News commentator suggests Shawn Hornbeck enjoyed his abduction.

[Brad]

Yes, someone had the balls to accuse the fifteen-year-old child (who was eleven when he was torn from his family) of having more fun during his abduction than he had when he was safe at home, before his innocence was robbed.

Right. Let's blame the child victim, not the 41-year-old, 300 lb., 6'4" behemoth who kidnapped him, held him for four years, and probably regularly sexually assaulted him.

The commentator goes on to say that "this guy, Shawn Hornbeck... taunted" his parents on their website. He's basing this accusation on two posts Hornbeck made in late 2005 on the site his parents launched as an effort to find him.

Hornbeck wrote, under the name 'Shawn Devlin,' "How long are you planing [sic] to look for your son?"

Wow, you're right. He couldn't have possibly been trying to drop hints, or see if his parents still cared. He was trying to make his parents' lives a living hell. He wasn't scared. He was living it up.

"He's got the piercings. I mean, this is a troubled kid in my opinion."

Yes, all kids with piercings must worship Satan and sacrifice cats.

Let's see how much this man would enjoy being held captive and sexually molested for four years by a man three times his size.

Here's the clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qo-x1pKGQk), in full context. Absolutely reprehensible.

[MsOrange]

sicko

[Ireneparalegal]

Motherf******...I hope this bastard loses his job QUICK!

[James"Thunder"Early]

That is sick to accuse a child of such a thing, especially after such an ordeal. He ought to be ashamed of himself for even saying something like that.

[80sTrivia]

How sad... obviously this person doesn't know the first thing about sexual and/or physical abuse and the effect it has on young children...

[friendsfan77]

Bill O'Reilly is a moron. That is all.

[Ireneparalegal]

What this M****F***** says is pathetic. Because he thinks in his own mind, "You can leave...run away" simple as that. He doesn't believe in the Stockholm syndrome, so what? Because you don't believe in something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
How many women are battered, beaten, emotionally abused and people say the same thing abt them? "Why don't they leave?" It's not as simple as that.
The child, yes, he was a child when he was abducted, was brainwashed, he was most likely sexually abused. What other reason was he kidnapped? To do this guy's housework???? I doubt it. Until someone is living in fear or repercussion of some sort of violence, they have NO IDEA WHAT IT IS LIKE. Whether it is battered women or kidnapped children, you are pretty much at the mercy of the person who has this hold over you.

I HATE YOU BILL O'REILLY!

[Brad]

I like how he tries to soften the blow of villifying the child victim by referring to him as "this guy," at least twice.

[Bobby F.]

Shawn Hornbeck Appears on 'Oprah'
Friday, January 19, 2007

By Bill O'Reilly


Shawn Hornbeck, the kidnapped 15-year-old, appeared with Ms. Winfrey just six days after police freed him from that despicable predator Michael Devlin, who entered a "not guilty" plea today to kidnapping charges.

Shawn went missing four years ago. Ms. Winfrey was gentle with him:

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OPRAH WINFREY: What would you do all day? Could you tell us that? Do you feel comfortable?

SHAWN HORNBECK, KIDNAP VICTIM: I would mostly sleep. It is the only way I could ever pass the time.

WINFREY: Sleeping.

HORNBECK: It was just basically what I did. Sleeped (sic) or watched TV or played video games.

WINFREY: Can you tell me how you got through these past four years?

HORNBECK: Hope and praying.

WINFREY: Hope and praying. You said you would pray and cross yourself every night.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

Oprah told her audience there were ground rules for the interview and she could not ask Shawn on camera why he didn't try to escape from Devlin. Off camera, apparently he told her he was too scared to leave the predator.

This case has captivated the entire country and is now becoming political. The far-left smear Web sites have vilified me for raising questions about the situation and predictability "The View" ladies took the bait.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOY BEHAR, 'VIEW' CO-HOST: Bill O'Reilly has said that he does not believe in the Stockholm Syndrome. You know this kid who was kidnapped in Missouri — isn't it Missouri? Yes. He says that.

(CROSSTALK)

BEHAR: That it rarely happens. He doesn't believe — he thinks that the kid basically was free to roam around and could have gone home and why didn't he? Almost like blaming the kid. I think it's really abominable.

ROSIE O'DONNELL, 'VIEW' CO-HOST: Yes. Do you know why he thought that?

JOY BEHAR, 'VIEW' CO-HOST: Why?

O'DONNELL: Because the kid has a pierced lip.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

Well, that's completely absurd. But what else is new?

Cutting through all the nonsense, the bottom line on this story is that Shawn Hornbeck fell victim to evil — pure evil. And every American parent should use this case to instruct their children on how to confront evil because sooner or later they will have to. Simplistic stuff like Stockholm Syndrome and the like get us nowhere.

