O'Reilly Mafia Threatens O'Donnell Over Sex Scandal

Fox News host promises to "go after" The View host and her colleagues
prisonplanet

Rosie O'Donnell, currently under attack after she questioned the official story behind 9/11, has revealed that Fox News bully Bill O'Reilly threatened to "go after" her and her colleagues after they mentioned O'Reilly's sex scandal on The View.

ABC has now gagged O'Donnell from mentioning the subject on all future broadcasts.

The policy of mafia-like intimidation directed at anyone who discusses 9/11 truth on behalf of O'Reilly is a common and disturbing theme.

Within the past two weeks, O'Reilly has threatened both Charlie Sheen and Mark Cuban that he'll be "looking out" for them if they continued their involvement in the upcoming release of the Loose Change Final Cut movie. On his Friday show, O'Reilly demanded Cuban, the billionaire owner of the Dallas Mavericks, be thrown in jail.

In October of last year, O'Reilly threatened Jim Fetzer and Kevin Barrett that he would use his influence to push for an FBI investigation of the 9/11 truth professors, in an attempt to discover if they had links with terrorists.

"I'd put the FBI on you and that nutty Barrett and find out what the hell you guys are up to," salivated O'Reilly, making reference to Sammy Al-Arian, a former professor at USF who was charged and later acquitted of helping to lead a Palestinian terrorist group that carried out suicide bombings against Israel.

During a September 2001 interview before his arrest, O'Reilly told Al-Arian, "if I was the CIA, I'd follow you wherever you went. I'd follow you 24 hours."

As Kurt Nimmo writes, "Bill O'Reilly essentially had Dr. Sami al-Arian, an associate professor of computer engineering at the University of South Florida, not only bounced from his job but also arrested and indicted by the Justice Department on racketeering and terrorist charges due to his alleged association with Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Ashcroft went as far as to characterize al-Arian as "the North American leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad."

In March of 2006, O'Reilly threatened disagreeing callers to his own radio show that their information would be turned over to law enforcement and that they would receive a visit from Fox security personnel. One such caller was actually contacted by Fox security after he mentioned Keith Olbermann on O'Reilly's show, an action classified by O'Reilly as obscene.

"If you're listening, Mike, we have your phone number, and we're going to turn it over to Fox security, and you'll be getting a little visit," barked O'Reilly.

In October 2004, O'Reilly Factor producer Andrea Mackris filed a lawsuit in which it was alleged that O'Reilly had subjected her to repeated instances of sexual harassment, including unwanted invitations to engage in phone sex and unsolicited graphic descriptions of O'Reilly's sexual fantasies, as well as O'Reilly masturbating on the phone following an O'Reilly Factor episode in which two porn stars were featured. O'Reilly is married with two children.

Out of court settlements were reached in both Mackris' and O'Reilly's counter-lawsuit. The whole sordid affair can be read here.

O'Reilly has written five non-fiction books, one of which includes graphic scenes of sex and violence, including teenagers having sex with adults. The ending of O'Reilly's detective thriller, Those Who Trespass, features a shower scene that is almost identical to the one described by Mackris in her lawsuit.

Bill O'Reilly has repeatedly called for Rosie O'Donnell to be fired by ABC for questioning the official 9/11 story as well as other controversial statements. On Thursday night, MSNBC guest Danny Bonaduce called for O'Donnell to be executed for treason.

"When Joy and I alluded to O'Reilly's sex scandal on The View," writes O'Donnell on her blog, "we were told the following day that we couldn't bring it up anymore or else Bill O'Reilly would "go after" all the hosts of The View."

O'Donnell goes on to write that O'Reilly carefully edited her statements in his end of week attack on her for discussing the Iranian hostage crisis and 9/11, "molding the facts" like 1984 in an attempt to appease Fox News owner "Big Brother" Rupert Murdoch.

O'Donnell quotes a passage from George Orwell's 1984.

"Parsons was Winston’s fellow employee at the Ministry of Truth. He was a fattish but active man of paralyzing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms—one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the thought police, the stability of the Party depended."

The View host warns America that they must question authority before it's too late, and that by 2050 no human being will be able to understand a conversation that requires thought on behalf of the individual.

"The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact, there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness," writes O'Donnell.

O'Reilly's methods are disgraceful and are intended to create a chilling atmosphere to prevent more high profile figures from going public in support of 9/11 truth. But O'Reilly's arrogance is rivaled only by his delusion, ratings for his Fox show continue to plummet, while The View has gained 600,000 new viewers since O'Donnell took the helm.

Telling the truth resonates with the American public - threatening people with consequences unless they shut up does not.

Bill O'Reilly is sowing the seeds of his own downfall as more people every day begin to see through his tenuous facade as a fatuous cheerleader for the Neo-Cons and the Bush administration.

Top Court: EPA Can Control Emissions

(04-02) 08:54 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --

The Supreme Court ordered the federal government on Monday to take a fresh look at regulating carbon dioxide emissions from cars, a rebuke to Bush administration policy on global warming.

In a 5-4 decision, the court said the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from cars.

Greenhouse gases are air pollutants under the landmark environmental law, Justice John Paul Stevens said in his majority opinion.

The court's four conservative justices — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas — dissented.

Many scientists believe greenhouse gases, flowing into the atmosphere at an unprecedented rate, are leading to a warming of the Earth, rising sea levels and other marked ecological changes.

The politics of global warming have changed dramatically since the court agreed last year to hear its first global warming case.

"In many ways, the debate has moved beyond this," said Chris Miller, director of the global warming campaign for Greenpeace, one of the environmental groups that sued the EPA. "All the front-runners in the 2008 presidential campaign, both Democrats and Republicans, even the business community, are much further along on this than the Bush administration is."

Democrats took control of Congress last November. The world's leading climate scientists reported in February that global warming is "very likely" caused by man and is so severe that it will "continue for centuries." Former Vice President Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth — making the case for quick action on climate change — won an Oscar. Business leaders are saying they are increasingly open to congressional action to reduce greenhouse gases emissions, of which carbon dioxide is the largest.

Carbon dioxide is produced when fossil fuels such as oil and natural gas are burned. One way to reduce those emissions is to have more fuel-efficient cars.

The court had three questions before it.

_Do states have the right to sue the EPA to challenge its decision?

_Does the Clean Air Act give EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases?

_Does EPA have the discretion not to regulate those emissions?

The court said yes to the first two questions. On the third, it ordered EPA to re-evaluate its contention it has the discretion not to regulate tailpipe emissions. The court said the agency has so far provided a "laundry list" of reasons that include foreign policy considerations.

The majority said the agency must tie its rationale more closely to the Clean Air Act.

"EPA has offered no reasoned explanation for its refusal to decide whether greenhouse gases cause or contribute to climate change," Stevens said. He was joined by his liberal colleagues, Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter, and the court's swing voter, Justice Anthony Kennedy.

The lawsuit was filed by 12 states and 13 environmental groups that had grown frustrated by the Bush administration's inaction on global warming.

In his dissent, Roberts focused on the issue of standing, whether a party has the right to file a lawsuit.

The court should simply recognize that redress of the kind of grievances spelled out by the state of Massachusetts is the function of Congress and the chief executive, not the federal courts, Roberts said.

His position "involves no judgment on whether global warming exists, what causes it, or the extent of the problem," he said.

The decision also is expected to boost California's prospects for gaining EPA approval of its own program to limit tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. Federal law considers the state a laboratory on environmental issues and gives California the right to seek approval of standards that are stricter than national norms.

The case is Massachusetts v. EPA, 05-1120.