Video: Michelle blasts CNN for sniper video on O’Reilly

posted at 9:53 pm on October 23, 2006 by Allahpundit

Nothing to joke about here, not with a U.S. soldier missing in Baghdad.

It won’t end with a rifle shot if the jihadis have him, needless to say.

The always lovely but oddly subdued KP put up little resistance tonight, exhausted perhaps from the week she’s spent wrestling with Rick Ellensburg and his half dozen alter egos.


She’s addressed this subject further on her blog where she says she doesn’t want American television publicizing enemy propaganda. I don’t mind if they do that — just so long as it’s propaganda that reflects badly on the enemy, not serves as a testament to his good aim.

You’d have to warn people before showing it, though. Some of them, like Keith Olbermann, scare easily.


Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


“CNN trades access for cooperation.” He says it like that’s okay. It’s not okay.

Savage on October 23, 2006 at 10:05 PM

Hold the frickin’ phone: did O’Reilly just call the sniping of an American soldier “great footage?”

Citizen Duck on October 23, 2006 at 10:08 PM

What can we say? My advice to the american soldiers is whenever an insurgent is about kill a CNN journalist. They should take the video of the heroic killing and place it on You-tube.

Ouabam on October 23, 2006 at 10:19 PM

“CNN trades access for cooperation.” He says it like that’s okay. It’s not okay.

Precisely. Plus they’re trading cooperation for access to admitted staged footage. What the heck kinda good does that do?!? They are working with the enemy, not to get good news footage, but to get freakin propaganda.

db on October 23, 2006 at 10:29 PM

Michelle should purse her lips a little less. It makes her look constipated.

Oh yeah boycott CNN and the companies that advertise on the network.

Does anybody know where I can score an anti CNN t-shirt?

Theworldisnotenough on October 23, 2006 at 10:31 PM

I think Duncan Hunter said it right – One soldier getting shot does not convey “war”. Showing that video did nothing to show anyone the brutality of war, just like one guy getting shot on the beach of Iwo Jima doesn’t paint a picture for the events that took place there.

I think CNN’s patriotism has been called into question too many times. Fool me once, shame on you – fool me twice, shame on me.

d-rock on October 23, 2006 at 10:36 PM

Should be doing what the Brits are doing

British defence ministry bans news broadcaster from embedded reporting

LONDON (AFP) – The British defence ministry has temporarily banned television news broadcaster ITV from embedding their journalists with British troops, a defence ministry spokesman told AFP.

His comments were in response to a report in The Times newspaper saying that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had halted cooperation in war zones with ITV, Britain’s biggest commercial news broadcaster, after accusing it of inaccurate and intrusive reports about wounded soldiers.

Declaring The Times report to be inaccurate, the spokesman said that the MoD was “disappointed by inaccuracies in the ITN (which provides ITV News) report last week, and we are writing to them to seek explanation.”

But he acknowledged that ITV had been banned from embedding their journalists with British troop divisions, though he stressed that the ban was temporary, noting that it could be reversed within a few hours, if ITV and the MoD reached an agreement. He said that the ban had been in force since last week.

The spokesman added that ITV would still be able to access the MoD’s press office, and would retain access to military personnel.

Unidentified sources within ITV News told the newspaper that the broadcaster had cancelled its planned trip to Afghanistan to cover troops marking Remembrance Sunday because of the row with the defence ministry.

The Times reported that the head of ITV News, David Mannion, had written to the MoD demanding an explanation, sending a copy to the Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell, Britain’s highest-ranking civil servant.

The news segments in question, unnamed MoD sources told The Times, raised concerns over images showing identifiable wounded soldiers arriving in Britain at night, without obtaining permission from the men, possibly causing their families distress.

The Times cited an e-mail apparently sent by James Clark, the MoD’s head of news, to ITV editors last week which read: “As bad a hatchet-job as I’ve seen in years. Cheap shots all over the place, no context, no reasonable explanation.”

Mark Wood, chief executive of ITN, told The Times: “We are not happy about the way it has been handled. They (The MoD) have objected to some of our coverage but we haven’t quite worked out what the repercussions are.”

“We welcome any criticism particularly if it is pointing to factual errors or inaccuracies. What we have had is criticism of our coverage which has not actually gone into any detail of what is factually wrong.”

