Bill O’Reilly’s statement last week on the morning show The View that “Muslims killed us on 9/11”, was just another example of inflammatory rhetoric thrown at us to create more diversionary media hype and promotion on a slow news day. The topic is important and timely, but there was certainly no constructive purpose in stirring-the-pot with such an inane statement. Mr. O’Reilly is not dumb, and he certainly knew full-well the type of reaction his comment would garner. It is unfortunate that the rest of the media fell into his trap and gave him yet another opportunity to promote his slant on the world, and of course his new book.
While factually true that the terrorists responsible for “killing us on 9/11” were Muslims, twenty-seven of “us” who died there were also Muslims (not including the nineteen terrorists), Mr. O’Reilly’s statement did nothing to promote our healing or understanding of moderate Islam, and was somewhat akin to saying that Christians were responsible for killing the Jews in the Holocaust, since Hitler and many of his henchmen were so baptized. (www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1699/was-hitler-a-christian) .
The women of The View unfortunately proved their insecurity and unwillingness to discuss another view, and O’Reilly came out on top of the media spin again.
It is interesting that we Americans, who are, and have been, so involved in trying to bring the Palestinian (many of whom are Christian) and Jewish people together, can’t understand why the two sides can’t sit down and talk rationally about their differences, and yet here in our own country we can’t get a group of liberals to sit down rationally with a conservative hack to discuss two sides of a similar argument. It appears that sensible debate is not only dead in the Near-East, and our own Congress, but also in the rest of our society as well, and that we are incapable or uninterested in understanding the other side of an argument, much less finding any common ground to agree on.
Mr. O’Reilly claims that his statement was not “hateful”, and I will give him the benefit of the doubt, though it certainly seemed thoughtless. It was certainly intentional however, and his intention was not to develop some constructive dialog on an important topic, but to add fuel to an uncomfortable status quo, and promote his own self-interests.
More insanity from The Edge….. thanks for your input.