Skip to main content

From Crooks and Liars. There was an exchange on Fox News last night between Bill O'Reilly and Wes Clark. The issue was the release of further Abu Ghraib pictures and video.

O'Reilly was incensed that it "puts our troops at risk". Clark responded that what's putting the troops at risk is the chain of command letting, or even making, this happen in the first place.

O'Lielly was saying that it happens just like this in every war, with Clark rebutting that those were isolated incidents which were court-martialed.

And then, this:

Clark: And let me explain something. You go all the way up the chain of command ...

O'Reilly: General! You need to look at the Malmedy massacre in World War Two, and the 82nd Airborne who did it!

Video of the exchange here.

The Malmedy massacre? Well, about that on the flip...

From the Wikipedia:

On December 17, 1944, near the hamlet of Baugnez on the height half-way between the town of Malmédy and Ligneuville in Belgium, elements of Waffen-SS Kampfgruppe Peiper encountered the American 285th Field Artillery Observation Battalion. After a brief battle, the Americans surrendered. About 150 of the prisoners of war were disarmed and sent to stand in a field near the crossroads. Peiper and his leading armoured units then continued their advance.

A tank pulled up, and a truck shortly thereafter. A single SS officer pulled out a pistol and shot a medical officer standing in the front row, and then shot the man standing next to the medical officer. Other soldiers joined in with machine guns. It is not known why this happened; there is no record of an order by an SS officer. While the shooting of POWs was common on the Eastern front, such incidents were rare on the Western front.

Another good account: History Net (w/ thanks to AaronBa).

Why do Bill O'Reilly and Fox News believe that American troops used to behave, and ought to behave now, like Nazis?

Originally posted to miholo on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:19 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Bill O'Reilly hates (4.00)

    But you knew that.

    He's on the list for biggest Republican fake media asshat, but there are so many competitors.

  •  Not that we needed further proof. . . (none)
    that O'Lielly is an idiot, but what an idiot!!!!

    You have to love a chicken hawk like O'Rielly, who has never served telling GENERAL Clark he's wrong etc.  O'Rielly continues to make himself look a bigger and bigger fool.  The scary thing is, howqever, that there are still people out there who believe this blowhard.  

    •  Yup. (4.00)
      The scary thing is, however, that there are still people out there who believe this blowhard.

      Unfortunately, that includes most of my immediate family.  Hell, they even buy his books as gifts for each other.  I'm starting to wonder if I'm adopted. <g> Makes for some tense family get togethers, I assure you.  I love 'em; but they're idiots.

      •  What are you doing for Thanksgiving? (4.00)
        I used to drive 200 miles to the fam's city, brought the Turkey, COOKED the turkey, stuffing etc etc.  Last year, the tension was so great we all felt like we were walking on eggshells.  My own mother told me that I was just like Jeffrey Dahmer and all of the rest of us liberals were too.  
        This, year?  I don't know what I'm going to do.  They are starting to come around but now they don't want to talk about it.   I know they feel embarrassed but Jeez they were jerks.  
        I keep hoping my boyfriend's family adopts me.  They're traditional, Eisenhower Republicans but they at least seem sane.
        And they have never once compared me to a psychopathic necrophilic cannibal.  

        "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

        by goldberry on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 02:09:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe you could offer them a recipe (none)
          like we do here.  You might want to print off a handful just to be covered.  

          My in-laws were like that too :)

          The truth always matters.

          by texasmom on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 02:22:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  My parents were Eisehower GOP (4.00)
          They were very socially liberal and fiscally conservative, and would have been horrified to see the theocrats and Pharisees that call themselves Republicans today.
          I'll be thinking about you this Thanksgiving!

          War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus. - Antoine De Saint-Exupery

          by Margot on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 02:49:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Thanksgiving (none)
          My husband and I just go to our local Fancy Restaurant for a Thanksgiving buffet.

          Con: no leftovers
          Pro: nobody calls us names

        •  No Thanksgiving (none)
          My sister-in-law solved that problem.  We are not having get together.

          My brother and I can not have a civil discussion on these matters. He has been useful for me because what he sends me is clearly (mis)informed by what his getting from Fox Faux News.

          Le peuple en ce jour sans cesse repète: Ah! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira!

          by MoDem on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:52:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  How do you do the cross-out? (none)
            Like you did above.
            •  strike-thru html... (none)
              the html for strike-thru is easier on this site than  most: < s > strike-thru < /s > will equal strike-thru if you eliminate the spaces between the <-type brackets.

              Most of the time, the html is either < str > or
              < strike >. At least in my experience, but I'm no expert.

              ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

              by snookybeh on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 04:56:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  thanks for the info (none)
                I think I understood it. Well, now wait a minute.  Do you place the words you wanted stricken inside brackets or quotes or some icon that I don't seem to have on my computer.  What is HTML?  I see above my post it has HTML tags but I don't know how to use them.  That's my problem, but thanks again for your help.
        •  turn the other cheek (none)
          While I enjoy a good debate, I'm not sure there is much good in arguing with someone who says you are like Jeffrey Dahmer.

          In my experience when it gets to be REALLY awful like that, the best response is what (pre-Bush) some would have called the good Christian response: if you are slapped, turn the other cheek and continue to love them anyway.

          In practical terms, this means not rising to the bait. Smile and ignore even the most awful and hurtful comments. Leave the room if the conversation turns ugly. If someone says something rude in your vicinity, ignore it or change the subject. If they press you for a reaction, as some will, just say "What? I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention." And respond gently to personal attacks like the Dahmer comment. Shake your head sadly and quietly say, "Do you really believe that?"

          It takes a Zen-like calm to do this well, and not everyone can achieve that. But if you can, it can be surprisingly effective. The effects don't show immediately, but what happens is that people feel bad about "fighting" someone who refuses to fight back. The more thoughtful ones may actually have an attack of conscience and realize "oh my god, because I've been listening to Rush Limbaugh so much I just equated my child with a murderer and cannibal". But even the less thoughtful ones will stop -- not because they learned anything, but simply because they can't get that perverse joy from tormenting you anymore.

          •  a good republican boy (none)

            "what happens is that people feel bad about "fighting" someone who refuses to fight back."

            -this is one of the most unfortunate tactics the american left chronically engages...or
            -kerry did it...or didn't do it.
            -and i have seen it being exercised during numberless t.v. debates.
            -the republicans simply steam roll right over their opponents...and to everyone viewing...appear to have been victorious even if their arguments are drivel.
            -may i suggest some republican tactics..."mother, jeffery dahmer was a republican...everyone knows that. and so is his entire family. what IS your point?"
            -so what if it is or isn't a lie. it doesn't matter. repeat it over and over at the dinner table until people start to believe it. just like a republican would do.

            •  Hate to admit it (none)
              but she's right. There is no respect for the fair fight or for grace and dignity anymore.

              We've been taken over by the WWF. Think about it.

              •  nature vs. nurture (none)
                -unfortunately, the tactics of zen are no match for the virulent conservatism that seems rooted in the u.s.
                -here in canada, our liberal party engages in all sorts of naughty tricks to keep the conservatives in their place.
                -you gotta knock 'em down, hold 'em down and never never let them up until they stop moving.
                -i mean that ENTIRELY in the figurative sense of course and i am talking in the larger sense, not about this poor unfortunate's mother.
                -our right wing is chronically castrated. and we never give them an inch because we know, like a vicious dog, they would attack.
                -it is simply the tribal, xenophobic nature of right wing politics and those that subscribe to it.
                •  Liberals vs. Conservatives (none)
                  I'm guessing they don't use the BIG lie strategy against the conservatives that the republicans seem to have adopted, or maybe I'm wrong. In any case, could you be a little bit more specific about exactly what tactics the Liberals use against the Conservatives? Or maybe even give us some pointers to information sources which show those tactics in action.