William Amos on October 23, 2006 at 10:37 PM

So Bill doesn’t understand how “morale would be down” from the viewing of this snuff film? How about if troops feel they aren’t supported at home? How do the troops feel knowing their spouses and children are seeing this on the news? How did Bill feel seeing the video of his fellow journalists held captive? This man really irks me sometimes.

thedecider on October 23, 2006 at 10:39 PM

Why is it that no one mentioned consideration for the American soldier’s family? It would seem to me that this alone is enough of a reason NOT to air the video. I can not see where airing a video of an American soldier being assassinated has any redeeming value whatsoever. CNN is PURE EVIL.

CyberCipher on October 23, 2006 at 10:47 PM

Michelle came out swingin’ tonight and hit a homerun with “CNN WANTS us to lose this war!” It was great, good job Michelle, you rock!

Kirsten didn’t argue, I guess she’s finally startin’ to see the light.

Glenn Beck had Robert Spencer on tonight. They both explained in simple 3rd grade English how the muslims are takin’ over Europe and will come here next. I just wish Glenn were on FOX, that way somebody might actually SEE his show.

Tony737 on October 23, 2006 at 10:49 PM

O’Reilly’s ass must be calloused from so much fence sitting. He’s mostly to the right, but tries to appease his media peers too much.

I like him okay, and appreciate how often they invite on Michelle, but I’m still perturbed about the interview he had a few years back with Leonard Peikoff, head of the Ayn Rand Institute. He interrupted Peikoff excessively, and then told him he was “dead wrong” in his assertion that the US should throw its weight around MORE in the world.

Peikoff was referring specifically to going after terrorist nations, and this was before 9/11. No “I’ll give you the last word” that night. The interview ended with big Bill wagging his tongue and his ballpoint at the bemused Piekoff.

Wasn’t long after that, O’Reilly was the biggest proponent of the same terror war he had so recently scolded Peikoff for advocating. Ah well, nobody’s perfekt.

Indy Mark on October 23, 2006 at 10:53 PM

CNN in fact previously refused to show these types of images

CNN said it made an editorial decision not to air the video of the prisoners of war. NBC, CBS and ABC also agreed to a Pentagon request to hold off until families had been contacted. CBC broadcast pictures of the living PoWs and excerpts of statements they made on camera, but said it would not show the corpses.

William Amos on October 23, 2006 at 10:53 PM

Some of them, like Keith Olbermann, scare easily.

Mr. Olberwussie!

I saw the ladies. KP looked stunning and said little. She needs a home. O’Reilly was, well, O’Reilly. Michelle let them have it. Good of her to tell the blunt truth with courage.

What s/b argued is that CNN doesn’t show and condemn the brutal and 3rd to 7th centuries’ behaviours of the islamists.

Entelechy on October 23, 2006 at 10:55 PM

CNN in fact previously refused to show these types of images

That’s not all they refused to show:

Muslims consider it sacrilegious to produce a likeness of the Prophet Mohammad. CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons in respect for Islam.

Respect for Islam? Check.

Respect for the families of American soldiers?


Citizen Duck on October 23, 2006 at 11:00 PM

Related: Ministry of Defence Bans ITV News From Warzone

Say. They might just be onto something.

Citizen Duck on October 23, 2006 at 11:09 PM

Wolf Blitzer said it baldly when he argued that: wasn’t it important to show people the horrors of war? That is the reason CNN showed the film, to hammer home the Left’s message that the war on terror is going badly so that voters will be anguished enough to not vote Republican in November. Can’t stand CNN’s dishonest, sniveling little dodges when they push propaganda and call it “news.” How much did they pay for that film? Did they send out a message to the jihadists that they would be interested in such films if they were available (knowing it was likely)? There is real news to be known tracking how that piece of snuff film-making ended up in CNN’s hands.

naliaka on October 23, 2006 at 11:33 PM

Either O’Reilly was playing the Devil’s Advocate or he has completely gone off the deep end. Kudos to Michelle for sticking to your guns! Even KP was learnin’ Bill a moral lesson or three.

infidel4life on October 23, 2006 at 11:39 PM

I just noticed that they labeled Kirsten Powers as a democratic strategist…did I miss something?

tyler999 on October 23, 2006 at 11:44 PM

What got me was how O’Reilly simply accepted that CNN views itself as an international news organization that allows it’s news teams to be directed in order to gain access. If that’s so, then the US should get the same deal. CNN should show their news the way the US DoD wants it, or they can get out.

pedestrian on October 23, 2006 at 11:48 PM

Hey Michelle, next time, don’t hold back – tell us how you REALLY feel! ;-)

Seriously, I was surprised that she didn’t reach across the monitor and hit Bill with an industrial strengthed clue-by-four. I like the O-Factor, but Bill was more corporate shill than cultural crusader on this issue.

