I recently had the joy of helping my fellow Kossacks by listening and transcribing an O'Reilly interview
Doing so I took the utmost care in providing an accurate transcription, which can be found in the commment thread
I wanted to use this dairy to take a look at the "journalism" that O'Reilly displays throughout this piece.
O'Reilly: The word torture is loaded captain, and you know that, some people say [This is a common phrase spoken by Fox News people. The point of journalism is to cite your sources, the documentary Outfoxed goes into great detail about this (see what I just did there was cite my source and not just say, some people say)], you know, dunking somebody in the water for 40 seconds [Here O'Reilly intentionally distorts the severity of waterboarding, it is equivalent to saying, "You know some people say that 2.0g of lead is dangerous, others point out that that weighs less than a pencil" knowing full well that the weight of a bullet isn't the dangerous part of it] isn't torture it's coerced interrogation, whatever. But, Vice President Cheney contends that memos that have not been made public say that what was gleaned from Sheikh Mohammed, Khalid Mohammad, Zubaydah, and the other guy that was waterboarded saved American lives, do you believe that?
Rittgers: Well, we need to look at all that they said when they were being waterboarded. Certainly they said some things that were true, but they also said somethings so they wouldn't be suffering drowning.
O'Reilly: (interrupting) But if American lives were saved, alright, if if they were able to disrupt plots, we know one on the Brooklyn Bridge a couple of others, that saved lives, captain? Was the technique that we know now worth doing that?[Here O'Reilly employs a favorite technique of his, making highly complicated subtly shaded questions into binary yes and no, he does this by framing it in such a way that not agreeing with him tacitly connects you to something unfathomable, like not caring if Americans die]
Rittgers: Well, they also sent us on a bunch of wild goose chases all over the globe.
O'Reilly: (interrupting) But, that doesn't matter captain. Captain, it doesn't matter.[It does matter, this goes to the last point of O'Reilly setting up these ridiculous frameworks which his questions live in, it makes it impossible to have an actual dialog] The question is, with all due respect, and I do respect you, Cheney says lives were saved, is it worth doing waterboarding, keeping them up late in cold rooms, stress positions, to save lives? Is it worth is, sir?[Really he is asking, do the ends justify the means, but he is trying to frame it in such a way that the obvious answer of no, is less than appealing]
Rittgers: We could have gotten the same information by following the time proven techniques that interrogaters have always used?
O'Reilly: And you're positive of that?[Knowing that Captain Rittgers is not nearly as cavalier and careless with his words as O'Reilly is, he puts him into the absurd position of needing absolute assurance of the alternative to O'Reilly's position]
Rittgers: Well, we'll never know. Because, we went ahead and made these extraordinary...
O'Reilly: (interrupting) But, you just stated, we could have gotten, and now you're saying we'll never know. Look, here's the deal, and I want everybody to understand this. If I'm the President of the United States, captain, and I believe you too, and [if] we have an imminent threat, because that's what the government thought after 9/11, there was going to be another attack, [if] and you have guys that aren't giving up any info, and [if] you have a choice of dunking them in the water, with an attending physician standing by. You dunk them in the water captain, I think you would have done it too. [When you leave out all the if's, like O'Reilly does, the tortured chain of logic doesn't seem so crazy (ok it still is fairly insane). With them you clearly see that he is setting up some weird 24-like scenario]
Rittgers: Well look, all this talk of the, uh, the ticking nuke comes from watching too many scenes of 24.[Rittgers nails him on it] The reality is that we didn't know what we didn't know, and using waterboarding to go fishing for intelligence, produces a lot of bad information. And, it's counter-productive, and it, uh, it produces a lot of bad information, and strikes back at us.
O'Reilly: What do you say to that Mr. Zeihan?
Zeihan: Actually on that last point I definitely agree with the good captain. Terror inter... I'm sorry, torture interrogation is only effective when you know a specific person has specfic information, that we need.
O'Reilly: (interrupting) Ok, we already heard that, I'm getting a little impatient with you gentlemen.[Where are my soundbites I need!!!] If you were the President, Mr. Zeihan, and [if] you were facing the lack of intelligence that we were facing, and [if] you were facing the intell that said another attack is coming, would you have waterboarded these men?
Zeihan: I would have to know more.
O'Reilly: You would have to know more about what? [BillO lives in a fantasy world, not unlike Star Wars, where everything is either good or evil, and there is no need for silly things like context and judgement]
Zeihan: I'd have to know more about the people and more about the attack. Torture only works...
O'Reilly: (interrupting) Ok, alright, that, that, that's not a bad answer,[Finally something I can weasel into my worldview] alright, because we don't know what President Bush knew. Presumably we will when he writes his book. But, let's say that Cheney is telling the truth [Why we should believe this after being lied to again and again is never fully explained], and he's putting up, he's putting up, he wants those memos released, and the memos say that the intelligence that they gleaned, from these actions, Mr. Zeihan, saved American lives and disrupted plots that would have killed Americans, are you gonna then say that it wasn't worth doing sir?
Zeihan: Those techniques have to be part of the arsenal.
O'Reilly: (interrupting) Alright.
Zeihan: There's no doubt about that. (trailing off in crosstalk)
O'Reilly: (interrupting) So you're going to say, they have to be part of the option that only the President can order? You're going to say, I just want to get you on the record. You're gonna, you're with me on that?
Zeihan: (interrupting) Oh, I agree with that, yes.
O'Reilly: Ok, but captain, you dissent, you still wouldn't use them under those circumstances?
Rittgers: Well look your creating this hypothetical and there's a bunch of cherry picking on both sides.
O'Reilly: (interrupting) It's not a hypothetical captain. [Yes, it is] No, it's not a hypothetical, there are memos that Obama has not released that he could, tomorrow, and he should, that say, "Here's what we got, and here's what was disrupted." It's not a hypothetical. Cheney said last night on this sho... on this network, he wants them released so that everybody can see it. So you gotta assume the guy's not lying. [Again, why? In fact as journalists, it your job to assume that nothing is true without evidence and sources]
Rittgers: We're never going to be happy in this declassifying contest. We can declassify the, uh, cherry picking that Cheney is asking for, but then we would also have to declassify all of the dead ends that didn't go anywhere.
O'Reilly: (exasperated) Uh, maybe, maybe on that. Alright gentlemen I appreciate you coming on, its a complicated question.
It's one thing when we make general statements about O'Reilly being awful at his job, its quite another to get to go through, and see him doing things counter to informing the populace. It's not really surprising, just more to build a reality-informed decision around.