|
|
| All content taken from The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News Channel. Each weeknight by 6 PM EST a preview of that evening's show will be posted and then updated with additional information the following weekday by noon EST.
|
|
|
"Donald Trump has called for a total ban on Muslims entering the USA. He says we have to do it to protect ourselves against the jihad. Almost immediately, hysteria broke out. But let's examine this without emotion, which can cloud thinking. The federal courts would never allow the government to deny entry to anyone solely on the basis of religion, so the whole discussion is really moot. However, the Feds do have an obligation to deny visas to anyone who might cause harm to this country. Homeland Security should deny visas to any questionable person, but the U.S. and other Western nations need moderate Muslims to fight the jihadists. So it is simply bad anti-terror policy to prohibit Muslims even if you could. It is long past time for Americans to see the jihad for what it is, a movement that seeks to destroy Western civilization. But the majority of Muslims do not support jihad and some will fight against it. They should be applauded, not demonized. The Obama administration is losing the fight against ISIS. Political correctness and weakness dominate Washington, and many of our politicians are afraid to confront evil. I'm talking to you, Democratic Party. We the people must rise up and demand that war be waged against the jihad in a smart and aggressive way. With a presidential election next year, it is on us to elect a new leader who has the guts to fight Islamic terrorism. This is 1938 all over again."
The Factor asked terrorism experts Aaron Cohen and Jim Hanson how they would fight ISIS and terrorism. "The first thing we should do," Hanson said, "is stop importing jihadis. There are some countries from which we can not vet the people and we should stop them coming from places like Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen. We should also change the rules of engagement and let slip the U.S. dogs of war with special operation raids every night." Cohen laid out a specific military strategy. "We need to go on the immediate offensive with a multi-national, 50,000-strong, anti-ISIS assault force designated to completely eradicate the 31,000 armed ISIS fighters. We should also deploy a 3,000-strong Green Beret-style special operations instructor program. Those instructors would act as force multipliers." Both men ridiculed Donald Trump's idea that the USA can or should ban all Muslims from entering the country. |
|
|
| Democrat Jessica Ehrlich and Republican Andrea Tantaros opined on Donald Trump's latest comments about Muslims. "I have a unique perspective," Tantaros said, "because I lived in Paris to study. If you made a right out of my door it was an all-Muslim neighborhood that did not assimilate. I was attacked twice and I think there is a serious problem in the Muslim community. Muslims do not believe in equal rights and they do not believe in gay rights, but peaceful Muslims exist and they have to come out and denounce bad behavior." Ehrlich expressed a vastly different opinion based on her own personal experience. "One of my best friends in elementary school was a Muslim girl. Her parents moved here from India where they were persecuted for being Muslim. She is now a neonatal doctor saving babies." |
|
|
| Will Donald Trump suffer from his anti-Muslim remarks? The Factor posed that question to Tea Party activist Scottie Nell Hughes and GOP strategist Doug Heye. "Trump has had an amazing ability to defy the laws of political gravity," Heye said, "but in the long run this has to hurt him. The comments make some key swing states very difficult to win and I don't think he's going to be our nominee." But Hughes predicted that Trump's bombast will help him once again. "He's talking about action, he's giving solutions, he's showing that he has backbone. We're not talking about U.S. citizens being banned, we're talking about immigrants." The Factor contended that Trump will never be accepted by the Republican establishment, saying, "The latest comments about Muslims have sealed his doom within the party itself." |
|
|
| Former Secretary of State George Schultz has joined the list of past Reagan aides who have blasted 'Killing Reagan' and questioned its accuracy. The Factor responded with this exposition: "Killing Reagan depicts the frightening ordeal that President Reagan endured and overcame. Martin Dugard and I accurately chronicled how Mr. Reagan fought through the difficulties brought on by the attempted assassination and triumphed in foreign policy. It is an amazing story of courage! By the way, Ronald Reagan's struggles after he was shot are confirmed by scores of on-the-scene folks, including one of his closest friends and his son. So what is really going on? The high-profile attacks on the book are coming from a close-knit group of people, all of whom know each other. They object to any reportage that does not play into the deification of Ronald Reagan. We write about a real man, not somebody from Mount Olympus. He had flaws, like we all do, and how he overcame them is heart of the book." |
|
|
| The Factor asked legal analysts Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle whether a president could actually ban Muslim immigrants. "It would be unconstitutional," Wiehl declared, "because of the First Amendment right to freedom of religion and the Fifth Amendment right to due process. You can make the argument that the Constitution does not apply to people who want to come here, but there are many treaties that say you can not discriminate based on religion." Guilfoyle agreed that international rules would make the ban impossible to enact. "We are signatories to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, there are international laws and treaties that we are bound by. You can not ban people based on their religious beliefs!" |
|
|
| Greg Gutfeld and Bernard McGurik may not be military stratgists, but that didn't stop them from weighing in on how to defeat ISIS. "I say we expose their carbon footprint," General Gutfeld quipped, "because it might at least anger President Obama to see what they're doing to the environment. But to be serious, ISIS requires one humiliating defeat - they are able to recruit because no one has seen them lose and people gravitate toward a winner. Once you humiliate the bully, no one wants to join the losing team." General McGuirk also recommended forceful and powerful action. "Obama gave an awful, apathetic, and spineless speech. Two weeks ago he said the global warming conference would be a 'rebuke' to the terrorists and then San Bernardino happened. We have to meet savagery and barbarity with savagery and barbarity." |
|
|
Patty Simpson, Tulare County, CA: "I agree with Mr. Trump. We have no way of knowing which Muslim is friendly and which is a threat. It's time for the government to err on the side of caution."
Robert Goodwin, Fairfax, VA: "Mr. O'Reilly, your bias and deceit know no bounds. You say the president is wrong to discourage anti-Muslim sentiment because it's not a problem. But you and those on talk radio are stoking the hatred."
Leslye Kohl, New York, NY: "Bill, your Talking Points were exactly right. President Obama is incompetent in fighting ISIS. I do wonder if he's doing it on purpose." |
|
|
| Writing for a Harvard publication, a young woman named Uzra Khan made this allegation: "Bill O'Reilly has called Islam a destructive force in the world." That is untrue, defamatory, and apparently was taken from a far-left smear site. Where are your editors, Harvard? |
|
|