Now *I* am wondering if Larry King wants the US to lose in Iraq…

itzWicks on October 24, 2006 at 12:05 AM

Ha. Glad I wasn’t the only one who picked up on the “great footage” thing.

I am not in the mood to hear about how CNN is justified in broadcasting “great footage” of American soldiers getting picked off by Iraqi snipers because it’s “great footage.”

If Matthews or Olbermann had said something along those lines, I’d be less surprised (though no less outraged). O’Reilly should be ashamed of himself.

Citizen Duck on October 24, 2006 at 12:15 AM

“great footage” Great footage? Killing US troops is “great footage”?

americanpundit on October 24, 2006 at 12:18 AM

Funny we never see any of the “great footage” of Jihad Joe being dropped by our snipers….oh wait…that would be insensitive.

EnochCain on October 24, 2006 at 12:23 AM

I don’t even think Larry King KNOWS we are in a war….

Give em hell Michelle! Keep punching back the numbskulls!

Limerick on October 24, 2006 at 12:29 AM

What about the people who cheer this kind of footage, even in this country?
Why would CNN even consider anything that would raise their morale, embolden them?

Imagine your child is in Iraq, doesn’t this footage terrorize you?
You have no idea if the soldier shown being killed is your loved one!
An incredible lack of caring for America and Americans is characterized by this kind of immoral pandering of our enemies.

Speakup on October 24, 2006 at 1:34 AM


As for poor Larry King, I’m still not convinced he’s even alive anymore. CNN just props him up in front of the camera and uses CGI to keep him talking.

Joshua P. Allem on October 24, 2006 at 1:49 AM

Simply put, CNN is Jihadie tool and I can’t believe that Bill was defending them. Michelle is completely right and I’m glad she stuck to her guns and called them out.

BTW, does anyone else think that Michelle and KP are incredibly hot? I love brainy chicks!

x95b10 on October 24, 2006 at 3:19 AM

What the hell is wrong with O’Reilly? Normally he can figure this kind of thing out. Where does he find the gall to get on to Michelle for pointing out the eight hundred pound gorrila in the room?

Wolfman on October 24, 2006 at 4:23 AM

Michelle, glad you called out those rats at CNN last night, made me proud to be a reader. I was given Oreilly’s book by a friend but after his position on this last night I think Ill give it to the dog to play with, as the family member of a US servicmen I have to say I found that video more than upsetting, that couldve been my brother being shot and how would you know? how would you know? when you get the call and they tell you we’re sorry to inform you but your family member has made the ultimate sacrifice in the finest traditions of the service, by the way if youd like you can catch a video of it on CNN…

I’m sick to my stomach over this and they should remove ALL CNN embeds, though Im quite sure some of them are certainly finding themselves unwelcome amongst the troops.

Viper1 on October 24, 2006 at 6:03 AM

x95, yes, Michelle is beautiful, but K.P. didn’t look as pretty as she normally does. And yes. intelligent, conservative women are much more attractive than pinhead liberal hollywood type morons who happen to look nice but have nothin’ upstairs. Michelle has the looks, the brains and the worldview that makes her the ideal woman for any red blooded, conservative American male.

Tony737 on October 24, 2006 at 6:53 AM

I quit watching O’Rielly well over a year ago because of his two-faced, wishy-washy, reporting. The only time I watch it is in the clips Michelle post. That man has no credibility with me.

Michelle: McAfee Site Advisor blocked and warned it made Brower Setting Changes when they tested it. Please have someone check it. You don’t want to subject your readers to possible Malware infections.

Helloyawl on October 24, 2006 at 9:18 AM

I think Ms. Malkin hit the nail on the head when she continued to stress the point that it was “all about context”. The CNN video was presented in such a manner that it glorified the terrorists. The intent was not, as O’Reilly argued, to make Americans “aware of the brutality of the terrorists” or “aware of the war” or to show the terrorists as being the evil slime they are. Rather, it was to demoralize the population at home, to sow the seeds for further doubt, and to weaken the war effort. Here CNN is serving as a willing propaganda organ for the jihadists and its reporters should be removed from the Iraqi theater until such time as CNN states on the record that it will no longer act as a tool for the jihadis.