                  BTW, you are talking about the parties named Liberal and Conservatives, right?

            •  misunderstood and misapplied knowledge (none)
              Can be worse than no knowledge at all.

              I never suggested that this is a general-purpose approach suited to all situations. I regularly call people on ridiculous conservative bullshit all the time. And I certainly never suggested that politicians should adopt it. Hell no. Let me repeat that: Hell no. I want representatives who will stand up and fight hard against the evil that has swept across our country.

              But you can't choose your family, and not everyone has the time, energy, or inclination to be in constant 10-against-1 debate mode during what's ostensibly a holiday weekend. In the situation of dealing with an impossible debate with your family where they are beyond rationality -- the original commenter's tone certainly made it sound like it was impossible, and I'd say that a mother comparing her child (and half the country) to a cannibalistic serial killer is thoroughly beyond rationality -- a little bit of pacifism can go a long way.

              Is the point clear yet? You use the right tactic at the right time.

              •  misunderestimated knowledge (none)
                yes, i realize you didn't mean it as a template for all behaviour everywhere.
                it's just that the sentiment is so eerily familiar...and so utterly futile when dealing with right wing brutality...even from your own mother.
                what a country.
            •  They are not debaters or fighters (none)
              they are bullies. Their behavior is abusive.

              Don't tolerate it. Don't go. Find someone who loves you... or even someone who doesn't know you and spend a peaceful Thanksgiving with them. Restaurants are a great option.

              You deserve to eat without being baited into some no-win argument so some family member(s) can "prove" they are right and you are wrong by verbally bludgeoning you.

              Edward R. Murrow:We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.

              by digital drano on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 10:23:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Let them be like the Butterball Turkeys... (none)
          that they are and self-baste in their own juices.

          Beg off the holiday, say you have come down with the flu and enjoy solitude in the comforts of your own need to go to all the effort if all it is going to get you is grief.

          Enjoy eating your tasty petit-bourgeoise tidbits in peace...eff'em all!

          Do not even call the day of. You will regret any conversation you happen to have with your mouthbreather kinfolk...

          Or go and enjoy a peaceful Norman Rockwell-esque meal with your sane ones...and say a small prayer for the mouthbreathing knuckledragger relatives.

          People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

          by rgilly on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 08:53:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Same with both my and my wife's families (none)
        Except they think Rush is even smarter than O'Reilly. My father-in-law listens to Rush religiously. It's led to many very tense conversations during holidays, etc. The sad but true fact is that we have pretty much quit being part of the family. It was just too unpleasant, and it didn't seem worth the effort. It was my wife's decision, which I fully supported.

        I've been arguing politics with my Dad since 1968, so we are both used to it and don't take it personally, so it's a little easier. Although those around us don't seem to think so :)

        "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter." Dr. ML King, from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963.

        by bewert on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:23:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yikes!!!!! (none)




        SO sorry to hear that.  You have my deepest sympathy.

        If Jesus Christ came back today and saw what was being done in his name, he'd never stop throwing up... - Hannah and Her Sisters

        by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 04:02:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I was gonna say... (4.00)
      Where does this chickenhawk loofah-lout get off telling a decorated officer what war is like?
  •  New slogan (3.93)
    Fox News.  We make up stuff.  You decide.

    "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." -Abraham Lincoln

    by Dr Van Nostrand on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:25:51 PM PDT

  •  Thanks! (4.00)
    I saw the exchange last night, and was a little perplexed, for I could not place the Malmedy reference.  Clark didn't respond to it directly (he didn't need to--for he had already bracketed his discussion as covering his own career, which started well after WWII) and I didn't really think about it.

    But I do know of the incident, now that you jog my memory, and find it as bizarre as you do that O'Reilly should mention it.

    One thing about the exchange that I noted was when Clark asked O'Reilly if he had been to Iran or talked to leaders there.  O'Reilly, of course, had to admit that he hadn't.  That, I think, is indicative of O'Reilly as a whole: he speaks without knowledge.

    He speaks without knowledge, too, when he says the Abu Ghraib photos would "endanger our troops" (using his specious "Newsweek" analogy--one long since debunked).  He has never been in the military and knows nothing about Arabs.

    •  I had... (4.00)
      ...exactly the same reaction: it jogged something in my memory, but just didn't fit. It left me wondering whether I had somehow and strangely always completely missed a major WWII episode.

      That he would make such a confusion between Nazi perpetrators and victims doesn't just show that he is completely ignorant of history. It is also quite revealing of the image that Billy and the Bush Republicans have of what the US military is and what it is for.

      Blogs will matter when we act locally: Local Diaries on Daily Kos.

      by miholo on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:34:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  As much as it galls me to do so... (none)
        ... I believe I can explain what the Falaffel King was getting at.

        He brought up Malmeedy(sp?) as an example of how bad treatment of prisoners lead to allied forces to 'fight to the death'. They knew after that moment that there was no point in surrender, because surrender merely meant a shortly postponed and CERTAIN death, versus still having a fighting chance and going down with all guns blazing.

        O'Liely is saying "if you release the pictures, you're going to be telling the arabs that there's no point in surrendering because we'll torture and kill them all".

        There is a certain twisted logic to it. I have serious doubts I'd surrender to some hayseed in a warzone to be beaten to death as opposed to a comparatively quick and clean bullet, particularly if I could put a few of mine into some of the bastards on my way down.

        The problem with O'Flaffels argument is that the damage is ALREADY DONE. The arab street is already more than aware of what's been done. Releasing pictures may indeed incite outcries of anger and moral indignation, but the biggest danger isn't to the troops (who already are exposed to it), it's to the administration and its allies in this ill conceived deadly farce.

        Thing is, germany had its moment of public purging. Few today would have a realistic concern of being tossed an an oven if captured by a german infantryman. The US is going to need a similar act of contrition before people will believe that capture by US forces won't equate to being tortured and probably killed.

        Plot your political compass scores at KosCompass

        by Hatamoto on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:19:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Bill seems to have only two states of being: (none)
    asleep or incensed.  And it's laughable that he thinks his opinion and what is good for military morale can stand on an equal footing with the opinion of a career officer.
  •  Scary. Did Clark Call Him On It? (4.00)
    It sucks when you have to chase after these things afterwords while, like a diseased and feverish satyr, O'Reilly brances back into the embrace of his Nazi fanclub, and then, caked with green effluvia, they prance about in their out festering mental emissions.

    Hmm... Actually, is it really worth chasing after such a despicable pack of slavering, warmongering gremlins? Why look at them one second longer then we have to? Can't we just build a moat or something?

    9/11 + 4 Years = Katrina... Conservatism Kills.

    by NewDirection on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:30:54 PM PDT

  •  While in this instance (4.00)
    the reference is fine, I would not count on Wikipedia as a resource.  Several times I've seen things on there, especially regarding politics (the process, not opinion) that are just wrong.  So, as with everything, be careful.

    Having said that, O'Reilly is a fuckstick.

    "While there is a lower class, I am in it. While there is a criminal element, I am of it. While there is a soul in prison, I am not free." - Eugene Debs

    by matthewc on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:31:13 PM PDT

    •  True, About Wikipedia (4.00)
      Today, because I've seen it copied so often and taken as true, I altered the Wikipedia entry on Yakima Canutt (the man who developed the whole field of movie stunts).  It had said that Canutt got his nickname because he had lived in Yakima.  Not true.

      Wikipedia is a good place to start in on finding out about things, but it should never be taken as the final answer.

    •  I know... (none)
      ...but don't have anything better at hand right now, and in this case Wikipedia's write-up is pretty good. If you have another good reference I can replace it.

