Bill O'reilly's Book On Patton Ignores Patton's Antisemitism

[AquaAthena]

Patton was a hero. Save your energy for the enemy.

Patton would have probably punched O'Reilly in the mouth if given the chance.

O'Reilly is a liberal, plain and simple.

He's just not a communist.

I think he is a conservative walking that fine line of trying to please his audience of liberals and conservatives, thus making him a Populist, really. I like his Talking Points and most of his guests. I like that he doesn't let them spin his questions. He holds them to answering them. So does Megyn Kelly. Her star is rising fast!

 

[AquaAthena]

Patton was right that WWII was a strategic loss for the USA and Brits. Had he know that FDR and Truman were working for Stalin...well, maybe that why they assassinated him

Patton would have had ISIS wiped out by now.

 

[mudwhistle]

Patton was a hero. Save your energy for the enemy.

Patton would have probably punched O'Reilly in the mouth if given the chance.

O'Reilly is a liberal, plain and simple.

He's just not a communist.

I think he is a conservative walking that fine line of trying to please his audience of liberals and conservatives, thus making him a Populist, really. I like his Talking Points and most of his guests. I like that he doesn't let them spin his questions. He holds them to answering them. So does Megyn Kelly. Her star is rising fast!

Megyn is a conservative. O'Reilly is a liberal. It oozes out every once in awhile. But he's not a crazy progressive. He's what liberals used to be in this country.

 

[Samson]

The point of this post, of course, is to imply that Bill O'Reilly/traditionalists/conservatives/Republicans are anti-Semitic racists.

When you think about it, Republicans hate so many minorities, it's difficult to keep track of who they don't hate. It's a mistake anyone could make.

Clarence Thomas



I'll not mention Abraham Lincoln, you partisan moron.

 

[shart_attack]

Patton was right that WWII was a strategic loss for the USA and Brits. Had he know that FDR and Truman were working for Stalin...well, maybe that why they assassinated him

Patton would have had ISIS wiped out by now.

Nope.

The military-industrial complex in the USA isn't the same now as it was then.

 

[Politico]

Patton was a hero. Save your energy for the enemy.

Patton would have probably punched O'Reilly in the mouth if given the chance.

I would have too if he had published that pile of shit about me.

 

[Katzndogz]

Democrats want to rewrite history. They don't like the real stuff so they will change it to suit them.

 

[whitehall]

All Patton had to do was defeat the Germans on the battlefield and he completed the mission with distinction. He was an elitist Soldier who had no use for weakness on the battlefield or anywhere else and that's part of what made him great. He saw Jewish refugees as weak and degenerate but there is no evidence that he tried act on his bigotry. FDR came into power around the same time as Hitler and evidence indicates that he made little or no effort to to interfere in the Holocaust which he was no doubt aware of and went on during at least one and perhaps two of his administrations. FDR even blocked Jewish immigration into the US when they had nowhere to go when they escaped being murdered by the Nazi regime. FDR wouldn't even relax immigration for Jewish orphans when they were dying on filthy ships. FDR's racism toward the Japanese was evident in the executive order that authorized the incarceration of freaking US citizens on the basis of the color of their skins and the shape of their eyes. Japanese Americans were arrested in California where their real estate was valuable but nor in Hawaii where they were needed to make coffee for the Navy Admirals.

 

[Picaro]

Democrats want to rewrite history. They don't like the real stuff so they will change it to suit them.

Yes. Real history is very uncooperative for those who keep trying to turn the study of it into some kind of morality play to promote some modern day 'talking point' or other, whether it be ideologues on the left or the right as well.

"
And here is what bothers me so much about modern "scholarship." At what point did history become ethics? Why should we subvert the elusive search for facts to moralist concerns? So what if they are on or off the hook? If you want to be a preacher, go preach. If you want to save the world, go into politics. If you want to invent a world free of evil, take prozac. It was said in Ecclesiasties and it still is true today, people suck. They did then, all of them. They do now, all of us. History is the history of self-interested, competing, aggressive, selfish, murderous humans. At what point did it become a morality play? -Dave WIlliams, George Mason Univ.

 

[GreenBean]

Patton referred to the Jews as less than animals.

What Bill O Reilly ignored about George Patton - The Washington Post

It’s a fortunate thing that Bill O’Reilly’s latest book, “Killing Patton,” was written by him and not someone else. If not, O’Reilly would have taken the poor person apart, criticizing the book for its chaotic structure, its considerable padding and its repellent admiration of a war-loving martinet who fought the Nazis and really never understood why. George S. Patton stood almost shoulder to shoulder with them in his anti-Semitism — not that O’Reilly seems to have noticed or, for that matter, mentioned it in his book.

It is, of course, permissible to admire Patton for his generalship and astonishing bravery. It is even possible to give him a pass for some of the foolish things he said that were repeatedly getting him into trouble and finally caused Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower to effectively sack him. Even Patton’s likening some Nazis to Republican or Democratic apparatchiks, while tasteless and heroically impolitic, had an explicable context: Plenty of people became Nazis for career, rather than ideological, reasons.

Patton’s anti-Semitism is a different matter. As far as I know, he never made his views public, but he was repulsively candid in letters home to his wife, Beatrice, and in diary entries. What’s more, he acted on those views. It was Patton’s job after the defeat of Germany to run the displaced-persons (DP) camps in southern Germany, where he was commanding officer. In the view of some, including an outraged President Harry S. Truman, he treated these Holocaust survivors little better than the Nazis did.
<more>

Anti-Semitism as well as many other facets of Racism [Lynchings and etc..] were fairly common in Pattons Time . Lindbergh - was an avid anti-semite and Erol Flynn was a Nazi symapthizer

 

[GreenBean]

Have read pleanty of Jewish commentaries likening to the Jews murdered in death camps as animals and sheep for submitting to going in the first place. I wouldn't begrudge someone like Patton (who's a loon just for the reincarnation thing) for making a similar observation.

Could be worse. Coulda been a pedohpile like Gen. Monty.

"The "revelations" that Montgomery preferred the company of young staff officers to that of women have been around for a long time, and Hamilton himself referred to Monty's "romantic friendships with young boys" in the original book, specifically the 12-year-old Swiss lad Lucien Trueb "who engaged Monty's affectionate attention". The question Hamilton is really posing now is not whether Field Marshal Lord Montgomery of Alamein was gay, but whether he was a repressed paedophile."
The third sex that sustained the Empire - Telegraph

You are an absolute Degenerate - is the only thing that matters to you the satiation of your Mental Disease ? - are you that neurotically fixated ?