On Reliable Sources, host Brian Stelter said CNN had interviewed many of Bill O’Reilly’s CBS colleagues from his time in Argentina and that each had contradicted his claims about reporting from a “war zone” and in a “combat situation.”
Host Brian Stelter said, “We have interviewed six other people who were working for CBS in Argentina at the time. And all of them are refuting O’Reilly’s version of events.” As I’ve previously posted, one of O’Reilly’s anecdotes about his time in Argentina that came under scrutiny in a Mother Jones article is his claim about covering a riot in Buenos Aires:
I was in a situation one time, in a war zone in Argentina, in the Falklands, where my photographer got run down and then hit his head and was bleeding from the ear on the concrete. And the army was chasing us. I had to make a decision. And I dragged him off, you know, but at the same time, I’m looking around and trying to do my job, but I figure I had to get this guy out of there because that was more important.
Stelter acknowledged that the riot O’Reilly covered in Buenos Aires following Argentina’s surrender in the Falklands was “scary” and “hairy.” But not, apparently, what O’Reilly described.
STELTER: (CNN) could find no evidence that anyone from CBS was injured. We’ve been trying all weekend. To the contrary, six other people who were there, working for CBS, say they are unaware of any injuries. They also say they’re unaware of any civilians being killed in the riot. And O’Reilly has repeatedly claimed over the years that people were killed there. None of them, none of these people agree with O’Reilly’s depiction of it as a “combat situation” or a “war zone.”
Some of them remarked to us yesterday and this morning that the events in Ferguson recently were actually more serious and more severe.
Retired CBS reporter Eric Engberg, who caused a stir with a devastating Facebook post about his time working with O’Reilly in Argentina, was a guest. He blasted O’Reilly again.
ENGBERG: I came to Argentina from years of experience in Washington covering anti-war demonstrations against the Vietnam war in Washington. And I saw more violence in anti-war demonstrations in D.C., than I saw in Argentina that night. It was over quickly, it was over within two hours and the people did not try to storm the Casa Rosada. They were held back by troops, …they did not tangle with those troops, they did not try to crash into the building and it was really a fairly minor incident.
… He’s not a real reporter and he was not in a combat zone that night. This was not a combat zone. Not even close.
Later in the day, CNN reported:
Jim Forrest, who was a sound engineer for CBS there, said that when he heard O’Reilly retell the Argentina riot story to interviewer Marvin Kalb several years ago, he contacted Kalb and said “I was on that crew, and I don’t recall his version of events.”
Manny Alvarez, a CBS News cameraman in Buenos Aires said about O’Reilly’s claim that his cameraman had been injured during the riot, “Nobody remembers this happening,”
In addition to Engberg, Alvarez and Forrest, CNN said four others who worked for CBS at the time spoke “on condition of anonymity.”
All of the people said they’re unaware of any civilians being killed in the riot. In O’Reilly’s 2001 book, he said “many were killed.”
“There were certainly no dead people,” Forrest said. “Had there been dead people, they would have sent more camera crews.”
Watch Stelter’s very damning conversation with Engberg below, from the February 22 Reliable Sources.
Corn: "But here’s the tell: As O’Reilly read from the Times story, when he reached the line about a cop “firing five shots,” he omitted the rest of the sentence: “over the heads of the fleeing demonstrators.” He jumped straight to the next sentence, hoodwinking the audience, for with this selective quotation, he had conveyed the impression that at least one cop had been firing on the protesters. He had adulterated his supposed proof."
The author of that NYT article found out about O’Reilly’s remarks on Kurtz’s show and said this on his Facebook page:
“Bill O’Reilly cut out an important phrase when he read excerpts of my report from The Times on air Sunday to back up his claim that Buenos Aires was a “war zone” the night after Argentina surrendered to Britain in the Falklands war…
When he read it on Howard Kurtz’s Media Buzz show, O’Reilly left out that the shots were “over the heads of fleeing demonstrators.” As far as I know, no demonstrators were shot or killed by police in Buenos Aires that night.
What I saw on the streets that night was a demonstration—passionate, chaotic and memorable—but it would be hard to confuse it with being in a war zone."
“How Bill O’Reilly imploded at CBS following his Falklands War ‘combat’ reporting”
Should read: BOR’s legacy of him being a real reporter/newsman
Duh, I need more coffee.
Hate to break it to BOR but name calling and throwing out the same old chestnut about the “liberal” media is not going to get him out of this mess. Mother Jones/Corn have laid out several discrepancies in their article and their annotated response. His Talking Points last Friday and the video that he’s are going to show us did not and will not clear up these discrepancies. BOR needs to answer to the MJ allegations one-by-one and point-by-point. But I don’t think that’s going to happen as it’s clear that his versions differ and there’s no way around that without his admitting that he told it wrong and/or he exaggerated at times. BOR rarely ever admits when he’s been wrong or he’s not going to tell the folks that he puffed up his stories to make him look like a bad-ass reporter when he really wasn’t.
He plans on showing the viewers a video of the Buenos Aires riot – CBS referred to the footage as being of a “riot” (as we heard in BOR’s own Talking Points last Friday). Even BOR himself called it a “riot” in his “No Spin Zone” book. But tonight he’s going to try and convince us all that it was part of a war zone and that the video is of combat and that anyone who doesn’t agree that it the Buenos Aires event was combat/war zone – even the other CBS reporters who were actually there – are simply out to destroy him.
Billy has one colleague foe who’s itching to take his time slot.
We suggest all the masses write letters to the editor, post comments, and call every radio station to question why the Foxies refuse to punish Billy for lying about his role at CBS.
NOTE TO AILES
You are a coward. You are too afraid, and weak to suspend Billy.