Brian Kilmeade Apologizes for “All Terrorists are Muslims” Comment
I really wasn’t paying too much attention to Brian Kilmeade’s comments on Fox and Friends last week because once I saw the non Media Matters version of the incident, it became pretty clear to me that Kilmeade just didn’t phrase what he was trying to say properly. But Kilmeade did issue a clarification this morning. In fact he did it twice, once on Fox and Friends and once on his radio show…which suggests this clarification was ordered from on high. (video via J$)
Advertisement
October 18, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Good, golly, gosh … what a heck of a stand up guy … I just hope he’s not expecting an invite to the Mensa picnic this year ..
October 18, 2010 at 2:30 pm
The Media Matters version of his comments and his foe-apology (both on radio and TV) are in full context, Spud.
October 18, 2010 at 2:35 pm
“I’m sorry about that, if I offended … or hurt anybody’s feelings. But that’s it.”
Well golly, I feel better now.
October 18, 2010 at 3:13 pm
There’s a minute of Countdown programming done. The loop is closed. We can rest easy.
October 18, 2010 at 3:17 pm
I assumed the apology was ordered from higher up because I didn’t think what he said warranted one. True, not all terrorists are Muslim, but the ones who’ve been going after us and the rest of Western culture for nearly two decades now all seem to be.
October 18, 2010 at 3:25 pm
C’mon Al, the guy’s a host of a major cable news show. Everybody knows the major terrorist threat worldwide is from Muslim extremists. Nevertheless, “all terrorists are Muslim” is a patently false statement. I agree it’s not a huge deal, and his semi-lame apology is commensurate to the offense, but you can’t just shout a generality like a drunk in a bar in the forum Kilmeade is in. The apology was required.
October 18, 2010 at 3:30 pm
He didn’t say anything that most of us haven’t thought or said, and God knows you hear it on talk-radio all the time. ‘Big time’ TV news, on the other hand, maybe not so much.
October 18, 2010 at 3:34 pm
In the phrase, “all terrorists are Muslim”, I think the clarifier of “that we’re currently at war with” is implied since Everybody knows this.
October 18, 2010 at 3:35 pm
Nice work, Laura. You managed to support both mine and Al’s position, and I think agreed with one of us, but I can’t tell which. You should run for office..
October 18, 2010 at 3:48 pm
There have been all kinds of extremists and terrorists terrorizing people in this world for thousands of years. We’re not the only ones dealing with it[ right now.
That doesn’t make it right. Just because other people say or think something nonfactual doesn’t mean we should all repeat it as fact. Fox News doesn’t try to be truthful, they just need to stir up controversy as much as possible to keep their ratings up.
October 18, 2010 at 3:55 pm
^ That might’ve been my point, but don’t hold me to it..
October 18, 2010 at 3:57 pm
I should have quoted – That doesn’t make it right — on that one. The rest of the PL comment was crap.
October 18, 2010 at 3:59 pm
The rest of the PL comment was crap.
…and she returns with slightly less ambiguity.
October 18, 2010 at 4:16 pm
PL… I responded to your comment a J$’s and I was/am curious to see a response.
Of course, since you tend to dodge when someone says, “prove it,” Im not surprised to not see another post. Although, when you “find time” to post here, I wonder why you still havent found time to either find the evidence you claimed existed… or retract your statement.
Oh well. I remain unsurprised.
October 18, 2010 at 4:32 pm
The problem is the mindset that occurs when we utilize broad terms for very specific actions. The end result is the increased use of generalities to promote an agenda. This is not what truely accurate news is supposed to do. To make a grossly passive appology is unacceptable, but then, maybe we’re not talking about a news network but an agenda promoter.
I will soften this up a bit by commenting that I have seen a lot of unnecessary and broad term jabs at Christianity on just about every news network there is – at some time or another. I won’t even touch all of the Jewish jabs that have been around ever since they invented “news”.
October 18, 2010 at 6:29 pm
^ Much of the criticism of Bill O’Reilly’s comment on ‘The View’ – even from the liberal folks – seems to be directled mostly at his failure to be adequately specific. In that narrow scope, I don’t disagree; we should all strive to communicate with clarity.
October 18, 2010 at 6:40 pm
“Adequately specific” is important. When Tea Partiers hear things like “Tea Partiers are racist”, they get deservedly bent about it. I don’t care if it’s true that the percentage of terrorists who are Muslim is high, it’s still patently offensive to everyday, going-about-their-business Muslims to hear a generalization about their group; just as it is to everyday, going-about-their-business Tea Partiers about their’s.
October 18, 2010 at 6:44 pm
-adequately specific-
So it was worth maybe pointing a finger and and chiding O’Reilly for being sloppy. Not worth getting into a huff and walking out.