      Blogs will matter when we act locally: Local Diaries on Daily Kos.

      by miholo on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:40:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not very authoritative (4.00)
        but the Time-Life book on the Battle of the Bulge recounts the same events. The Malmedy was perpetrated by Nazi Waffen SS troops on the 82nd. American forces were not responsible for any atrocities in this incident although the Time-Life book notes that reports of the massacre of unarmed American POWs caused individual American soldiers to vow never to take a member of the SS alive.

        Frankly, and I know from a humanitarian and human rights perspective this is wrong, I have no problem with our soldiers not recognizing the surrender of SS troops.

        The book does not report any actual instances of Americans exacting revenge against the Germans, whether Wermacht or SS as result of this. So, even if Americans vowed to not recognize the surrender of SS troops, it does not appear that they acted on this.

        •  My father was in the Battle of the Bulge (4.00)
          He was in the 17th Tank Battalian (attached to the 3rd army during this Battle I think. He also told me that they did not take SS prisoners. He had a lugar, he taken from an SS officer. He did not share details, but the implication was clear. And BTW he came out of the war, very anti-war in general.

          SOCIAL SECURITY: Invented by Democrats yesterday, Protected by Democrats today

          by mollyd on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:30:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This is an ongoing theme of Saving Pv. Ryan. (4.00)
            One of the things that made the film unusual is that it portrayed US troops, bitter, weary and brutalized by the conflict, as often tempted to shoot surrendering prisoners and sometimes doing so.  It was striking to me; I had never seen that in a movie before.

            It stands to reason that our guys will sometimes commit a crime in war; our guys are only human, there are always some bad apples, and the pressures in war are immense.

            The big issue, of course, is whether misconduct is permitted and encouraged, or prohibited, by the leadership.  Our army has always been run on the assumption that it needed high ethical standards to succeed in its mission in the long-run.

            Up until lately, that is.

            If Bush were President when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, he would have invaded Mexico.-- Cervantes

            by jem6x on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:56:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Malmedy and Abu - not comparable: (4.00)
          The Waffen SS troops murdered some 80 men of the 285th Field Artillery Observation Battalion, who were part of the 7th Armored Division, not the 82nd AB.
          After word of this reached GIs in the front lines, many decided they would not accept the surrender of SS troops.
          There most definitely were a few reported cases of GIs shooting SS troops attempting to surrender, or SS who had already surrendered and were executed on-the-spot. Some 82nd AB GIs may have done this, but not many.

          The important thing to remember is;
          during WWII it was absolutely forbidden for GIs to shoot prisoners, but isolated incidents of this nature were generally ignored by the US military authorities. Heat-of-battle and all that. Any GIs who did shoot SS prisoners knew perfectly well they were breaking the laws of warfare, but felt it was justified.

          This is in no way comparable to Abu Ghraib, which was a definite result of a deliberately vague US policy regarding interrogation and the Geneva Convention.
          Those inmates were not a potential threat, nor were the US MPs under "combat stress" conditions. Nor were those MPs taking possibly-justifiable revenge on known terrorists. Those guards would've had little reason to do this, unless they were encouraged by their superiors.
          US military intelligence interrogators in the hopes of gaining information, with the implicit approval of the Pentagon, gave the MPs permission.

        •  Neighbor was a Battle of Bulge veteran (none)
          He talked frankly about his experiences. No bravado, just trying to help me understand what he saw. One instance he was on patrol and killed some German soldiers who seemed to want to be captured. They were walking loudly down a road. He said they couldn't take prisoners at that time because there was nothing they could do with prisoners--they were in a survival mode themselves.  This probably had nothing to do with the SS incident but it helped me understand the bleakness of the situation.
      •  Undisputed event - O'Reilly just stupid. (none)
        The Malmedy Massacre is a pretty commonly known event among even casual WWII historians.  I am surprised Clark did not point out an obvious mistake  --  probably did not want to get diverted.  Not citing Hollywood as a source, because the event is pretty well documented, but even the early 60's movie "Battle of the Bulge" re-enacts the event.  Honestly, it was pretty stupid of O'Leilly to claim Americans committed that atrocity.  Might as well say George Washington committed the Boston Massacre.
  •  revisionist ? (4.00)
    Let me get this straight: O'Reilly is rewriting history to make it look like American forces were responsible for a Nazi atrocity?

    Or was it a slip of the tongue?  If so, I have no idea what he meant to say.

    The third possibility is that he just doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, and just says whatever comes into his head.

    In any case, we should pound him so hard with this that he has to grovel and apologize.

    New Orleans will never die

    by hrh on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:31:45 PM PDT

  •  So why is it missing from the transcript? (4.00)

    "General Wesley K. Clark and Bill O'Reilly - The O'Reilly Factor" transcript
    Fox News
    October 3, 2005

    GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Listen, let me explain something. You go all the way up the Chain of Command

    Bill O'Reilly: General, you need to look at the Malmedy Massacre in World War II and the 82nd Airborne

    GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Bill, this isn't World War II. I'm looking at a volunteer Army. We are fighting a War Against Terrorist

    Bill O'Reilly: I'm telling you

    I thought the "who did it" was pretty clear in the video.

  •  Recommended (4.00)
    This is a  "foot in mouth" moment on the level of Bill Bennet's musings about blacks, abortion, and crime.

    O'Reilly accused the 82d Airborne of committing a warcrime that was actually committed by Nazis!  Talk about slander!

    Oh when the frogs. . Come marching in. . Oh when the FROGS COME MARCH-ING IN!

    by pontificator on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:37:28 PM PDT

  •  OK, I see what he meant (4.00)
    Thanks to Google.  O'Reilly was talking about the postwar trials of the Malmedy perpetrators, and the story that the US prosecutors used torture to extract confessions.

    What's interesting is that this puts O'Reilly in the position of Joe McCarthy and American neo-Nazi organizations.  This is from the oh-so-lovely National Alliance website:

    After the war, Germans who had taken part in the fighting at Malmédy were turned over to U.S. Army Colonel A.H. Rosenfeld and his Jewish underlings for "interrogation." The prisoners were arbitrarily reduced to civilian status so that they would not be protected by the Geneva Convention, and brutal torture was used to extract confessions. When 18-year-old prisoner Arvid Freimuth hanged himself after repeated beatings rather than sign a "confession," the prosecutors were permitted to use as "evidence" the unsigned statement which they themselves had contrived.

    McCarthy dared to speak against this officially sanctioned lynching, when almost no one else had the courage to do so. By fearlessly championing the underdogs, the defeated and vilified Germans, and speaking out against the actual atrocities committed by self-righteous aliens in American uniform, the Senator demonstrated the rare moral courage that later propelled him into the forefront of the struggle against Communism.

    So I guess the real question here is, "Why does Bill O'Reilly perpetuate neo-Nazi propaganda?"

    New Orleans will never die

    by hrh on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:57:53 PM PDT

    •  So That's It! (4.00)
      O'Reilly thinks that what was done to the Germans was fine and dandy.

      It's strange to think of Tailgunner Joe standing up for anyone, though.

    •  Wow. (none)
      If neo-nazi propaganda is his source, that doesn't change the fact that the comparison is unacceptable. Besides which, the war crimes tribunal had civilian witnesses to some of the atrocities according to Time-Life, so the whole thing smells like lies to me.
      •  What comparison? (2.18)
        BillO was not comparing the 82d to Nazi's.

        He was making a reference to an obscure (these days) military tribunal where the GERMAN prisoners were alleged to have been tortured.

        As a result of said allegations and follow-on investigations the sentences of many affected German war criminals were reduced to short prison sentences instead of execution.

        P.S. This is not neo-nzai propaganda. It is history.

        •  hey! (none)
's our resident bill o'reilly apologist troll! thanks for letting us know early on what the contorted bull-shit excuse will be on this one.

