Religions > Atheism > MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the definition of a lie.....?????)
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Yang Yanks His Wang" |
| Date: |
29 Jul 2004 04:07:44 AM |
| Object: |
MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the definition of a lie.....?????) |
MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the
definition of a lie.....?????)
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc4.htm
"O'Reilly: The issues… alright good, now, one of the issues is you
because you've been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass
destruction, the senate intelligence committee, Lord Butler's
investigation in Britain, and now the 911 Commission have all come out
and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus,
Gladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons
of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?
M: He didn't tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass
destruction.
O: Yeah, but he didn't lie, he was misinformed by - all of those
investigations come to the same conclusion, that's not a
lie................
O: Just the issues. You've got three separate investigations plus the
president of Russia all saying… British intelligence, US intelligence,
Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass
destruction, you say, "he lied." This is not a lie if you believe it
to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious -
M: Well, that's almost pathological - I mean, many criminals believe
what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test -
O: Alright, now you're dancing around a question -
M: No I'm not, there's no dancing
O: He didn't lie
M: He said something that wasn't true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources"
-----------
(http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=lie):
"lie:
A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
To present false information with the intention of deceiving. To
convey a false image or impression: Appearances often lie."
------------
Liberals Hate America!
.
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the definition of a lie.....?????) |
29 Jul 2004 07:55:25 AM |
|
|
"Yang Yanks His Wang" <kool24dude@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4fcdcfe8.0407290107.542fb5de@posting.google.com...
MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the
definition of a lie.....?????)
Sure he does. But not nearly as well as O'Reilly. Or you. <G>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "RemnantsAflame" |
|
| Title: Re: MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the definition of a lie.....?????) |
31 Jul 2004 01:33:43 AM |
|
|
(Yang Yanks His Wang) wrote in message news:<4fcdcfe8.0407290107.542fb5de@posting.google.com>...
MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the
definition of a lie.....?????)
http://www.drudgereport.com/dnc4.htm
"O'Reilly: The issues? alright good, now, one of the issues is you
because you've been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass
destruction, the senate intelligence committee, Lord Butler's
investigation in Britain, and now the 911 Commission have all come out
and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus,
Gladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons
of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?
M: He didn't tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass
destruction.
O: Yeah, but he didn't lie, he was misinformed by - all of those
investigations come to the same conclusion, that's not a
lie................
O: Just the issues. You've got three separate investigations plus the
president of Russia all saying? British intelligence, US intelligence,
Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass
destruction, you say, "he lied." This is not a lie if you believe it
to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious -
M: Well, that's almost pathological - I mean, many criminals believe
what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test -
O: Alright, now you're dancing around a question -
M: No I'm not, there's no dancing
O: He didn't lie
M: He said something that wasn't true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources"
Wow, did Moore ever blow this! He *did* make it look like he doesn't
understand the definition of "lie". I'm disappointed. The correct
answer to O'Reilly's contentions are, "Bush was indeed lying. He and
the rest of the vipers in his administration had designs on Iraq and
Hussein as far back as 2000, and so they purposely, knowingly
presented the public the scant, bad intelligence that supported their
case, and ignored the rest that didn't."
Moore knows this, and was getting at it for a second, but failed to
drive it home. Apparently in the heat of the debate, he just wasn't
at his best.
I'd love to see or hear this exchange. I'm glad to see that, from
what I can tell from the transcript, Moore never backed down from
putting up at a fight (but he did waffle, on subjects I wouldn't think
he would, strangely). I love this bit at the end, where it looks like
he was being as persisently feisty as ever:
M: You wouldn’t send another child, another parents child to
Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?
O: I would.
M: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?
O: That’s right.
M: Where’s the recruiter?
O: You’d love to get rid of me.
M: No I don’t want—I want you to live. I want you to
live.<<<
And indeed, Moore really has a point ... If O'Reilly really means
this, well, I don't know how wiling at this point the military would
be to let a grey-haired middle-aged guy with (I believe) no military
experience go fight in Iraq or not, but I'm sure they would if he
tried hard enough.
Moore and O'Reilly's outrageous personalities played off each other in
such a way that this confrontation was surprisingly pleasant, in a
strange way.
Ryan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Clave" |
|
| Title: Re: MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the definition of a lie.....?????) |
31 Jul 2004 01:44:41 AM |
|
|
"RemnantsAflame" <remnantsaflame@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8053c8c9.0407302233.416204a@posting.google.com...
kool24dude@yahoo.com (Yang Yanks His Wang) wrote in message
news:<4fcdcfe8.0407290107.542fb5de@posting.google.com>...
MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the
definition of a lie.....?????)
<...>
M: He said something that wasn't true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources"
Wow, did Moore ever blow this! He *did* make it look like he doesn't
understand the definition of "lie". I'm disappointed. The correct
answer to O'Reilly's contentions are, "Bush was indeed lying. He and
the rest of the vipers in his administration had designs on Iraq and
Hussein as far back as 2000, and so they purposely, knowingly
presented the public the scant, bad intelligence that supported their
case, and ignored the rest that didn't."
Yeah, he should have done it there, but he *did* do it tonight on Maher's show,
where he could speak relatively uninterrupted. If you missed it, catch a rerun
later this week -- HBO.
Jim
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Burns" |
|
| Title: Re: MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand thedefinition of a lie.....?????) |
31 Jul 2004 06:55:49 AM |
|
|
RemnantsAflame wrote:
kool24dude@yahoo.com (Yang Yanks His Wang) wrote in message
news:<4fcdcfe8.0407290107.542fb5de@posting.google.com>...
[...]
O: He didn't lie
M: He said something that wasn't true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate
sources"
Wow, did Moore ever blow this! He *did* make it look like he
doesn't understand the definition of "lie". I'm disappointed.
The correct answer to O'Reilly's contentions are, "Bush was
indeed lying. He and the rest of the vipers in his administration
had designs on Iraq and Hussein as far back as 2000, and so they
purposely, knowingly presented the public the scant, bad
intelligence that supported their case, and ignored the rest
that didn't."
This isn't some new standard whipped up for the 2004 election.
I stumbled across an essay from 1877 the other day that seemed
exquisitely appropriate, William Clifford's "The Ethics of Belief".
The line that really slapped me in the face was:
It is admitted that he did sincerely believe in the soundness
of his ship; but the sincerity of his conviction can in no
wise help him, because he had no right to believe on such
evidence as was before him. He had acquired his belief not by
honestly earning it in patient investigation, but by stifling
his doubts.
W K Clifford's "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)
http://www.casco.net/~tkerns/religsite/textsite/cliffordsa.html
: I.—THE DUTY OF INQUIRY
:
: A SHIPOWNER was about to send to sea an emigrant-ship. He knew
: that she was old, and not over-well built at the first; that she
: had seen many seas and climes, and often had needed repairs.
: Doubts had been suggested to him that possibly she was not
: seaworthy. These doubts preyed upon his mind and made him unhappy;
: he thought that perhaps he ought to have her thoroughly overhauled
: and refitted, even though this should put him to great expense.
: Before the ship sailed, however, he succeeded in overcoming these
: melancholy reflections. He said to himself that she had gone
: safely through so many voyages and weathered so many storms that
: it was idle to suppose she would not come safely home from this
: trip also. He would put his trust in Providence, which could
: hardly fail to protect all these unhappy families that were leaving
: their fatherland to seek for better times elsewhere. He would
: dismiss from his mind all ungenerous suspicions about the honesty
: of builders and contractors. In such ways he acquired a sincere
: and comfortable conviction that his vessel was thoroughly safe and
: seaworthy; he watched her departure with a light heart, and
: benevolent wishes for the success of the exiles in their strange
: new home that was to be; and he got his insurance-money when she
: went down in mid-ocean and told no tales.
:
: What shall we say of him? Surely this, that he was verily guilty
: of the death of those men. It is admitted that he did sincerely
: believe in the soundness of his ship; but the sincerity of his
: conviction can in no wise help him, because he had no right to
: believe on such evidence as was before him. He had acquired his
: belief not by honestly earning it in patient investigation, but
: by stifling his doubts. And although in the end he may have felt
: so sure about it that he could not think otherwise, yet inasmuch
: as he had knowingly and willingly worked himself into that frame
: of mind, he must be held responsible for it.
:
: [...]
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN (Does Michael Moore understand the definition of a lie.....?????) |
30 Jul 2004 04:57:20 PM |
|
|
And let's not forget, the following politicians, among many others, all said
in very public speeches that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,
was continuing to develop them, and had to be stopped:
John Kerry
Hillary Clinton
Bill Clinton
Al Gore
Tom Daschle
Jay Rockefeller
According to the Michael Moore definition, all the people named above are
liars. And if they actually believed what they were saying, they are
pathological liars.
p.s. -- In 1999, Kery also said, on Larry King Live, that Saddam had to be
deposed, and if our allies wouldn't go along, we should do it alone. Not
that he'd ever flip-flop or anything.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