As regards O’Reilly: I think here he was acting as a devil’s advocate. Ms. Powers was opposed to the airing of the video and I think O’Reilly wanted to act as a foil for Ms. Malkin.

As regards the apparent political evolution of Ms. Powers: Since I don’t know her, I can’t really speak for her–all I can do is draw off my own experiences as a Democrat who has become disenchanted and disillusioned with that political party. When I see the latest stunts pulled by Reid/Pelosi/Rangel/Conyers or the latest bile spewed forth by the Kos Kids or the DU or Code Pink, I have to ask myself, “Is this the party of Harry Truman, Adlai Stevenson, JFK and RFK, Hubert Humphrey, LBJ, Scoop Jackson, and countless other “Old School” Democrats who truly did love their country?” Again, I can’t speak for Ms. Powers, but I can’t help but wonder if something similar is going through her mind when she reads the email and left wing blogger bile that she does. The main reason I stay a Democrat, and probably the reason she does as well, is that I hope that those of us who are still reasonable and sane–those of us who hold to the values of Humphrey, Truman, Stevenson, and those other classical Democrats, can retake our party from the lunatic left. For our country–for democracy–to work, we need a strong, viable two party system. We need voices of loyal opposition. Thesis + Antithesis=Synthesis.

Matt Helm on October 24, 2006 at 9:21 AM

I think Michelle got it half right when she said CNN wants the USA to lose the war: CNN wants us to lose so long as a GOP president is C-in-C. God help us all if a Dumocrat wins in 2008, but if that happens I’ll bet you dollars-to-donuts that CNN’s coverage of the war will change dramatically and become much more favorable to the USA. We’ve already seen it happen, no? If I recall correctly, CNN and the other Mastodon Media were far more supportive of everything Clinton did back when he was firing cruise missles into Iraq. The NYT even fawned over Clinton’s suicidal “deal” with Crazy Kim in North Korea. You can get more commitment from a cracked-up Paris Hilton in the bathroom of the Ghost Bar than Clinton got from Kim in exchange for $5 billion and two nuclear reactors. But there was the NYT, telling the world what a good deal it was for the USA.

The Master on October 24, 2006 at 9:37 AM

The always lovely but oddly subdued KP put up little resistance tonight, exhausted perhaps from the week she’s spent wrestling with Rick Ellensburg and his half dozen alter egos.

Hey AP – Yeah, she does seem to of stepped into a patch of pit vipers… repeatedly lately. She’s been having to use the cluebat to knock around the rabid lefty trolls on her blog.

I guess the left has forgotten that she’s (technically) her their side.

E L Frederick on October 24, 2006 at 9:50 AM

I guess the left has forgotten that she’s (technically) her on their side.

/sigh need more coffee…

E L Frederick on October 24, 2006 at 9:51 AM

Bill lofted Michelle a juicy pitch and she MISSED it!

When he asked if she really thought CNN wants us to lose this war, she should have begun her response with an unapologetic and very clear

“Yes I Do!”

Actually, the truth is they want the BUSH Administration to lose this war. Because, as we all should be painfully aware by now, it’s not about the war. It’s about Bush.

These people are wearing blinders.

Bill did have a point about the potential anger rallying these things could have, but as Michelle pointed out — only if presented in the right context.

philmon on October 24, 2006 at 10:20 AM

Just another reason I have stopped watching O’Reilly.

Wade on October 24, 2006 at 10:40 AM

Why do they keep showing the video if they think it’s terrible, terrorist propaganda, and detrimental to troop morale?

Doesn’t CNN have a brain in its head? What happened to them? In GW1, they were the shiznit! Now, they are an almost anti-american shadow of itself.

Mazztek on October 24, 2006 at 10:54 AM

Michelle, when she gets really fired up about something, does an excellent job of getting her point across without looking like a loon. I was hoping, however, that she would mention the Danish cartoons.

As Citizen Duck and others have mentioned, CNN has no problems at all showing beheadings, snipers, all manner of pure evil. They won’t, however, show Mohammed cartoons, or any of the good things going on in Iraq. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

dalewalt on October 24, 2006 at 11:00 AM

I thought O’Reilly’s use of the term “great footage” was sarcasm…is it just me?!

