As quoted on mediamatters.com. He misreads a statement about giving suspected terrorists legal protections improving the US's reputation abroad. Would any sane person misconstrue that to mean "improving the US's image in the eyes of Osama bin Laden?" Of course not. But because O'Reilly cares how Osama feels about us, that's how he intereprets it. Then he has an Islamist fantasy about cutting Michael Kinsley's head off.
You're a closet Islamist, aren't you, Bill?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200505190003O'REILLY: No, no. I want you to read it. Go to LATimes.com. I want everybody in the country to read this editorial, 'cause it just -- I mean, you'll be sitting there pounding the table like I did. How can they -- how can they think this way? How can anyone think this way? You know, "Shutting down Guantànamo and giving suspected terrorists legal protections would help restore our reputation abroad." No, it wouldn't. I mean that's like saying, well, if we're nicer to the people who want to KILL US, then the other people who want to KILL US will like us more. Does that make any sense to you?
Do you think Osama is gonna be more favorably disposed to the U.S. if we give the Guantànamo people lawyers?E.D. HILL (co-host): No, of course not.
O'REILLY: I mean, but this is what they're saying. It is just -- you just sit there, you go, "They'll never get it until they grab Michael Kinsley out of his little house and they cut his head off." And maybe when the blade sinks in, he'll go, "Perhaps O'Reilly was right."