I can't believe Charles didn't have anything on him being on O'reilly tonight! Its 8:15 did I miss him already?
The Colonel David Hunt was just on and in the promos they didn't have anything on Pipes being on?
He was just on. Hope you saw him. He did a good job representing his position. The woman from MPAC, "Eltantawi" I believe her name was, spent most of her time trashing Pipes and telling people not to pay any attention to the man behind the curtain. "Nothing to see here, move along, move along, it's all Daniel Pipes' fault." O'Reilly didn't give Pipes a chance to defend himself, but I think it was OK. As I said, he came off well, and she seemed quite shrill.
He didn't make the point clearly or strongly enough, and he's not a great speaker, but did reasonably well.
She was chomping at the bit to attack him, but just went short of totally doing it.
They didn't refute the point made that only 6 out of several thousand have been implicated.
Also why the fuck is O'reilly only mentioning that Rabbi chaplains don't need to be double checked, which eltantawi of course avoided, why not mention Christian Chaplains as well?
ANY TIME A PAL SPOKESMAN COMES OUT O'REILLY FOR SOME FUCKING REASON ASSUMES that JEWS SHOULD BE COMPARED TO THE ISSUE OF MILITANT ISLAMISTS? Though this is of course done by Eltanatawi's group in their own head, its bullshit and O'reilly should cut it the fuck out!
The implied message is bullshit!
The trouble with O'Reilly is he just isn't that well informed - on anything, but particularly on this (although I did see him go off on a Pal spokesman one time over his unwillingness to say anything against terrorism). So he tries to appear sympathetic to the Arab cause by taking it easy on people like Eltantawi. Easy, since he isn't well thought out enough to argue with her.
He did mention Christian Chaplains, but I think he was prodding her for a bit of a reaction by focussing on the Jewish clergy thing. I didn't read too much into it, but you seem to be undert he impression he does that consistently? Does he?
I also agree, Pipes isn't that great on his feet. I've only seen him a few times, but I've never been impressed. I remember him going up against Eltantawi long ago, and when she said something about him he would just repeat, "I will not be attacked, I will not be attacked..." over and over again like a mental patient. It didn't come off well. You would think he'd know and be prepared for the attacks he must know are coming and have good answers ready.
Which makes me think it may be intentional that they were kept separate, maybe at Pipes' request - but that's just a guess.
I noticed they weren't ready with the reply. Again, I blame both O'Reilly and Pipes for not having their replies ready. There certainly weren't any surprises.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
I can't believe Charles didn't have anything on him being on O'reilly tonight! Its 8:15 did I miss him already?
The Colonel David Hunt was just on and in the promos they didn't have anything on Pipes being on?
He was just on. Hope you saw him. He did a good job representing his position. The woman from MPAC, "Eltantawi" I believe her name was, spent most of her time trashing Pipes and telling people not to pay any attention to the man behind the curtain. "Nothing to see here, move along, move along, it's all Daniel Pipes' fault." O'Reilly didn't give Pipes a chance to defend himself, but I think it was OK. As I said, he came off well, and she seemed quite shrill.
He didn't make the point clearly or strongly enough, and he's not a great speaker, but did reasonably well.
She was chomping at the bit to attack him, but just went short of totally doing it.
They didn't refute the point made that only 6 out of several thousand have been implicated.
Also why the fuck is O'reilly only mentioning that Rabbi chaplains don't need to be double checked, which eltantawi of course avoided, why not mention Christian Chaplains as well?
ANY TIME A PAL SPOKESMAN COMES OUT O'REILLY FOR SOME FUCKING REASON ASSUMES that JEWS SHOULD BE COMPARED TO THE ISSUE OF MILITANT ISLAMISTS? Though this is of course done by Eltanatawi's group in their own head, its bullshit and O'reilly should cut it the fuck out!
The implied message is bullshit!
The trouble with O'Reilly is he just isn't that well informed - on anything, but particularly on this (although I did see him go off on a Pal spokesman one time over his unwillingness to say anything against terrorism). So he tries to appear sympathetic to the Arab cause by taking it easy on people like Eltantawi. Easy, since he isn't well thought out enough to argue with her.
He did mention Christian Chaplains, but I think he was prodding her for a bit of a reaction by focussing on the Jewish clergy thing. I didn't read too much into it, but you seem to be undert he impression he does that consistently? Does he?
I also agree, Pipes isn't that great on his feet. I've only seen him a few times, but I've never been impressed. I remember him going up against Eltantawi long ago, and when she said something about him he would just repeat, "I will not be attacked, I will not be attacked..." over and over again like a mental patient. It didn't come off well. You would think he'd know and be prepared for the attacks he must know are coming and have good answers ready.
Which makes me think it may be intentional that they were kept separate, maybe at Pipes' request - but that's just a guess.
I noticed they weren't ready with the reply. Again, I blame both O'Reilly and Pipes for not having their replies ready. There certainly weren't any surprises.