Reuters News Agency
Feb. 10, 2004
WASHINGTON -- Conservative television news anchor Bill O'Reilly said on Tuesday he was now skeptical about the Bush administration and apologized to viewers for supporting prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
The anchor of his own show on Fox News said he was sorry he gave the U.S. government the benefit of the doubt that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's weapons program poised an imminent threat, the main reason cited for going to war.
"I was wrong. I am not pleased about it at all and I think all Americans should be concerned about this," O'Reilly said in an interview with ABC's "Good Morning America."
"What do you want me to do, go over and kiss the camera?" asked O'Reilly, who had promised rival ABC last year he would publicly apologize if weapons were not found.
O'Reilly said he was "much more skeptical about the Bush administration now" since former weapons inspector David Kay said he did not think Saddam had any weapons of mass destruction.
While critical of President Bush, O'Reilly said he did not think the president intentionally lied. Rather, O'Reilly blamed CIA Director George Tenet, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton.
"I don't know why Tenet still has his job."
He added: "I think every American should be very concerned for themselves that our intelligence is not as good as it should be."
O'Reilly anticipated the presidential election would be a close race, adding he thought Democratic front-runner Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts would be a formidable opponent against Bush.
"It will be a very close race. The nation is divided," he said.
Published by
Reuters News Agency
|
Commentary:
It was like pulling teeth to get Bill O'Reilly to admit he was wrong on 'Good Morning America' (see transcripts, below), and he still hasn't said anything like this on his own show.
But it's now fair to say Bill O'Reilly has more integrity than the President of the United States.
Think about that for a few frightening moments.
=H&HH= |
|
|
|
-- TRANSCRIPTS --
From FOX transcript of THE O'REILLY FACTOR, March 18, 2003
BILL O'REILLY: "Here's, here's the bottom line on this for every American and everybody in the world, nobody knows for sure, all right?
"We don't know what [Saddam Hussein] has. We think he has 8,500 liters of anthrax. But let's see. But there's a doubt on both sides.
"And I said on my program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?
"But I'm giving my government the benefit of the doubt ... If he has 8,500 liters of anthrax that he's not going to give up, even though the United Nations demanded that he do that, we are doing the right thing.
"If he doesn't have any weapons, then we are doing the wrong thing. So, we'll see."
|
|
From ABC transcript of GOOD MORNING AMERICA, Feb. 10, 2004,
after host plays O'Reilly clip (see center column)
BILL O'REILLY: Right. Well, my analysis was wrong and I'm sorry. (pause) Absolutely. You know. And I'm not pleased about it.
CHARLES GIBSON: (Off Camera) Camera's right there.
BILL O'REILLY: Yeah, I just said it. What do you want me to do? Go over and kiss the camera? (pause) All right. I was wrong. I'm not pleased about it at all. And I think all Americans should be concerned about this.
ROBIN ROBERTS: (Off Camera) It's not the apology that I care about. That's truthful. You did say in there, though, if he's clean, if there's nothing, I will never trust the Bush administration again.
BILL O'REILLY: I am much more skeptical of the Bush administration now than I, I was at that time. Absolutely. And I'll tell you why. I understand from reading the Kay report how it all happened because I believe Kay. All right? I don't think Bush lied, but I don't think Bush was, and his people, were nearly skeptical enough about George Tenet and his guys bringing him in this stuff. I think they cherry-picked what they wanted to remove Saddam Hussein.
|
| This material is copyrighted by its original publishers.
It is reprinted by Unknown News without permission, solely for purposes of criticism, comment, and news reporting, in accordance with the Fair Use Guidelines of copyright material under § 107 of U.S.C. Title 17:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include --
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. |
|
|
|
There's much more than this at Unknown News.
|
