Your 1984 reference no doubt went a mile over his head.

O'Reilly is a well-known chickenhawk who avoided military service in his own time. Why would anyone expect him to have a handle on any kind of military history?

It's something about newspeople, especially ones with clear political preferences or a predisposition towards scumbag sensationalism. They assume they know everything and that it's their way or the highway. Then they talk louder to get the point across. When they can't say anything in response and know they're disproven they plug their ears and sing "LALALALALA!!!!!" really loud to drown everything out.

I first noticed it with an NBC debate about Bush's intelligence, which is obviously average, but despite evidence suggesting he is just a poor in terms of communication, the newscaster was convinced otherwise. I'm as anti-Bush as the next guy, but come on, show a little sense.

I was not trying to compare what the Americans did to the Germans to what the Germans did to the Americans. Yes, the German atrocity was far worse. It probably caused the Americans to react violently. There is no excuse for either atrocity. You cannot deny that the Americans did what they did. It happened.

O'Reilly did not deny that the Germans slaughtered American troops at Malmedy. He only pointed out that American troops did some slaughtering themselves in response.

I watched the video & I read the transcript & what you are saying is simply not true.

Here is what he said:
Then he tried to spin his way out of it. Unless you are brainwashed, it is just that simple & obvious.

First, I have to say that O'Reilly had the facts wrong in the Malmedy Massacre. It was German SS and Paratroops that shot and killed surrendering Americans. However, as a result of Malmedy, American troops themselves committed attrocities themselves.

Following the discovery of the massacre, the commander of the 328th Infantry Regiment issued Fragmentary Order 27. "No SS troops or paratroopers will be taken prisoners but will be shot on sight."

On New Years Day, some 60 German prisoners were shot and killed by their American captors.

This is the point that O'Reilly had been trying to make in regards to the releases of additional photos from Abu Gharib. Attrocities committed by one Army in war led to attrocities committed by the opposing forces. We saw the reaction of the Islamic jihadist with the release of the Dutch cartoons, and we saw the reaction from the original photos from Abu Gharib, did we really need to release more to stoke their fires even more???

BTW O'Reilly's ratings are twice that of Olbermann's. But I got to give Olbermann credit, he is the highest rated show on MSNBC. OInly behind, O'Reilly, Shepard Fox, and Hannity and Colmes.

dmk

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

o'reilly is a punk!
O'Reilly Hit With Sex Harass Suit - October 13, 2004

Oh, he didn't deny it, he flat out lied about it.

Again, he said this to Gen. Wesley Clark:

"In Malmady, as you know, U.S. forces captured S.S. forces who had their hands in the air and they were unarmed and they shot them down. You know that. That‘s on the record. Been documented."

When caught with his lie, he spun it in order to save face. (Going from talking about Malmedy, to talking about after Malmedy.) Any idiot who watched his show the day before would have easily caught this.

New Episode: "O'Reilly: 150 versus 1, Underground Epidemic of Lez Gangs terrorizing innocent Straights and recruiting Children into Homosexuality, or Hyper-Sensationalist BS?"

I report, you decide

Seriously, do they leave their brains in the Brain Room like one would leave a coat in a Coat Room? A little fact-checking goes a long way.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<obje...mbed></object>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<obje...mbed></object>

Bill O'Reilly has been cought lying so many times he has just become a huge joke.