O'Reilly caught red-handed advocating fascism in Iraq

The blog CallingAllWingNuts.com did some great reporting on what Bill O'Reilly blurted out on the radio today.  On today's edition of The Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly said that soldiers should shoot any Iraqi civilian "right between the eyes" if they are on the streets after their curfew, which he considers as a way to keep the country safe:

O’Reilly:  "Now to me, they’re notfighting it hard enough.  See, if I’m president, I got probably another50-60 thousand with orders to shoot on sight anybody violatingcurfews.   Shoot them on sight.  That’s me… President O’Reilly…  Curfewin Ramadi, seven o’clock at night.  You’re on the street?  You’redead.  I shoot you right between the eyes.  Ok?  That’s how I run thatcountry.  Just like Saddam ran it.  Saddam didn’t have explosions - hedidn’t have bombers.  Did he?  because if you got out of line, yourdead.

"Now…  is that the kind of country I want to have for Iraq?  No…  Butyou have to have that for a few months to stabilize the situation sothe Iraqi government can get organized, can get security in place andcan get the structure going."

Three things come to mind here.  First, what he is advocating is actually fascism by definition:

"Aphilosophy or system of government that is marked by stringent socialand economic control, a strong, centralized government usually headedby a dictator, and often a policy of belligerent nationalism."

Second, it has been shown all throughout history that those who are given power tend not to voluntarily relinquish it.  Therefore, the whole idea of promoting democracy in Iraq would be thrown out the window.

Third, and lastly, if he wants to treat Iraqis like Saddam Hussein treated them, then maybe O'Reilly should explain his comments during a debate with Michael Moore in 2004 about why he favored going into Iraq:

"They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people."

So, if Bill O'Reilly would like to enforce order like Saddam Hussein did, then what exactly is Mr. O'Reilly really suggesting?  All this coming from a guy that claims to be pro-life.