There are a lot of unanswered questions in this case that are important. But two things override all of them:

First, Shawn Hornbeck is a victim. And he should be helped in every way possible.

And second, American children must be prepared to fight against frightening things — prepared to fight against them. And they must be warned those things are real.

All the other nonsense can walk as far as I'm concerned. Society must deal harshly with these predators — are you listening Vermont? And parents must aggressively educate their kids regarding the true dangers of the world, because nobody else will.

And that's The Memo.

[Brad]

No matter how much backpedaling he does, he can't deny what he said on January 15. The proof is in the video and in transcripts.

You can't say something one day, and then three days later, deny saying it and then state the opposite. Especially in this day of YouTube, where if you say something outrageous, you're online within minutes.

This is no liberal witch-hunt. I would hope that one would find Bill O'Reilly's comments disgusting, no matter what side of the political fence they lie.

[Bobby F.]

This is no liberal witch-hunt.

Yea, right.:lol:

[JuicyCoutureGirl]

:rolleyes: How did I know Bill O'Reilly had something to do with this? He is the right wing version of Rosie O'Donald

[friendsfan77]

This is no liberal witch-hunt. I would hope that one would find Bill O'Reilly's comments disgusting, no matter what side of the political fence they lie.
Exactly. This has nothing to do with politics, but everything to do with him being a complete jerk.

[JuicyCoutureGirl]

Exactly. This has nothing to do with politics, but everything to do with him being a complete jerk.

Yes. With the way he blamed this poor boy for not escaping, why didn't he blame Elizabeth Smart for not leaving? She had dozens of chances to leave her abductors but didn't. Is this because society is made to feel sorry for females but not males? What about Natalee Holloway? No one told her to go off drinking with three complete strangers but if anyone had said this then off with their heads!:rolleyes:

[James"Thunder"Early]

It has nothing to do with politics, it is way over the line to say something like that about the victim of a crime, especially a child. O'Reilly ought to own up to his comments instead of trying to make excuses.

[Lex Luthor]

Motherf******...I hope this bastard loses his job QUICK!

Come on Irene, don't hold back tell us how you really feel :lol:

I agree completely this guy should lose his job, I wonder how amusing he would find it if his child was abducted

[Lex Luthor]

Exactly. This has nothing to do with politics, but everything to do with him being a complete jerk.

For some poeple anything said in a negative light about "their" people is a liberal witch hunt. Right and wrong have no bearing only politics.

Some things are about simple human courtesy and characteristics, not everything has to be about politics.

[JuicyCoutureGirl]

For some poeple anything said in a negative light about "their" people is a liberal witch hunt. Right and wrong have no bearing only politics.

Some things are about simple human courtesy and characteristics, not everything has to be about politics.

^5. Something as simple as discussing toast turns into a political debate.

[Ireneparalegal]

It has nothing to do with politics, it is way over the line to say something like that about the victim of a crime, especially a child. O'Reilly ought to own up to his comments instead of trying to make excuses.
I so agree. Why does politics always have to enter the picture. Why can't it just be agreed that what this a$$hole said was PATHETIC, DISTURBING, STUPID, OBNOXIOUS and LUDICROUS!? This has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with a loud mouth bastard who is blessed to not have had anything bad occur in his family. It isn't until you walk in that person's shoes do you really understand WHY.

[Crapple]

Once again, Mr. Orally can't see the forest for the trees.

It'd be one thing if Bill had said "you know, I just don't feel right about this. I feel like there's something here we may not be seeing." But to come out and brazenly say "there was an element here that this kid liked" and that his abduction could be chalked up to "no school, play all day long" is just...obscene. That's the only word for it. Obscene.

I'm now more convinced than ever that Bill is nothing more than a ratings whore who makes these cocksure, "devil's advocate" type allegations just to create controversy. I predict that within a year he'll start saying the Holocaust never happened. :rolleyes:

But what can you expect from a guy who started his career on "Inside Edition"?

[Brad]

I just found out that O'Reilly is set to be the keynote speaker at a National Center For Missing And Exploited Children event on March 9. I would hope that after his remarks on January 15, the organization will reconsider that choice.

[theshark8777]

I just found out that O'Reilly is set to be the keynote speaker at a National Center For Missing And Exploited Children event on March 9. I would hope that after his remarks on January 15, the organization will reconsider that choice.

Are you kidding me?!

[Ireneparalegal]

I just found out that O'Reilly is set to be the keynote speaker at a National Center For Missing And Exploited Children event on March 9. I would hope that after his remarks on January 15, the organization will reconsider that choice.
C'mon, are you for real?????? WTF?????

[Brad]

I just found out that O'Reilly is set to be the keynote speaker at a National Center For Missing And Exploited Children event on March 9. I would hope that after his remarks on January 15, the organization will reconsider that choice.

The organization has canned Mr. O'Reilly. His victim-villifying mouth is no longer invited. He's been replaced by a real victim's advocate, John Walsh! Good for the National Center For Missing And Exploited Children! :thumbsup:

[Ireneparalegal]

The organization has canned Mr. O'Reilly. His victim-villifying mouth is no longer invited. He's been replaced by a real victim's advocate, John Walsh! Good for the National Center For Missing And Exploited Children! :thumbsup:
Now THAT IS A BETTER CHOICE.

[Lex Luthor]

The organization has canned Mr. O'Reilly. His victim-villifying mouth is no longer invited. He's been replaced by a real victim's advocate, John Walsh! Good for the National Center For Missing And Exploited Children! :thumbsup:
:clap :clap Good for them

[Bobby F.]

The organization has canned Mr. O'Reilly. His victim-villifying mouth is no longer invited. He's been replaced by a real victim's advocate, John Walsh! Good for the National Center For Missing And Exploited Children! :thumbsup:

"victim-villifying mouth" Too funny!!!:lol: :lol: O'Reilly hads done more than anyone to try and get states to pass Jessica Law. You know...the one that locks up child predators up for alot longer than some liberal ass judge wants too.

Good for O'Reilly for actually putting forth the question instead of playing "touchy-feelly" over this whole deal.:clap

[Brad]

You know, Bobby, you're right. All of that makes what Bill-O said about Shawn Hornbeck okay. I take back what I said. Bill O'Reilly, who accuses a child victim of anything but being victim; of taking a certain enjoyment in the very circumstances that caused him to be sexually abused for four years, should be allowed to speak at a National Center For Missing And Exploited Children event. You have me convinced! He's a much more qualified speaker than John Walsh. All that loser did was lose his son to a predator.

Seriously "the question" you refer to Oh'Really "putting forth" shouldn't even have been posed. I don't know if he meant what he said, if he just said it to garner more ratings, if he's senile, or all three. Whatever it boils down to, it was a despicable thing to say, and O'Reilly should be ashamed.

[Ireneparalegal]

You know, Bobby, you're right. All of that makes what Bill-O said about Shawn Hornbeck okay. I take back what I said. Bill O'Reilly, who accuses a child victim of anything but being victim; of taking a certain enjoyment in the very circumstances that caused him to be sexually abused for four years, should be allowed to speak at a National Center For Missing And Exploited Children event. You have me convinced! He's a much more qualified speaker than John Walsh. All that loser did was lose his son to a predator.

Seriously "the question" you refer to Oh'Really "putting forth" shouldn't even have been posed. I don't know if he meant what he said, if he just said it to garner more ratings, if he's senile, or all three. Whatever it boils down to, it was a despicable thing to say, and O'Reilly should be ashamed.
:yeahthat

[Bobby F.]

Gee whiz...all of these opportunities to say something and it never happened. Yet no one should even question as to why. Better keep those blinders on.

IN DEFENSE OF BILL O'REILLY
http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/56/6838/defense.asp?nid=6838&wid=56&pv=1

Tuesday, January 30, 2007


"Bill O'Reilly is not looking out for the kids," wailed a blogger. He ought to lose his job for his "base-line idiocy" and perverse inhumanity, sermonized Keith Olbermann, suddenly sounding a lot like the man he calls "Billo." "I've really had it, you know, with people judging," came Sean Hannity's signature inanities. "This was an 11 year-old boy, ripped away from his family, and people are suggesting maybe he just enjoyed being away from school."

The contretemps were over O'Reilly's response to the case of Missouri kidnapping victim Shawn Hornbeck. The boy disappeared in 2002, and "turned up four years later—alive, the alleged captive of a pizza-parlor manager," to quote Newsweek. O'Reilly has been clobbered ever since he dared to suggest that, horrors, the kid probably enjoyed his new-found freedom: "He didn't have to go to school. He could run around and do whatever he wanted."

Indeed, in Newsweek's telling, "The 11-year-old boy no longer had to go to school. He could watch TV and play videogames all day. He was given an iPod, a computer, an Xbox 360 and a bike." At 15, he had a girlfriend and a best friend, with whom he regularly rode his bike, went skateboarding, hung around the mall and played videogames.

Shawn surfed the Web. On at least four occasions he was stopped by police late at night and given a ride home. Not once did he so much as mutter under his breath, "I'm that kidnapped kid." And get this: young Shawn even filed a police report when his brand-new bike was stolen, but failed to mention that its owner had been nicked too.

