments section of every story, making this site just like every other one on the Internet, means SOMETHING – although I don’t know if it means you’ve done something RIGHT. Although it’ll probably mean another one of those updates about all the hits you’re getting and how great it is that you’re attracting advertisers, and it’ll probably pay the bills and then some, so….now that I think about it, yes, I guess congratulations are in order after all. Back to you.
ImNotBlue says: Vidiot says:
November 7, 2009 at 1:41 pm
I just love how FNC hosts bitch and moan about the “media” or the “MSM” in the same breath as touting their huge numbers and their victories over other outlets.
Yes, b*tching and moaning about a news network is best left to the White House… right?
dregs says:
November 7, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Maybe you’ve been watching the wrong show.
Which show have YOU been watching?
This is a guy who has repeatedly said that children should be shielded from the fact that homosexuality even exists, that in public – in view of children – gay couples should refer to one another as “friends” and avoid even hand-holding.
Lie.
Not a big deal to you, I’m sure, but if you were gay, and had school-age children, how would you feel about the popular TV commentator who believed your relationship was akin to sexual indecency, especially if the idea it existed came anywhere near a classroom.
If that happened, you’d have something to talk about… but it’s still a lie, so you don’t.
This is homophobia – you might agree with it, but at least be honest about your opinion.
After lying in your post, I’m not sure you should lecture someone else about “being honest.”
Dan Abrams says:
November 7, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Hmmm. . . then maybe just maybe we are doing something right?
So, my comment about this post (which I have made continually, and shown examples for over and over and over again… even if some of the writers would rather ignore it), is on par with an overt liar (see above) who simply dislikes when people who don’t expressly agree with him/her state their opinion. No Mr. Abrams, that’s not “doing something right,” that’s called pandering to a left-wing audience, which has apparently found this site to be on par with other left-wing sites, and thusly demands the same conformity of a KOS, MediaMatters, or Newshounds.
I’m looking for a little objectivity… tell me why you think the line I highlighted belonged in the story, and isn’t an example of bias or a cheap shot at FNC. Tell me why that’s not an unnecessary opinion, once again, making its way into a “report” on this site.
ImNotBlue,
When did I say anything about the White House, or imply that I supported their decision to go after FNC? You’re just building strawmen here, much as Fox News or Glenn Beck do. Typical conservative reaction — if you can’t engage the point, change the subject and get upset about something else.
ImNotBlue says: Vidiot says:
November 9, 2009 at 12:27 pm
ImNotBlue,
When did I say anything about the White House, or imply that I supported their decision to go after FNC?
Oy vey… the situations are analogous. You complain about FOX alleging poor coverage or bias elsewhere in the media… while the White House has spent significant time in the past month doing just that, but targeted at FOX.
But more over, did I say that YOU thought something specifically about the war on FOX? No? Hmmm… a little defensive, aren’t we?
So let’s go back, and really examine your original post:
If you’re constantly feeling the need to trumpet how powerful you are and how you have so much better ratings than other media outlets
You mean a network which vies for ratings, dollars, and credibility talks about their dominant ratings? Really? Don’t ALL networks do this when they’re ahead? The answer… yes. Selective outrage.
that’s always seemed more than a little defensive, to say nothing of classless
Was it classless when Olbermann was doing that nightly (although, he often got his numbers wrong)? Is it classless when CNN touts “the Most Trusted Name In News” or the “Most Watched Program” commercials? Is it classless that McDonald’s says “Billions and Billions of Burger’s Sold?” Seems, you like modesty when it comes to FOX… but perhaps only in that arena.
But memo to BillO et al: you *are* the “mainstream media.”
Mainstream media is a synonym for “historic media outlets and formats.” The Internet will never be part of the “MSM,” nor will cable news. MSM refers to newspapers and the broadcast networks. But either way, it’s simply a way of classifying those outlets… not disparaging them. Would you prefer that instead of saying MSM, he say, “ABCNBCCBSNYTimesWashingtonPost…” and so on each time? Come on, be realistic.
You can’t play the victim card AND the winner card at the same time.
Nobody’s playing the victim. O’Reilly was saying the MSM was lax in their coverage, and was avoiding getting to the real issue. That’s not being a victim… that’s being critical. And after then being critical, being able to back up your thesis with evidence of ratings success, is called being thorough. He states and opinion, and backed it up… what’s the problem?
How’s that for “engage the point.” You’re wrong on all accounts, as I’ve shown. Perhaps next time, you’ll prefer I make a short comment about your nonsense, instead of pick apart your arguments one-by-one, and expose their ignorance.
- » Jon Stewart's Epic Parody Of Glenn Beck
- » CNN: Protesters Shout Racial And Gay Slurs At Lewis And Frank (Update)
- » Another CNN Anchor Fails At Celebrity Jeopardy
- » David Shuster On Media Bias, Drudge, Andrew Breitbart, And James O'Keefe
- » FAMU Sex Tape Link - Real Or Hoax?
Job hunting?
Use our proprietary jobs tool to access the largest pool of jobs aggregated from around the country.
Rory Kennedy To Produce Rosie O’Donnell’s New Talk Show
Our sister site Gossip Cop broke the news on Friday that Rosie O'Donnell was signing a deal with Warner Brothers to have her own talk show in syndication by 2011-2012 (coincidentally when Queen Oprah is going off the air). Now Gossip Cop has confirmed: the show will be produced by none other than Robert F. Kennedy's daughter, Rory Kennedy.
MSNBC Jumps The Gun On Rep. Stupak’s Health Vote
At 1 pm today, MSNBC was reporting that Democratic House member Bart Stupak was voting "yes" on the health care bill, via a chyron on the bottom of their screen, even as the hosts were saying he was "close to" a deal. C-Span repeated the same story. At 1:20 pm Stupak told reporters that he's still planning on voting no, but "getting there." So how did a major news org end up reporting otherwise?
More TV headlines:
»Bart Stupak Will Vote Yes On Health Care: “Real Winners Are The American People” »23
»This Week: Karl Rove and David Plouffe Spar Over ‘Mission Accomplished’ »4
»Networks Come Out In Full Force For The HCR Debate
»David Shuster Defends Brett Baier Interview, Talks Twitter Absence »10
»CNN: Protesters Shout Racial And Gay Slurs At Lewis And Frank (Update) »249
-
Coming soon...
© 2010 Mediaite, LLC | About Us | Advertise | Newsletter | Privacy | User Agreement | Disclaimer | Power Grid FAQ | Contact | Archives
| Dan Abrams, Founder
| Hosting by Datagram
| 
RSS
