Amazon.com Widgets

« Links With Your Coffee - Monday | Main | No Hocus-Pocus »

Malmedy Followup

Keith Olbermann does a followup on the Malmedy story. The good news Fox has corrected the transcript to reflect the truth albeit under pressure, but hey it's better to do the right thing even if you have no real choice. There is bad news as well. Bill O'Reilly still hasn't apologized for his outrageous mistake. He has provided an alibi, but no apology.

Quicktime Video 7.4MB 8'16
Quicktime 7 required
Countdown with Keith Olbermann


 

Comments

I don't get it. Please, someone explain it to me as if I were nine. As long as a o'reilly or limbaugh can be so "successful" what does it matter if they are intellectual boobs? Come libs, let's kill a Zar... http://worstwriter.wordpress.com/2006/05/25/whats-in-the-truth-anyway/

user-pic

Slander aside, what exactly was O'Reilly's point? Was he trying to say that Americans had commited retribution killings before, so it was not a big deal? I don't get it.

Bill O'Reilly will likely never apologize. The man is a pathological liar, who has worked his way from school yard bully to a fear and loathing mouthpiece for the neocons. I can't imagine any other reason that those on the far right would want his representation, except that they have nothing better to offer.

Saying incorrect statements "in the heat of 'debate' " never means having to say you're sorry, or even regret the error.

I think what keith oberman is doing here is as much of a witch-hunt as people like bill o'reilly seem to do so often. it's was a mistake, bill o'reilly is an idiot, period. why do you care?

Is it possible that there were 2 tragedies at Malmedy? One by them, one by us? I mean, sweet jesus, I hate bill o but for him to make the claim in the way that it's presented here... well it seems to me like saying that the Japanese leveled San Francisco with a nuclear weapon to end WWII.

Stefan //why do you care?//

Because he spreads lies and hatred. Keith Olberman is the only one to call him on it.

Why don't you care?

I do think Olberman is starting to go a little too far with this. He is starting to dabble into O'Reilly's witch-hunting like Stefan mention above.

There really was no need to bring an 'expert' on to discuss it or to continue showing the dead frozen bodies, over and over and over. I understand showing it once, but there is no need for one to continue doing so (not saying this is Olbermans fault, as he most likely does not control those things.)

I do believe Bill should apologize, but there was no need for such a long part 2. I think saying how Fox news changed the logs, then changed it back after it received attention, and Bill's answer the one persons question, and how he still has not asked would be enough.

Of course Americans have committed atrocities (possibly right after finding all their soldiers killed in Malmedy, decided to attempt to avenge it), and things like this will continue to happen, but that is not a defense in not prosecuting the ones that commit such acts.

It is silly to even try to attempt to explain away such acts of violence by saying, "Well, it happened before."

What popular media and political figures can get away, with lieing and decieving, even when they are being VIDEO TAPED, just absolutely dumbfounds me.

The media is NOT doing their damn job and it is constantly sickening me.

Sorry, little rant there ...

Put me on the “I care” list Jo Ann. It’s not frivolous what Mr. O’Reilly is doing. He and others who use our public airwaves need to be held accountable. Media Matters is already doing some of this but the public is not aware of their website. They don’t get the some coverage as does someone with a three-hour open microphone gets on the radio.

Mr. O’Reilly is just ONE of many who are laughing all the way to the bank. What is disheartening to me is to think: Even if Bill O’Reilly gets his termination papers from FOX broadcasting for anything…he will live the rest of his life in luxury. He has made millions. His ranting and free public relations coups have set him up for life.

I had to listen to O’Reilly one time. (Yes, I “HAD” to. My truck doesn’t get XM /Sirius nor much FM and I was stuck in tuning into his show on KSL mega-watts AM.) I was amazed to hear O’Reilly intimate he was a soldier and worked in the military. When a caller called him to expound on this fact the phone call was cut off. Bill took the obligatory time-out for commercial messages but returned to the air without apologizing for his misstatement. It was then I realized O’Reilly is not any better than urban-legend story-telling Paul Harvey.

They’re just entertainers. Well paid … but just entertainers nonetheless who can quickly and effectively mold the minds of people. Olbermann and, what is ironic, comedy shows (SNL, Jon Stewart, H. Stern) are the ones who keep these people in check.

