Wednesday, June 07, 2006

Goldwater's "truth" is shit on by "neo-Comservatives" of today

A certain Brandon Ragle responded to my outrage over
Pat Buchanan's dishonesty in never mentioning that the
Congressional Bill making it a fellony to work as or
to hire an illigal alien will exempt the employer for
SIX YEARS AFTER IT GOES INTO EFFCT!

That's coming from the very people who shout "NO
AMNESTY"-- of course they mean amnesty for the
exploiters who hire these illigals as exploitation
wages. That's NOT Conservatism; that's nothing but old
whores who can get it or give it streight so they do
everything crooked. Remember these people because they
are YOUR representatives in Congress and what they do
reflects on you and our men in harm's way in the name
of DEMOCRACY.

Last I looked Conservatism is all about EQUALITY UNDER
THE LAW FOR ALL, not examption from the law for those
crooks who can afford to hire Abramov and the K Street
Project.

But note Mr. Ragle's hollow response below, devoid of
substance:
*****************************************************

Sloppy, unsubstantiated, inaccurate tripe. Whoever
wrote this should be embarrassed.

Nice tie-in with slavery and Jap internment...quite
the neo-Marxist touch. That starved Irish peasants
came in droves 150 years ago is all the more reason to
object to our nation¡¦s current turd world invasion.
*****************************************************

NOTE THE VAGUE-- AND FALSE-- DENIGRATION OF MY CHARGE
AGAINST BUCHANAN. That, I fear, is what American
Conservatism has become in the hands of yahoo
know-nothing husslers and opportunists. They just
deny, deny, deny but never get down to substance. And
then, of course, they don't hesitate to call a refugee
from Communism and a life-long fighter against it
"neo-Marxist." Just note how FOX NEWS handled Bill
O'Reilly's blooper-- that's how they do everything!

O'Reilly's dumb error is covered up, not only with
lies but also with a purging of the transcript posted
on the FOX NEWS web site. NOW THAT'S NOT ONLY TYPICAL
RIGHT WING-- PHONY-PRETEND-CONSERVATISM-- FRAUD,
MAKING O'REILLY=BUCHANAN, BUT ALSO THE VERY KIND OF
COVER-UP THAT I ESCAPED AND FOUGHT AGAINST COMMUNISM
FOR. NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY ARE CALLED THE *"RED"*
STATES!

TRANSCRIPT OF THE O'REILLY STORY THANKS TO MSNBC TV'S
Keith Obermann on the news show "COUNTDOWN."

Read below and see why Goldwater must be turning in
his grave over the scums that call themselves
"conservatives" these days:
**************************************************
OLBERMANN: The guilty pleasure offered by the
existence of Bill O¡¥Reilly is simple but
understandable, 99 times out of 100, when we belly up
to the Bill-O bar of bluster, nearly every time we
partake of the movable falafel feast he serves us
nothing but comedy, farce, slapstick, unconscious
self-mutilation, the Sideshow Bob of commentators
forever stepping on the same rake, forever muttering
the same grunted, inarticulate surrender, forever
resuming the circle that will take him back to the
same rake. The Sisyphus of morons, if you will. But
this is the 100th time out of 100. It is not funny at
all. Bill O¡¥Reilly has, for the second time in under
eight months, slandered at least 84 dead American
servicemen. He has turned them again from victims of
the kind of atrocity our country has always fought
against into perpetrators of that kind of atrocity.
He has made these Americans into war criminals. They
are dead and have been dead for 61 years. They cannot
defend themselves against O¡¥Reilly. We will have to
do it for them.

Last October Bill O¡¥Reilly railed against a ruling
that more photos from the infamous Abu Ghraib prison
in Iraq might be released. His guest on his program
was Wesley Clark. Clark is a retired four-star
general, was for four years supreme allied commander
of NATO in Europe. First in his class at West Point,
wounded in Vietnam, earned the Bronze star, the Silver
Star and has streets named for him in Alabama and in
Kosovo. Therefore, naturally O¡¥Reilly knows much
more about the military than General Clark does.
Clark defended the release of the additional Abu
Ghraib photos saying we need to know what happened and
to correct it. O¡¥Reilly lectured him and concluded
that there had always been atrocities, even by
Americans in war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O¡¥REILLY, ¡§THE O¡¥REILLY FACTOR¡¨: General,
you need to look at the Malmady Massacre in World War
II in the 82nd airborne.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OLBERMANN: It was a remarkable mistake. The Belgian
town of Malmady did lend its name to one of the most
appalling battlefield war crimes of the 20th century.
But O¡¥Reilly¡¥s implication that the Americans
committed it was entirely backwards. Americans, most
of them, members of the Battery B of the 285th Fuel
Artillery Observation Battalion, surrendered to German
Panzer troops and were then shot by their captures by
the S.S. Yet O¡¥Reilly had implied that the Americans
had massacred these Germans in this one stark moment
of the Battler of the Bulge. And he used this Alice
through the looking glass view of history to somehow
rationalize Abu Ghraib while trying to dress down a
four-star American general.