          Blogs will matter when we act locally: Local Diaries on Daily Kos.

          by miholo on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:47:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  tough crowd today (none)

            W00t! I caught my first '0'

            Posters in this thread saying that BillO has slandered the 82d by calling them Nazi's, and I get the Zero?

            •  anyone can go check... (none)
              ...your posting history. almost everything is right-wing talking points, just nobody has yet been offended enough to give you a zero -- we're too polite.

              but again, thanks for letting us know what the spin will be.

              "the malmedy massacre and the 82nd who did it."

              doesn't get much clearer than that.

              he did not say: "some incidents during and after the battle of the bulge by some 82nd soldiers, which led to a couple reduced convictions for some nazis -- and which the american neo-nazi movement likes to describe as a great jewish crime."

              not quite the same ring to it, hey?

              and it begs the question: there are many cases of individual abuses by US soldiers during WWII, many of them followed up by court martials. why did o'reilly pick this particular neo-nazi 'cause celebre'? makes you wonder what company he keeps and what he's been reading.

              Blogs will matter when we act locally: Local Diaries on Daily Kos.

              by miholo on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 02:19:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The fact is... (none)
                the sentences against the SS troops (death) were commuted after it became known that they were beaten by US military interrogators to confess to the Malmedy massacre.
                •  You've said that before... (none)
                  ...and I (and others downthread even better) explained why it's irrelevant as an excuse for Bill O'Reilly's slander of the 82nd as the perpetrators of the Malmedy massacre, and malicious as a comparison with Abu Ghraib.

                  Your response? Standard right-wing method: ignore all facts and arguments, stick to your talking point, repeat ad nauseum.

                  Blogs will matter when we act locally: Local Diaries on Daily Kos.

                  by miholo on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 02:51:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Huh? Oh, yes I agree with you (none)
                    on that! See my comments up-thread. I think you misread my point. O'Reilly's an idiot and this just proves it absolutely.
                    In fact, comparing the Abu Ghraib MPs with US guards who beat up the SS troops during the trial of the Malmedy perpatrators proves that torture to get information is not only morally indefensible, but can also (under US law) cause a conviction to be thrown out, as was the case of the Malmedy SS Troops.
                    This in no way exonorates the torturers, and is no way a "RW talking point" as you seem to be saying, for some reason.
                    Also, O'Reilly is SO STUPID he didn't even realise his mistake no matter how he tried to justify Abu Ghraib.
                    He blatantly said the 82nd commited the massacre, thinking that meant war crimes committed by US troops was OK. It was actually committed by SS, so I don't know what point he was trying to make!
              •  Who knows... (none)
                why BillO said it.

                It came out sounding wrong - it sounded like he said the 82d committed the original Battle of the Bulge/Malmedy massecre.

                It was was dumb for him to say it without correcting himself. But notice how that Clark really wasn't surprised by the comment. Maybe they were talking about it off camera or something.

                A foot in mouth moment for sure, but it was not deliberate slander or misrepresentation like some posters in this thread seem to believe.

                I think BillO was trying to lay out the point that everyone knows "shit happens" in war. Therefore, he asserts, that there is no journalistic/historical value to releasing additional Abu Graib photos.

                However, shouting out that BillO thinks the 82d Airborne division is like the Nazi's is simple trollery.

                •  It's not just foot-in-the mouth... (none)
                  I think you're better off saying he confused the 82nd's actions with the actions of the Nazis.

                  The alternative is that he picked this one specifically (by name, saying 'Malmedy massacre') to talk about individual abuses by US soldier, rather than any other WWII battle. If that is the case, he must have been reading Neo-Nazi material or consorting with Neo-Nazis. The only thing that distinguishes this from many other cases is that the Neo-Nazis have made a cause celebre out of it, calling it a 'Jewish crime'.

                  Blogs will matter when we act locally: Local Diaries on Daily Kos.

                  by miholo on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 02:59:41 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, but I think (none)
                    he's just stupid. His poorly functioning brain simply mixed up Malmedy with other prisoner shooting incidents throughout history, some committed by GIs, to justify that "these things happen in war", which they do.
                    My main point is; his argument (shooting prisoners in the heat of battle is the same as Abu Ghraib) is wrong. They are two different situations.

                    That dumbfuck also tried to suggest that the US shooting of prisoners throughout history was actually condoned by the chain of command, which the exact opposite of what the Pentagon says, that it was the just actions of a few individuals.

                    •  Chegnogne massacre (none)
                      The troops of the 11th Armored were never tried. Fragmentary Order 27 basically said take no SS or Paratroop prisoners shoot to kill. The order was in breach of the Geneva convention.
                      It is important to remember the wrongs done to us, but for a society to develop it is equally important to rememeber the wrongs we have commited.
                      How many people have heard of Chegnogne?
                •  so, what your saying is ... (none)
                  ... if we want to know what O'Reilly thinks, it's important not to actually listen to what he says?

                  thanks for clearing that up :-/

                  "a society is measured by how it treats the weak and vulnerable"
                  - George W. Bush, State of the Union, Feb 2, 2005.

                  by icerat on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:54:23 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  GOP wants the same rules (none)
                    for OLielly as for Shrub.

                    Pretend he didn't say what he said.  Ok?

                    Now let's imagine what he might meant that wasn't incoherent, stupid, ignorant and/or appalling.

                    Now let's figure out how we can shuffle words, insert some, delete some, and suggest that he meant what we imagined.

                    Now let's STATE, categorically, that THAT is what was meant, that is what was REALLY said.

                    "Too many policemen, no liberty; Too many soldiers, no peace; Too many lawyers, no justice." Lin Yutang (1895-1976)

                    by ogre on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 05:49:57 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  thats why he gets paid the big bucks (none)
                  You seem awfully generous with your pity for O'Lielly ..

                  I say take every chance and skewer the son of a bitch .. even if he apologizes; even if he claims it isn't what he 'meant to say'.  

                  The wing nuts show no quarter.
                  Look what they did to Durbin.
                  Scoring brownie points means nothing.

                  This is war. Take no prisoners.

              •  O'Reilly didn't know what he was talking about. (none)
                He just threw it out there knowing most folks never heard of the Malmedy Massacre, nor would they look it up. He used it to "prove his point" (even though it doesn't on sooo many levels), but most people will think he "scored one" (HAH!) on General Clark.

                Edward R. Murrow:We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.

                by digital drano on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 10:41:02 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Gave you a 4 (none)
              Because you don't deserve to be zeroed just for being a winger. But I think that your spin-point is wrong as hell.

              Phase 1: Collect underpants
              Phase 2: ?
              Phase 3: Profit!

              by Oregon guy on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 08:11:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  I think it's more than that.... (4.00)
      82nd airborne page

      The 504th mentioned here is a parachute regiment of the 82nd Airborne division.

      All that night and on into the morning of the 21st, the 1st Battalion of the 504th slugged its way through the battle-scarred village. By mid-morning the town belonged to the 504th when the 3rd Battalion executed a wide flanking maneuver to enter the village from the North. A quick tally disclosed that fourteen flak-wagons, six halftracks, four trucks, four 105 mm field artillery pieces, and one Mark VI tank had been put out of action. Those enemy vehicles which were still serviceable were promptly utilized by the regiment. The 504th suffered heavily in this attack, but annilhilated an enemy SS Battalion and handed German forces the first defeat they had suffered in the "Battle of the Bulge". The fierceness of the battle can be attested to by the fact that of the enemy forces, only 31 were taken prisoner - half of them wounded. This SS Battalion was the same one that had been responsible for the infamous massacre of American prisoners at Malmedy; they were repaid with interest by the men of the 504th.

      I have to watch the O'Reilly video, but my guess is that he's talking about this retribution against the SS battalion.

      Although I'm not sure it is at all the same, as I don't know the details of what went on that day and would have to look up other historical articles.