Bob's Kid on October 24, 2006 at 11:17 AM

I have to say that I was a bit disappointed in Michelle’s performance.

My first impression came before she even opened her mouth. Her face reminded me of one of those old Looney Tunes cartoons where there’s a thundercloud hanging over the character’s head. In other words, Michelle looked sour to me, not serious. I felt that weakened her message.

Second, even though I know what the context is, I felt like Michelle didn’t clearly articulate what that context is. IMHO, that context is this: This video shows terrorists prevailing over Americans. But CNN rarely, if ever, shows Americans prevailing over terrorists, and certainly not in proportion to the actual events in Iraq. Where are the videos of Americans taking out those terrorists snipers? Where are the videos of Americans training Iraqi troops and of those troops’ successes?

In short, CNN chooses to show only (or mostly) those videos which make it appear as if we are losing, when that is far from the truth. That is what reduces moral and support for our troops at home. That is also how CNN is showing that it has sided with the terrorists. The Eason Jordan thing only shows that this is a conscious decision on their part, not merely the happenstance availability of video footage.

Michelle, please practice the 15 second elevator pitch version of CNN’s context and work on avoiding the Bob Dole (as candidate) look.

This video also left me with two other impressions. First, I was somewhat surprise, but pleased, that KP also agreed that CNN should not have shown it, and that her reason was that it was terrorist propaganda. Second, it felt like Bill O. was playing devil’s advocate just to stir up conflict — and thus ratings — because he knew that KP and MM basically agree with each other, and agreement can be boring to watch.

EWTHeckman on October 24, 2006 at 11:25 AM

Proper Context for News.

I think KP started the ball rolling in this conversation and Michelle nicely pushed it along.

If one follows the logic that Americans have a right to know and a responsible reporter is attempting to provide the material that he or she is given and did not take part in then… There is a way to do it. You can do as CNN does and jam it in peoples faces or you could go another route. For instance “after a great deal of work under cover we were able to bring out this horendous video. beware what you are about to see is disturbing etc.” This stated by a responsible reporter sitting at a news desk and behind him is flying the American Flag. Guess what that is alot less objectionable.

Priest on October 24, 2006 at 12:15 PM

Just wanted to give a big THANK YOU for standing up for our troops the way you did on The Factor last night – and the way you do every day right here.


greenpiece on October 24, 2006 at 12:39 PM

Am I the only one that thought KP looked stoned to the bone last night?

Readymade on October 24, 2006 at 1:53 PM

Readymade – Yes, I considered that myself, but have been afraid to bring it up. Perhaps some “liquid courage,” or “mother’s little helper” (for those 40 and up) -? At the same time, it’s total speculation, as she just as easily may have merely been sleep deprived, or under the weather. But, yes, she did seem strangely sedate.
Maybe just trying defend the jackass party is taking a psychological toll? It must be hard to always be defending the indefensible.

Indy Mark on October 24, 2006 at 2:34 PM

You’ve got a point there about the mental fatigue, but I couldn’t blame her if she was a little loaded, what with Bill O sitting there leering.

Readymade on October 24, 2006 at 4:06 PM

Yes, we all love Michelle, and Hot Air is an amazing website, but I think she went too far with “CNN wants us to lose this war.” Visions of Ann Coulter are dancing in my head.

I’ll agree more with Philmon’s post that CNN wants the Bush administration to lose the war.

Is CNN wrong on this? Absolutely. But lose the war? I don’t think so.

asc85 on October 24, 2006 at 6:23 PM

I’m going to don my flame proof suit for this post!
IMO, CNN is a classic example of why the ALL of the media should be booted out of Iraq. So far they have reported only the negatives and not any good our military has accomplished. Other then the enemy, who really needs a running body count of American dead. Every war is ugly and has it’s share of casualties. To put the war into proper perspective, tens of thousands of Americans die on American highways, then have compared to Afghanistan or Iraq combined. So then should we pull all of cars off of our highways?

Back to CNN. Clearly, if the U.S. should ever get serious about winning wars, they must first boot out the media out. Don’t let these bozo journalists be used as enemy propaganda tools, such as CNN so poorly misjudged and recently displayed. If the Bush administration wants to win in Iraq, the tide will turn over night with a forced AWOL media .

byteshredder on October 25, 2006 at 2:18 AM