Still it could have been a mistake, we make them.
Even historians do. O¡¥Reilly had not explicitly
called the Americans the war criminals of Malmady.
Our war troops, too, were accused of crimes against
prisoners in the Second World War. It was assumed
last year that he had simply made a foolish error and
though he got beaten up appropriately in some places,
it was all largely dismissed as merely that, a
mistake.

Then came this Tuesday night, again O¡¥Reilly¡¥s guest
was General Wes Clark. This time the topic was the
apparent murder of Iraqi civilians at Haditha. That
O¡¥Reilly was dismissive of that event should be no
surprise, that he should have described as the real
crime of Iraq the events of Abu Ghraib, should be no
surprise of those who know of his willingness to
jettison his most important beliefs of yesterday for
the expediencies and the ratings of today, but that he
should have brought up Malmady again, that was a
surprise.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O¡¥REILLY: 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.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OLBERMANN: Thus was the full depth of Bill
O¡¥Reilly¡¥s insult to the American debt of World War
II made clear. The mistake of last October was not
some innocent slip nor misrembered history. This was
the way O¡¥Reilly understood and thus, this way it had
to be. No errors corrected, no apologies offered, no
stopping the relentless tide of bull even briefly
enough to check one fact.

The facts of Malmady are terrifying as described by
Michael Reynolds in his painstakingly detailed article
from a 2003 issue of ¡§World War II¡¨ magazine. One
week before Christmas, 1944, 139 U.S. soldiers, most
of them from the 285th Field Artillery, encountered
the German comf (ph) group, Piper, the leading
formation of the German first S.S. Panzer Division,
one of only two German units in the entire war which
actually carried Adolf Hitler¡¥s name. The American
were overrun. The 11 of the 139 soldiers were killed
in the very short battle of Malmady, two more were
killed as they tried to flee, seven escaped, six
became prisoners of war. The other 113 Americans,
nearly all of whom had surrendered outright, were
ordered to assemble in an open field next to a
restaurant, the Cafe Bodarue (ph). What happened next
has been attributed to many things, a cold-blooded
decision by that unit Panzer commander, Colonel
Joachim Piper, that he could not handle the prisoners,
or an unjustifiable overreaction to some kind of
escape attempt or simply horrible mass murder.

Within 15 minutes the S.S. Colonel or someone directly
under him had ordered his men to shoot the unarmed
American POWs. The bodies at Malmedy were not found
until a month later. There were 84 of them, all
American soldiers, more than half shotgun 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 usually compliant viewers. From his program
Wednesday night:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O¡¥REILLY: Don Caldwell, Fort Worth, TX. Bill, you
mentioned that Malmady as the site of an American
massacre during World War II. It was the other way
around, the S.S. shot down U.S. prisoners.¡¨

In the heat of the debate with General Clark, my
statement wasn¡¥t clear enough, Mr. Caldwell. After
Malmady, some were executed by American troops.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

OLBERMANN: Wrong answer. When you are that wrong,
when you are 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¡¥re supposed to shut up for a long
time. Instead, FOX washed its transcript of
O¡¥Reilly¡¥s remarks Tuesday. Its Web site claims
O¡¥Reilly said in Normandy, when, as you heard, in
fact, he said in Malmedy.

The rewriting of past reporting worthy of George
Orwell has now carried over into such online
transcription services as Burell¡¥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 on the
air 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
in 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.

1 Comments:

At 8:36 PM, Anonymous Brandon Ragle said...

The felony provision to the House bill was an amendment to the legislation added by House Democrats in hopes of marginalizing the security only, no amnesty bill passed in the House. It is not a provision that any immigration restrictionists endorse. Not Tancredo, not Hayworth, and certainly not Patrick J. Buchanan and his collective over at the American Conservative. To claim that Buchanan is disingenuous for wanting to stop the Central and South American mestizo hordes flooding over our southern border, while not speaking up on the felony provision in the House bill (a provision that no one, on either side of the issue, believes will be signed into law) is absolute hooey.

Your writing is neo-Marxist drivel because it is little more than the advanced victimology and cliché-ridden twaddle often employed by the students or the useful idiots of Frankfurt School-inspired ideologies. I take it that you are the latter?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home