      It's one thing, I guess, for surrendered soldiers to be lined up and summarily executed without emotion... and to engage in a battle with a blood thirst driven by rage over the treatment of your fellow soldiers.  What the 82nd did that day can be understood in the fog of war.

      But it does not appear to be comparable to the situation in Iraq.  So I don't understand where Oreilly is coming from.  I think he's reaching, trying to find some way to justify the unjustifiable.

    •  NO, he was not (4.00)
      refering to the post-war trial of the Malmedy perpetrators (Waffen SS). He said "the Malmedy Massacre and the 82nd AB who did it". Period.
  •  If anybody (none)
    is registered with Media Matters, please let them know about this. I would, but I have forgotten my registration. Thanks.
  •  A possible response to O'Reilly (none)
    "One crime of the Nazis was turning the media into a state propaganda machine. Is it your contention, sir, that Fox News is equivalent to Der Sturmer and that you are Joseph Goebbels?"

    Very un-PC, I know, but it seems like poetic justice given his apparent total misunderstanding of the lessons of Nazism.

    Thwarting the forces of conservatism since 1978.

    by wiscmass on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:08:18 PM PDT

  •  Clark - ORielly (4.00)
    I watched some of the Clark - O'Reilly exchange last night, and was quite pleased to see that Clark wouldn't put up with any of O'Reilly's crap.  Clark wasn't willing to let O'Reilly make uncontested false statements, a rather refreshing change for FOX.  IN fact I'm surprised that FOX hasn't tried to fire Clark, he surely doesn't in any way support their neocon agenda and message...
  •  Final Justice for Malmedy (none)
    Peiper died on July 14, 1976 in a "mysterious fire" at his chateau in France, where he was living under an assumed name.  Local rumor has it that former members of the Resistance were responsible.  No one was ever prosecuted; gunfire was heard near the chateau during the fire and shell casings were found next to his body along with a rifle.  Someone needs to remind Bill the Liar of that one too.
    •  Happy Bastille Day! (none)

      People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

      by rgilly on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 08:54:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •   Robert Shaw fans perhaps... (none)
      Robert Shaw plays the Peiper-like Waffen-SS tank commander in the previously cited Henry Fonda epic "Battle of the Bulge".  In the film he is burnt to death in his tank, only yards from the fuel dump he MUST seize for the Fatherland.  Perhaps some former resistance fighters thought this a bit of a reenanctment before a holiday meal of Freedom Fries and Bordeaux.    

      Sometimes, out of the most ordinary looking vessel can flow the most extraordinary wine.

      by normcash on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 10:09:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Firefighters (none)
      at the blaze found their pipes cut.
  •  I just got back from listening to the video (4.00)

    Clark: And let me explain something. You go all the way up the chain of command ...

    O'Reilly: General! You need to look at the Malmedy massacre in World War Two, and the 82nd Airborne who did it!

    That is indeed what that stupid fuck said.  He just spit metaphorically on every vet in the US yesterday.  This is what he should be remembered for - attributing a Nazi atrocity to American troops.  More than sexual harassment, more than sticking a vibrator up his ass, this is his legacy.  Bill O'Reilly is in favor of committing Nazi-style atrocities in war.  That is right out of his mouth.  He needs to be fired for immorality and spitting on the sacred memory of our veterans of the Greatest Generation.

    Economic Left/Right: -7.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.13

    by calipygian on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:49:48 PM PDT

  •  Right wing owes Dick Durbin an apology. (4.00)
    He said that US soldiers shouldn't be allowed to torture, because that's something Nazis do and it is not compatible with our values.  He was crucified.

    Now, O'Reilly says that anything the Nazis did, we did, and that's okay.

    What's wrong with this picture?

    If Bush were President when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, he would have invaded Mexico.-- Cervantes

    by jem6x on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:51:13 PM PDT

  •  This is utterly ridiculous! (none)
    The 82nd Airborne couldn't have been responsible for the Malmedy Massacre. They were busy exterminating Jews.

    (Hey, be nice! It's sarcasm! And I was up all night working....)

    No animals were harmed in the making of this comment.

    by Shiborg on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 01:54:53 PM PDT

  •  Clark doing pretty well on Fox (4.00)
    From reading the comments above, we seem to agree that Wes Clark is doing pretty well on Fox. He sticks to his points (I loved the "the army I served in for 34 years", in passing), and O'Scumbag has to resort to yelling while the General stays in control. And then they have to go edit the transcripts because O'Reilly is a goddamn moron. The same thing happened last week when O'Diddley was trying to smear Clark by associating him with the far-left-wing-radical-communist Cindy Sheehan, while saying "we're gentlemen", but Wes Clark repeatedly rebutted him and didn't get the least bit defensive.

    Someone commented yesterday that Fox may be trying to gather things he says to use against him in 2008. Let them try; he'll kick their butts, and I'm being polite. I think he's winning over the enemy.


  •  This is why.... (4.00)
    Having Wesley Clark on Fox News is so great.  I swear some of the most entertaining debates/discussions in the past couple months have been Wesley Clark and O'Reilly facing off.  It really makes for great television.
  •  I guess we know who he means... (none)
    ... when he says "we" now.
  •  Bill O'Reilly is immoral and stupid. (none)
    Of all the vile and insulting things I've heard this @$$ say over the years I think this takes the cake for me.  I question the intelligence, sanity and morals of anyone who calls themself a fan of this man.
  •  like all wars... (4.00)
    You need to make sure your reasons for going to war are damned good ones.  Stuff like this will happen.  So when it does, you better be very sure you are there for a good reason.  Those reasons must justify the lose of blood, the wasting of treasure, and the unpreventable horrors that will ensue.

    Guess who forgot this lesson?

    •  This is so right, so dead on (none)
      This, ladies and gentlemen, is the point that every Democrat needs to be making about Iraq, OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

      Well put. Bravo my fellow Oregonian.

      Phase 1: Collect underpants
      Phase 2: ?
      Phase 3: Profit!

      by Oregon guy on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 08:15:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  the moron (none)
    can't even tell the difference between a falafel and a loofah.  It isn't surprising that he gets his WWII history ass-backwards.

    He's a modern-day variation on Mrs. Malaprop.

    New Orleans will never die

    by hrh on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 02:42:45 PM PDT

  •  Oh, you all have missed his point yet again. (none)
    He isn't comparing our troops to the Nazi SS. He is saying that IF our troops had been captured by Saddam's forces, surely they would have been shot just like those guys from the 82nd. I don't understand why you all can't understand his simple argument.

    You guys probably think a felafel is for eating, not a theraputic bathing aid.

  •  Sadly truth doesn't count (none)
    It doesn't matter that he was lying, most people won't even remember the name of the incident he referenced, they'll simply remember that according to him, this happens in every war
  •  O'Really just plain screwed up that comment... (4.00)
    and I can't believe the General let it slip by, maybe he was caught off guard.  This whole issue ties in with the thread yesterday.  The abuse/torture and killing of surrendering troops is one of those issues that nobody likes to face up to, however, it has happened in virtually all comflicts we've been involved in.   As several of you pointed out, there is a difference between the heat of battle type thing and deliberate actions.

    I have read a lot of WWII first person histories and talked to several WWII vets from my hometown (pop. 2000). These events did happen and Jem6x's comments are on the mark.  I too was struck with this issue being tackled in several recent WWII movies, and if you watched Band of Brothers they dealt with it also. It's what we do when we find out that makes a difference.  That is the point Clark made refering to "his" army.  The BushReich has completely abandoned our principles on this issue.

    That is why I am so adamat about this.  These interviews, books and movies and made me realize that it's not just life and limb we ask these young men and women to risk, it's also thier mortal soul.  To spend a lifetime trying to come to grips with an action they took in the heat of battle.  I have deep respect for the military and have several relatives including a brother and son actively serving.  This is what they risk.  

    That is why it is so very important for US (citizens) to question our government before they take us to war.  We OWE the troops that much.

  •  As a servicemember in the active-duty Army (4.00)
    Let me say that I found it astonishing, amazing, really, that O'Reilly could try to lecture Gen. Clark (or anyone who has served in the military) about the well-being of American troops.

    This is one of those "inside-baseball" sort of things. Soldiers do try to take care of soldiers. At least the good ones do. And I think that Gen. Clark (although I never served under him) was one of the good ones while he served.

    Good catch about Malmedy. I remember thinking to myself "Whaaa?" when he said it.

    However, I do believe there was an incident(s) during the Ardennes offensive in 1944 (Battle of the Bulge) in which US troops summarily shot some German captives. This may be what O'Reilly was referring to... although I think that the officers responsible were punished. And I think that Gen. Clark mentioned that.

    All and all, another "ridicuous item of the day" from O'Reilly that needs to be widely disseminated. Al Franken might be a go-to guy for this one, because he gets under O'Reilly's skin and has a large audience.

    Phase 1: Collect underpants
    Phase 2: ?
    Phase 3: Profit!

    by Oregon guy on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:01:17 PM PDT

    •  Aye (none)
      I mention it upthread... The 504th engaged in a battle with the very same SS Battalion responsible for the massacre and wasn't in the mood to take prisoners.

      Although what this has to do with Abu Ghraib, I can't figure out.

    •  Donald Burgett described something similar (none)
      in his 4-book series of his experiences in the 10st Airborne.

      He named three captains (medical officers) who survived a German attack on one of their temporary medical facilities outside Noville and that the Germans had slit the throats of wounded paratroopers.

      The 327th Glider Infantry Regiment encountered some of the survivors who fled from the German attack and set out to cut off the Germans, trapping them in a crossfire and not taking any prisoners.

  •  I think the point is (none)
    is that if O'Rielly realized that it was the Nazi's that had committed the atrocity, that would be bad.  But since he thought it was the 82nd that committed it, that is excusable.  I'm sure if he knew that it was the Germans that were the perps, he never would have brought it up.  I think by extension, he believes that, in general, massacre of prisoners by our side is okay and massacre of prisoners by the other side is bad.  I thought that that was a good reply by Clark when O'Reilly brought up My Lai also.

    Economic Left/Right: -7.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.13

    by calipygian on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:07:18 PM PDT

  •  malmedy (4.00)
    I have no idea where O'stupid picked up Malmedy from,aftter all it was one of the most infamous incedents of the Bulge,and it served as a rallying point for US forces in dissarry from the German assault--I think it demonstrates the ignorance of history so prevalent of the draft deferment generation from which he sprang. But to add to the record Maj Gen (then Lt Col) Mabry(later involved by position of command in the Green Beret Affair of Viet Nam) courtmartialled a West Point grad (he was ROTC) for executing German prisoners after a hard fought battle. So Clark is right, it has happened and when revealed dealt with by those with a strong moral compass incapable of condoning such actions. As a seviceman I know if I was in the 82nd I would be going ballistic on O'Liely.And Clark just seems to look better every day!

    it tastes like burning...

    by eastvan on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:20:18 PM PDT

    •  Exactly! (4.00)
      Ol' General Clark is really starting to grow on me.  He appears to have a lot of character, although I'm sure there are skeletons in the closet.  

      I used to like Powell.  In fact, right after 9/11 I told my son if he had to go into combat I wanted somebody like Powell leading, cause I felt he had learned the lessons of Viet Nam.  I based this on his writings, his book and watching him in Desert Storm.  As time has gone on, I kept waiting for Powell to stand up and say "this is all bullshit" and blow the whistle, but it never happened.  right now Powell's well into negative territory on my character 'o meter.  Oh, yea, recently, I told my son I was wrong on that one, and I don't want Powell leading him into battle.

      After listening to General Meyers on the clips that Jon Stewart had on his show (courtesy of Crooks and Liars, I can't help but think, "where are we getting these guys?"

      •  Myers (none)
        seems to me the biggest sort of toady of the sort that unfortunatly thrive in a military environment. As one who has butted heads with that type before (and paid the price! oh yes) I could smell him a mile away. Thank god hes gone,his sort do get to the top but every so often a real one gets there.I hold Myers accountable for a lot of whats gone wrong in the military lately.

        it tastes like burning...

        by eastvan on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:40:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sounds like you have experience (none)
          in that environment.  It's kind of funny, my brother (retired Sgt. Major) and son (Ssgt)share a lot of the same opinions when refering to certain officer types.  They describe the same things to me, even though they have only met each other once since my son has been in.
      •  Powell was an affirmative action appointment (none)
        They wanted to LOOK compassionate and competent and diverse. He was credible, capable and knowlegeable. But he was undercut at every turn. He had a good title but no real power.  And they used him to pitch that bogus WMD story to the world, undermining any credibility he ever had. He won't blow the whistle on the commander-in-chief, they know where all his skels are buried.

        Edward R. Murrow:We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.

        by digital drano on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 11:00:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  my meek assessment: (none)
    o'reilly is either stooooooooooooopid or a LIAR.
  •  my father, WWII vet (4.00)
    tells of an incident, I don't remember where and it is not a subject that comes up but hehas retold it to my mother recently,
    he was a tanker in Germany, Battle of the Bulge, etc. but on a mission through Germany they came upon American soldiers who had been killed.  They were killed by hanging and then their intestines and penis was cut out/off and shoved in their mouths.  Needlesss to say, when these tanker American soldiers overtook the next German troop - they were hell bent on returning the terribleness,  BUT, an officer spoke English and was able to tell his troop that they were German, the troop that had done th eother was SSI - our good ole American soldiers had to make a choice - and they chose to treat this German troop as POWs and they marched them back to wherever they were supposed to.  My father is proud of his battalion, his fellow soldiers - they were true soldiers - American soldiers.
    •  In the final days... (none)
      The SS even took their own male citizens and hanged them from lampposts to terrorize the country into continuing the war effort.  Teenagers, the elderly, it didn't matter, right up until the surrender they strung people up in front of their own families, adorned with a placard that said "Deserter".  Many of them then returned to their homes and murdered their own families and committed suicide.  They believed until the last moment that Hitler was the greatest thing that had happened to Germany and they couldn't bear life without him. I am reminded of this mentality every time I speak with individuals who still babble about "spreading democracy" or "We invaded Iraq based on faulty intelligence and it wouldn't be fair to the Iraqi people to just leave now".  Brainwashing is a very powerful thing, no matter what radical political movement you are dealing with.    

      Sometimes, out of the most ordinary looking vessel can flow the most extraordinary wine.

      by normcash on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 10:24:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Durbin had to apologize (none)
    I bet the MSM and GOP will now make US apologize for discussing the fact that O'Reilly said that.

    That's how bad the double standards are these days.

    We hurt that poor big bully's feelings by pointing out how much he hates his own troops!  Oh, boo hoo, poor him!

    Check out my lte archive at and feel free to use my ideas for your own lte's.

    by DemDachshund on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 03:39:12 PM PDT

  •  Please give (none)
    the people who actually listened to a recording and gave us a correct transcript a "4".

    They are upthread of here.

  •  What a dumb bastard! (none)
    The guy is so ignorant and stupid that I have a hard time believing he is actually not on dope while doing his show.
  •  High Priority (none)
    Fighting fascism on the media front has to be a priority for us if we're going to defeat the wingnut agenda.  There are parts of the country where the idiocy of O'Reilly and company is all the news people get.  The greed of media corporate giants has caused this, but beating them back with the truth is our best weapon.  That, and not buying a got-damn thing that's advertised on networks like Fox, Salem Radio, ClearChannel, etc.


  •  WTF (none)
    WTF, WTF, WTF etc

    These guys are all mentally unbalanced.
    But they rule the world right now.
    Comforting isn't it?
    May never sleep again.

  •  Franken Exactly Right (4.00)

    In his book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, Al Franken summed up Bill O'Lielly as a "L:ying, Splotchy Bully."

    That description hits the nail onna head.

    It's great to see O'Lielly trying to take on Gen. Wes Clark, because Clark is fifty times smarter than Bill, who is just some jerkoff who figured out that lying and bullying people on the air was a great job for a guy who isn't smart but gets his jollies being nasty to people, and Clark is a hundred times more admirable as a person than Bill.

    A war of aggression is, by its very definition, a crime against peace and mass murder covered with a shitty smear of faux legality.  The people who devised this should be living in cages.

    And the notion that hiding torture and abuse somehow makes Merka look better is just raw horsehit.  The world knows of these things already.  They're just trying to keep the Merkan people from having their consciences stirred.

    These atrocities are done in your name, and in mine.  We can bloggingly disown them, but in truth I suspect we ought to do something more concrete than that.

    O'Lielly is shocking, a disgrace.  That his uninformed, dishonest crap passes for conservative analysis -- and is believed by millions -- is scarcely believable.  Were there a commentator generally in agreement with Democrats, but so uninformed, mendacious, and gratuitously bullying, I would want him or her off the air, both on general principles (people who can't do anything but talk shit should be taken off TV) but as a disservice to my own political agenda.

    Thanks, Gen. Clark.  Keep kicking Little Bill's bully butt, willya?

    "In this world limits are not only inescapable but indispensable." (Wendell Berry).

    by proudtinfoilhat on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 04:58:48 PM PDT

  •  New meme (none)
    This is so absurd on so many levels that I'm having a hard time even coming up with a theory as to what Billy was going for.  So far, my best guess is something along these lines:

    I think the wingnuts have worn out the "Why does (such and such) hate America?" meme, so they're trying out a new one:

    "Why does the 82nd Airborne hate Nazi Germany?"

  •  unfortunately... (4.00)
    The people who watch O'Liely for their "news" (unlike people who watch him for perverse pleasure) will probably never learn the truth about what Bill said. They probably thought he was bringing up some obscure historical reference, about which he was 100% accurate, of course.

    If they thought about it at all. I think his loyal viewers are like dogs, in that most of the time dogs hear what we say to them as "blah blah blah blah SNACK blah blah blah blah WALKIES..."

    Just substitute "leftwing extremists" and "hates America" in the sentence above.

    ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

    by snookybeh on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 05:07:52 PM PDT

  •  The E-Mail that I sent to "Wee Willy"! (none)

    You keep forgetting to take your medications. These grandiose, paranoiac delusions that you pass on the your listeners is quite pathetic. Do you take the time to "fact check" your hallucinations after they occur? I mean, before you pass that idiocy on to the public? It might be more responsible for you to do so. It certainly would permit you "to appear" to be more concerned with the historical accuracy of World War II when debating someone such as General Clark. I certainly think Wes Clark has a much better concept of military history than the "wimpy", uninformed blather that you were stewing when you failed to recognize the experience of a wiser man.

    I am still confused about your 82nd Airborne comment!! Oh, by the way, which of the armed forces did you serve in? Sounds like a lot of talk without the walk to me. I am a veteran, and, I am insulted by your high paid distorted "SPIN"!


    "Clark: And let me explain something. You go all the way up the chain of command ...

    O'Reilly: General! You need to look at the Malmedy massacre in World War Two, and the 82nd Airborne who did it!"


    YES Bill, the 285th FA was under the command of the 82nd Airborne. WHO DID IT?????? The Germans! Here!! Let me help you!



    SNIP  -  I posted the entire article


    Bill, you definitely are a piece of work!!

    Have a great night!

    My Name!

  •  Sympathy for the Devil? (none)
    Maybe because he was there (as a guilty party), and he's still trying to flush this one down the memoryhole?

    "I rode a tank, in the General's rank..."

    (Sepp Dietrich has always been my candidate for that particular incarnation of Ol' Scratchie.  Heydrich is probably a better choice, though.  O'Reilly types, in either case...)

    If a thousand men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State...

    by HenryDavid on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 05:51:50 PM PDT

  •  Illegal killings and violations (none)
    of the Geneva Conventions have occured in every conflict in the past century of so. It happens. It always happens. And it will continue to happen. It's one of the many shitty things that happens in war. Are we above the Nazis? Yes. But the occasional execution of a EPW does happen now and then. And, also occasionally, American troops may light-up some soldiers/insurgents/terrorists who are waving a white flag trying to surrender. But sometimes you just get so mad at the damn enemy that you don't give a fuck that he's surrendering, and you pop him off(and if one of your brothers was killed by them, then it's a form of payback). Once again, war is hell and it's very ugly. Also, Marines/soldiers light-up cars carrying civilian families at check-points. And after they find out they killed civilians, they will be scarred and horrified for life. But they also can't take the chance, not even once, because suicide bombers love to ram cars into troop positions and blow them to shit. War is hell.
    But I don't think those killings should be compared to Nazis killing a bunch of US POWs. Because we try our damnedest to do the right thing morally.
    Also,the Abu Ghraib embarassment is not comparable to any massacre or illegal killing, because that was a bunch of immature, undisciplined soldiers doing a bunch of cruel and purposeless things to unarmed Iraqis. It was just plain STUPID! And I think the military needs to punish everyone involved: From top-ranking brass, to top-ranking Staff NCO's and NCO's, down to the soldiers who actually commited the horrible acts.
  •  Mystery town (none)
    OT, but O'Reilly just read an email from a 13 year old kid in "Grass Valley, AZ" who thinks that the O'Reilly Factor for Kids is a good book.

    I live in Arizona. There is no "Grass Valley".

  •  O'Reilly got this from Ann Coulter's book Treason (4.00)
    Here's a great diary from the Kos Archives that explains the controversy about Malmedy Massacre and it involves Joseph McCarthy...
    Abusing History by Steve Gilliard

    Here's a piece of the diary, which is a quote from a Salon article on the same subject:

    Joe McCarthy was brought down by the US Army and Republicans. Not the left, not communist sympathizers or the Hollywood Ten. The Army detested McCarthy and Joe Conason explains why:
    Coulter discusses McCarthy's impressive high school record in considerable loving detail. But somehow she neglects to mention McCarthy's first moment in the national spotlight. That was his infamous 1949 campaign on behalf of Nazi S.S. officers who were convicted of war crimes for the massacre of American troops in the town of Malmedy during the Battle of the Bulge. On their orders, 83 American prisoners of war had been murdered by Waffen S.S. machine-gunners. The S.S. officers were sentenced to death, but McCarthy insisted that the entire case was a frame-up, with confessions obtained by horrific torture. He intervened in Senate hearings on the case and lied repeatedly during his defense of the Nazi murderers. His most spectacular claim was that the American investigators had crushed the testicles of German prisoners as an interrogation technique. McCarthy was later shown to have served as the pawn of neo-Nazi and communist provocateurs who were using the Malmedy case to whip up anti-American sentiment in postwar Germany. The main source for his false charges concerning Malmedy was a Germany lawyer named Rudolf Aschenauer, whose closest ties were to the postwar Nazi underground and to American right-wing isolationists, but who has also been identified as a communist agent. Aschenauer testified at U.S. Senate hearings in Germany that he had passed information about Malmedy to McCarthy. The S.S. officers were guilty, as the Senate report confirmed -- although most of them later got their death sentences commuted in a gesture to former Nazi officials who aided the West in the Cold War. But McCarthy had succeeded in his larger purpose, winning publicity for himself and casting a negative light on the war-crimes trials.