Tony Douglas, the bosom buddy, would sleep over at Shawn's place. He attests to the chummy interactions between Shawn and his kidnapper, Michael Devlin. Shawn, in turn, spent holidays with Tony. A "neighbor, Krista Jones, observed Devlin teaching the boy to drive his pickup truck, while others saw the two pitching a tent outside the apartment."

These are the unsettling facts in the Hornbeck case. Naturally, they make people uneasy. If not for the ersatz experts waiting in the wings to rape reality with dubious theoretical constructs, a torpid public might have grappled with some of these discomfiting realities.

Newsweek, Olbermann, and our execrable experts asserted that Shawn "was almost surely threatened with gruesome consequences if he said a word about his abduction to anyone else." Based on what evidence? The freedom Shawn was given to come and go as he pleased? One Dr. Terri Weaver got carried away in trying to explain why, while on his bike rides, out with his girlfriend, at the mall, or at a slumber party, Shawn failed to dial 911 on the cellphone he owned. Devlin could have threatened to kill the boy's family and pets, she hyperventilated. Another tele-twit asserted, sans proof, that Shawn had decided to sacrifice his needs to save his family. To date, there is no evidence that the boy was molested. Devlin is charged with "felony kidnapping and felony armed criminal action," but not with sexual assault.

O'Reilly also picked apart the "Stockholm syndrome," something that really got the assorted resident experts going. (The stupidest and most vulgar of the psychology profession dominate the cable and talk show circuit; members of the Skeptics Society or the Society for a Science of Clinical Psychology they are not.) The sages had diagnosed Hornbeck in absentia with this Syndrome, which is said to arise when the kidnapped individual is deprived of basic needs. These are gratified grudgingly by the assailant, to whom the victim is purported to become emotionally attached. At best, "Stockholm Syndrome" describes an adaptive, purposeful behavior—a survival mechanism, not a disorder.

It most certainly doesn't describe Shawn, although there were shades of it in Natascha Kampusch. This Austrian girl was "yanked off a suburban street when she was 10 and confined to a squalid, windowless [underground] cell for more than eight years," reported MSNBC. Kampusch was confused, even ambivalent about her captor. But she told herself, "Surely I didn't come into the world so I could be locked up and my life completely ruined." So she read, listened to classical music, taught herself to knit, and eventually made a dash for it.

As did Steven Stayner find the strength to flee his tormentor. In 1972 he was "kidnapped at age 7 and sexually abused," writes Newsweek. Eight years later, "when his kidnaper brought a 5 year-old home, Steven took the little boy and made a run for it—hitchhiking 40 miles and going to a police station in Ukiah, Calif. ‘I couldn't see Timmy suffer,' he told Newsweek in 1984. ‘It was my do-or-die chance.'"

In January of 2006, a 13-year-old German girl was abducted, sexually assaulted, and held in a crate, at the complete mercy of her captor. However, when her abductor took her and the dog for a walk, she managed to drop notes on which she had scribbled, "Help." And helped she was.

Olbermann insisted that by raising questions about Shawn's conduct—in effect daring to impute a modicum of free will to the young boy—O'Reilly was guilty of "blaming the victim." Nonsense on stilts. Shawn's poor response to his predicament does nothing to change that he was a victim of a craven criminal. It does, however, amplify the fortitude shown by Steven Stayner, Natascha Kampusch, and others like them.

[Bobby F.]

You know, Bobby, you're right. All of that makes what Bill-O said about Shawn Hornbeck okay. I take back what I said.

Good boy!! Glad you finally see the light.

Seriously "the question" you refer to Oh'Really "putting forth" shouldn't even have been posed. I don't know if he meant what he said, if he just said it to garner more ratings, if he's senile, or all three. Whatever it boils down to, it was a despicable thing to say, and O'Reilly should be ashamed.

Shouldn't have been posed???:crazy: So we should just go on one side of a story in a situation like this?? Kinda like what they were trying to do in the Duke rape case. Just listen to the skank who claimed she got raped and just go ahead and convict the 3 boys over it. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?? Not in athe liberal world I guess.

[Sharop]

AKA, can you send me a PM?

You know, Bobby, you're right. All of that makes what Bill-O said about Shawn Hornbeck okay.

Bill-O. :) Steve Irwin was sometimes referred to (and referred to himself) as "Steve-o." Although that's probably the only thing the two of them have in common. Unless Bill O'Reilly is amazingly passionate about animals and loves crocodiles. Steve's great.

I wonder if Mr O'Reilly likes The Goonies? I hope he does. It's a really good film. I hope he likes Stand By Me as well - I thought River Phoenix was really good in that, but so was everyone else.