October 18, 2010 at 6:45 pm
or Kilmeade…
October 18, 2010 at 6:48 pm
Not worth getting into a huff and walking out.
I’m a liberal, Bill O’Reilly comes on my show, says something clumsy, I have a fit, everybody talks about it for days. Everyone goes home happy. There’s a sucker born every day..
October 18, 2010 at 6:49 pm
How much discussion would there be about the need for an apology if it was someone other than a Fox News employee who made the comment ? The discussion would be about a firing or a breathalyser test … or both.
October 18, 2010 at 7:15 pm
“I’m a liberal, Bill O’Reilly comes on my show, says something clumsy, I have a fit, everybody talks about it for days. Everyone goes home happy. There’s a sucker born every day..” – joeremi
Just watched Joy Behar’s show on HLN and she and all her guests were in agreement that it was O’Reilly who wanted this controversy because he is a narcissist, etc., who wanted people to talk about HIM for days. Joy never mentions that this dust-up benefitted her and had people talking about HER for days. And she asked each guest why today’s politicians (meaning conservatives) are so un-civil and nasty. Then Richard Dreyfuss appears as the last guest and she asks him what it was like playing Dick Cheney in the movie W. She said something like, How did you get to that Satanic part of you? She was serious. He replied that most actors like playing villains.
October 18, 2010 at 7:32 pm
Bill O’Reilly needs ‘controversy’ about like Joy Behar needs self-awareness. No, wait…
October 19, 2010 at 5:31 am
Actually, I like to post on different sites, and I usually forget to come back to them. I make sure not to avoid a response by anyone, though. So, when I don’t respond, I just haven’t checked back. Don’t take it so seriously, INB.
October 19, 2010 at 7:33 am
I had no problem with what Kilmeade said.
Muslims did attack us on 9/11.
More than 90 percent of all terrorists in the world are Muslims.
And most Muslims are good people who hate terrorism.
There is no conflict in the above three statements.
October 19, 2010 at 8:47 am
Uh, JWE..you’ve got a conflict between “90%” and “all”. I realize righties are kinda big on alternate realities, but “90% = 100%” is pushing it..
October 19, 2010 at 8:53 am
You mean like the ‘alternate reality’ where opposition to Obamacare is the result of a ‘communication problem’? You mean like the ‘alternate reality’ where opposition to anything that liberals want is the result of some-sort-of ‘ist’ or ‘phobia’ or hatred? That kind of ‘alternate reality’?
October 19, 2010 at 8:54 am
I forgot to smile when I said that.
October 19, 2010 at 9:38 am
Joe, technically you are right.
However, Kilmeade would have gotten in trouble if he’d said “almost all” instead of “all”. It’s just a very unpopular, but nonetheless accurate, thing to say.
In politics, 90 percent is “all”
“All” black people voted for Obama.
The Tea Party is “all” white.
“All” terrorists are muslim.
October 19, 2010 at 9:44 am
^ No, dear, I mean the kind that has Republicans who complain about deficits and spending, cutting taxes while going off to war; Republicans who complain about deficits wanting the Bush tax cuts permanent; Republicans who bash Dems for a bailout that both parties supported, then bragging to their constituents about the bailout funds they got for them.
Or Carly Fiorina claiming she’s going to “cut spending” – because that’s what voters like to hear – but refuses to say what she would cut – because voters like their government services – then insists she’ll do it all by eliminating “waste and fraud”. In other words, alternate realities in which righties just “say stuff”.
October 19, 2010 at 9:46 am
Ok JWE, I know a semantics game when I see one.
October 19, 2010 at 10:04 am
Fiorina was disappointing. When you’re reduced to trying to call-out Chris Wallace..not good. I’ve been hearing about ‘waste and fraud’ since the beginning of time, up to and including the sell on the healthcare-bill. It’s all BS. The essence of government is ‘waste and fraud’.
October 19, 2010 at 3:36 pm
-Republicans who complain about deficits wanting the Bush tax cuts permanent-
Had the tax cuts been made permanent (or even extended for 5 years) during early ’09 then the economy would have started its recovery much faster. This would have been instead of the non-stimulating $847B stimulus. Those two things, along with not focusing on and passing that stupid health care legislation would have done much to dampen or even correct the (still) rising unemployment rates.
Your premise ignores the true crux of the deficit problem which is entitlement spending. Without reducing “entitlements” it is not possible to tax enough in order to pay without borrowing.
-Fiorina-
She was disappointing in her unpreparedness. And if she thought that a “Fox News Sunday” interview wouldn’t be thorough and sometimes pointed then she’s also an unprepared idiot…. if she’d only suddenly become a candidate then not having a cogent answer would be understandable. The election is only two weeks away.