    Joe McCarthy, Coulter's great hero, defended the murderers of American soliders. Which is something the Army rightly never forgot or forgave. So when he went after the Army, despite having his counsel Roy Cohn's buddy, G. David Schine, obtain preferrential treatment while enlisted, the Army was ready and waiting to strike back.

    "Waist deep in the Big Muddy And the big fool says to push on." --Pete Seeger

    by DoDi on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 06:39:47 PM PDT

    •  Correction... (none)
      O'Reilly must have gotten it from either reading McCarthy himself or reading neo-nazi tracts, since I see on closer reading of this that Coulter never actually mentioned Malmedy in her book.

      "Waist deep in the Big Muddy And the big fool says to push on." --Pete Seeger

      by DoDi on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 06:43:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  and by the way... (none)
      in addition to O'Rielly the neo-nazis still are still going around re-counting the Malmmedy myth that American military tortured Germany soldiers.

      Here's an example of where O'Rielly may have picked it up:

      Birds of a feather....

      "Waist deep in the Big Muddy And the big fool says to push on." --Pete Seeger

      by DoDi on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 06:55:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Holy Crap, man (none)
      O'Reilly got it from Ann Coulter who got it from Joseph McCarthy per the Kos Archive piece where Steve Gilliard quotes a Salon article in which Joe Conason tells two friends. And then they tell two friends. And then they tell two friends. And so on. And so on.

      "You have 30 minutes to move your cube"

      by 48percent on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 09:53:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  O'Reilly is a fool and a blowhard (none)
    and I love how Wesley Clark is usually totally calm, totally confident, totally cool, when dealing with him. But I noticed tonight, General Clark actually talked over him, got a little pissed off at Bill, who was busy throwing mud at WWII vets.  Hmmmm....I think people are seeing more and more that the Dems actually care about the people in the military while the republicans are in love with the "IDEA" of the military: fly in on a jet, wear a codpiece, make a speech, go home and knock down some scotch.  

    "If you are not outraged, you are not paying attention."

    by adigal on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 07:01:56 PM PDT

  •  Bushies like to compare Iraq to WWII (none)
    to deflect the Vietnam similarity.  Like My Lai and Powell.

    Cheney died a natural death - on the phone with Halliburton.

    by annefrank on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 07:25:26 PM PDT

  •  What we should all do (none)
    .. and I mean this in all seriousness.

    Get a transcript of this O'Lielly shit.
    Go to every VFW hall you can find.
    Every last one of them - and distribute it as far and as wide as possible.  

    I'm going to.

    This lying son of a bitch needs to have his head  handed to him, and if enough of WWI vets {and anyone with brain} starts pounding on Faux, this is platter to do it on.

    •  Skip the transcripts and show the video (none)
      it is very difficult to dismiss the words as they are being spoken by Bill in the video. With transcripts, the reader can just say that someone just made it up.

      Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither. (Paraphrasing B. Franklin)

      by p a roberson on Wed Oct 05, 2005 at 04:12:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  malmedy (none)
    I've been emailing Fox and O'Reilly since last night about this.  Fox is not a real news station.  They lie, they fix the facts around their pro Republican, pro Iraq war agenda.  This is a PERFECT example of what is so damn spooky about the Fox news network.  I agree, this is a really big story.
  •  Holy god (none)
    There aren't enough felafels in the world to make that stinker smell good. And that's what he elected to cherry pick in order to duel wits with Clark?

    Is this on Media Matters yet? We need to get it up there, since we know Bill can't have his morning coffee without checking on the homepage first.

  •  Col Patrick Lang (none)
    takes O'Reilly to task on Booman Tribune.

    You can make anything look good if you can write billions of dollars of hot checks. --Ross Perot

    by lanshark on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 09:43:22 PM PDT

  •  Good think he doesn't teach history (none)
    I'm sure the 82nd Airborne wouldn't appreciate the "mistake".
  •  He also pulls a Pat Robertson in the same (none)
    interview. Calls for the assasination of Syrian leader.
    Via Think Progress:

  •  Kevin Trudeau (none)
    Sort of OT, but I turned on the TV this morning to confirm I blew out my cable box last night and I caught QVC with Kevin Trudeau, of the Natural Cures they don't wawnt you to know about infamy. I saw maybe 15 secs, and I was just really struck by how this snake oil salesman has just aped O'Rielly's cadence, diction, and facial gestures. Watch him. Scary.
  •  This all reminds me of something... (none)
    Otter: Point of parliamentary procedure!
    Hoover: Don't screw around, they're serious this time!
    Otter: Take it easy, I'm pre-law.
    Boon: I thought you were pre-med.
    Otter: What's the difference?

    [Addressing the room]
    Otter: Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our female party guests - we did.
    [winks at Dean Wormer]
    Otter: But you can't hold a whole fraternity responsible for the behavior of a few, sick twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole fraternity system? And if the whole fraternity system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg - isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!
    [Leads the Deltas out of the hearing, all humming the Star-Spangled Banner]

    Well, you can do whatever you want to us, Mr. O Reilly, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America!


    Strange and beautiful are the stars tonight, that dance around your head.

    by deepfish on Wed Oct 05, 2005 at 05:22:36 AM PDT

kos, pontificator, enaud, No One No Where, RichM, Lestatdelc, RobertInWisconsin, Happy Monkey, Best in Show, JR, hazey, kevin lyda, Dr Van Nostrand, Dperl99, Rayne, snookybeh, Better Days, Natural Anthem, Unstable Isotope, wytcld, Winger, gorlim, Yoshimi, doug r, Stoy, ParaHammer, Shockwave, Wintermute, cotterperson, hyperstation, darrelplant, xelnein, americanforliberty, frisco, Carnacki, Newsie8200, object16, PanzerMensch, mataliandy, Poika, angelmom, mldostert, chipoliwog, hotspur, DJ Adequate, eyeswideopen, calipygian, Hose B, I am Spartacus, sponson, cguilliams, ProfessorX, prius04, Doc Allen, jem6x, Ti Jean, FtheNaysayers, bedobe, mayandjay, Yuggs, Prairie Logic, sean oliver, jerseyjoew, AlyoshaKaramazov, biggb23, Siberian, Darksyde888, AndyT, calistan, chechecule, SAQuestor, samddobermann, hrh, murphsurf, sgilman, marylrgn, kaypaul, coffeeguzzler, BruinKid, itskevin, ReddHedd, jjhalpin, frightwig, arkdem, bobcatster, admiralh, Chrisfs, TNdem, kosophile, papadough, kharma, Magatsu, NewDirection, NYC Sophia, God loves goats, young voter, Hush, DianeL, 49blue, Caldonia, churchylafemme, dreamsign, snakelass, Magorn, Mrcia, welshvalleymaid, gbussey, faithnomore, Dave925, cevad, KateCrashes, glattonfolly, lhuynh, kywonderer, ArkySue, jen, DrReason, Steven D, HK, justmy2, AaronBa, Renaldo Migaldi, Mikecan1978, Timroff, dakrle, Benito, greeseyparrot, sawgrass727, SteveK, Skennet Boch, Fabian, Red State Misfit, farleftcoast, t v d, SpecialEFX, aspivelox, dukeraoul, LarisaW, alaprst, b tex, dantes, basquebob, Neimad, Brooke In Seattle, baghdaddy, mojo workin, IL dac, vulcangrrl, Derelict Dog, jimstaro, elesares, monchie b monchum, Overseas, annefrank, sunbro, leaveonlyfootprints, Padraig Muldoon, RElland, Warren Terrer, janew2, rb608, rhetoricuss, bartman, JanL, flem snopes, sfdoug, evil twin, RWeede, taracar, LeftOverAmerica, buddabelly, twoducks

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site