Oh wait…maybe it’s not ironic.

user-pic

These people have replaced logic literally with a finger pointing at a history book going "See! Someone else did it! It must be OK!" I feel like arguing about it is like cutting off the leaves of the weed and hoping it dies. We need to go to the source and yank those weeds out by the roots. Only way to render the head useless is to vote Republicans out of office in November so we can change CONgress back to PROgress and return to democracy.

user-pic

This thing is one in a long line of things that show why O'Reilly has no business having a radio show let alone his own forum on a cable news station. Still Olberman is really going overboard a bit, once again. Is he really suggesting that O'Reilly knows the full account at Malmedy, and yet doubts it because he sympathizes with the Nazis or is an anti-semite? Come on, Olberman. He's simply a moron who's too much of a slime to admit that he got it flat out wrong. Nothing more. That's why he invents French publications, yells at people who refute his claims, and shuts off microphones when he gets beat in an argument. He's the same personality type as McCarthy, but McCarthy had twice the brains.

Cowboy is right, this is entertainment. So entertain us, Olberman; don't turn your show into the anti-Fox News hour. We've got Media Matters already.

I think O'Reilly's point would be a rehash of an old argument - that even though there were atrocities committed by allied troops, it didn't harm the ultimate mission in the end.

Or, "well, so shit happens in a war, but look at Japan and Germany today - they turned from authoritarian fascist regimes to democracies, and the liberals should not use this incident to undermine the mission, and if they do, they support fascist regimes".

So he conflates the war- scenario on the ground in Germany and France in 1940 with Iraq today. And he excuses an atrocity on principle.

..It's an argument that fits a nazi- sympathiser more than an american patriot, imo.

J'suis content de savoir que jsuis pas le seul de s'en fous de toute cette histoire. Franchement j'attendais pas qu'un tel truc aurai traité sur ce site qui est autrement bien.

I think Olbermann is focusing so hard on this because Bill gets away with so much with his audience - close calls, fine lines, different points-of view, etc. This is so clear cut, it's anti-troop morale and he's done it twice --- and to Clark of all people.

Yes, it's the second time Keith's covered it but --- it takes a long arm to reach over into the make-believe world of Fox. The best way for him to do that is to get Bill riled up. Bill hates being called out the fool and this must be really driving him crazy.

I want to watch him tonight. He's got to cover the section in Ann Coulter's book on 9/11 widows which was quoted on the Today show...the worst, worst, worst person in the world....

It's telling that even McCarthy (a man notorious for a witch hunt) found the events of the Malmedy War Crimes Trials so corrupt he resigned, the U.S. must have been editing history. I don't doubt U.S. soldiers were gunned down, but it would seem our response wasn't a source of pride.

I read that in 1949 we smashed nuts, broke jaws & tried out the blackhoods we're still so fond of. Ain't it great to be one of the good guys?

Oops interrogation & trial were in ’45 & ’46. Investigated of trial in ‘49

Malmedy Massacre Trial

There is a lot of WWII stuff at scrapbook.com including Holocaust history & photos. Navigation is weak though. I still don’t get O’Reilly’s contention that past atrocities excuse current ones.

Which rationale is more lame: 1. Saddam and Usama did, or would do it, so therefore we are permitted to and should do it (if in lesser amounts).

  1. We did it before and so we can do it again!

It's a serious question, I'm wondering which is more lame.

In general, O'Reilly's point isn't so different that what a lot of other people have said. The formula goes like this:

  1. Find a historical example which is beyond reproach (Lincoln, WWII, your grandma).

  2. Point out that they did the naughty thing that we are accused of.

  3. Conclude: How can it be so bad???

Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus in the civil war, therefore Bush can pick up anyone he wants off the "battlefield" (American airports in some cases) and throw them in Gitmo indefinitely.

In WWII the "greatest generation" fire bombed civilians, nuked Japan, killed surrendering Germans, made thorough use of British women and spread syphillis around the U.K., used the F-word a lot, and plenty of other stuff. Therefore Bill O'Reilly.

So, look, people have used this kind of argument before--therefore how can it be so bad if O'Reilly does it??? ;p

user-pic

Jo Ann: Why don't you care?

I didn't say you shouldn't care about o'reilly's hatred. but him, making a mistake twice and not apologizing to dead people, that's worth attacking him? there are much better reasons.

Navigation

Support this site

Google Ads


Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives