Olbermann: The bodies at Malmedy were not found until a month later. There were 84 of them, all, American soldiers. More than half showed gunshot wounds to their heads. Six had received fatal **blows** to the head. Nine were found with their arms still raised **above** their heads.
The fact that O'Reilly got these horrible facts completely backwards -- twice -- offended even his own usually compliant viewers. From his program **Wednesday** night...Wrong answer.
When you're **that** wrong -- when you're defending Nazi War Criminals and pinning their crimes on Americans, and you get **caught** doing so -- **twice** -- you're supposed to say 'I'm sorry, I was wrong'... and then you should shut up for a long time. Instead, Fox **washed** its transcript of O'Reilly's remarks Tuesday -- its website claims O'Reilly said "In **Normandy**..." when in fact he said "In **Malmedy**..."
The rewriting of past reporting -- worthy of Orwell -- has now carried over into such on-line transcription services as Burrell's and Factiva. Whatever did or did not happen **later**, in supposed or actual retribution... the victims at Malmedy, were **Americans**, gunned down while surrendering -- by **Nazis** in 1944 -- and again, Tuesday Night and Wednesday Night -- by a false patriot who would rather be loud than right.
"In Malmedy, as you know" Bill O'Reilly **said** Tuesday night, in some indecipherable attempt to defend the events of Haditha, "U.S. forces captured S.S. forces who had their hands in the air and were unarmed and they shot them dead, you know that. That's on the record. And documented."
The victims at Malmedy in December, 1944... were Americans. **Americans** with their hands in the air. **Americans** who were unarmed. That's on the record. And documented.
And their memory deserves better than Bill O'Reilly.
We **all** do.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Full Transcipt
O'Reilly vs. Gen. Wesley Clark
Olbermann's editorial
O'Reilly proves again that he deserves no less than a public stoning and no more than a mental hospital. Worse than O'Reilly are the people who irrationally defend him without comprehension or individual thought. There is nothing wrong with being a republican, not innately, and there is nothing wrong with Fox News, at least on how it typically presents itself. The frequent circumstances where this "news" outlet provides propaganda to sabotage public opinion does as much to illustrate its own lack of integrity as it does to demoralize the opposition desperately seeking for comprehensible debate. Not emotionalism eloquently phrased, and certainly not patriotism cleverly concealing political rhetoric. This type of banter is destructive to both sides.
Watch O'Reilly ignorantly attack General Clark's factual data, and then blatantly disgraces the same American soldiers he professes to care about.
Watch Olbermann ostracize O'Reilly and his incompetence for the who-knows-how-many time.
This is not a matter of orientation, it never is, it is a matter of comprehension of what is said, and as usual O'Reilly illustrates the incapability of extremists to be rational. People who don't see him as a political extremist are political extremists.
Above you have the data, and my question is as follows: Is it possible to view O'Reilly as credible and concerned or is it more plausible to associate him to a new discerning style of yellow journalism?
You decide.
If I were to add another wish to my list it would be this:
I'd like for July 2nd to be a celebration of civil and political freedom where effigies of Bill O'Reilly are burned in the streets.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment