An Example of Kos and the Elusive Truth
I was just reading a diary entitled "Matthews Loses It over Right Wing Talking Points " where Chris Matthews went ballistic on some Georgia congressman. Typical Kos reaction of "hee hee, haw haw" and blithering idiocy.
One of the quotes from Matthews was:
Matthews: Yea, but..no no no no no. I won't let you get away with that. That's not a fair comparison. We do not have a war in South Korea. There's no German that's fired on an American since 1945....
A very, very simple fact check would have found this to be inaccurate. There were attacks by SS-organized insurgents, known as Werewolves, as late as 1947. In fact, the Allies were scared to death - far more than warranted - of the potential for a Nazi resurgence led by these guys.
Not a single Kos commenter bothered to interject this fact. They'd rather spew the same litany of venom than check to ensure that Matthews was correct.
And you wonder why I get upset?
9 comments:
A very simple check, huh?
'Some historians, including Antony Beevor have argued that the werewolves never amounted to a serious threat, in fact they are regarded by them as barely having existed. However, one historian who has focused on the subject, Alexander Perry Biddiscombe in Werwolf!: The History of the National Socialist Guerrilla Movement, 1944-1946, 1998, comes to a different conclusion. According to Biddiscombe, after retreating to the Black Forest and the Harz mountains, the Werwolf continued resisting the occupation until at least 1947, possibly to 1949-50, effectively undermining the post-war peace and stability. Yet even the book's publication summary softens this assertion, stating that Werwolf violence failed to mobilize a spirit of national resistance, that the group was poorly led, armed, and organized, and that it was doomed to failure given war-weariness of the populace and the hesitancy of young Germans "to sacrifice themselves on the funeral pyre of the regime."'
Garrett, what the hell? I myself said that the threat was taken more seriously than warranted. But there were attacks thorugh, verifiable, 1947, and maybe later. But my main point was that Matthews was wrong.
And, yes, a simple check. You checked and your post basically agrees with mine. And it wasn't hard, was it?
Multiples are quoted as arguing against: one is quoted as arguing for, and the publication summary weakens it. Without access to the original source documents, I can't judge who's more accurate.
Here a related question:
How many U.S. soldiers have died since the Iraq Occupation began?
How many U.S. soldiers died after the German Occupation began?
Ah, I see. The misdirect tactic. Simple questions ensue: Were there attacks against Americans after 1945? YES. So Matthews was wrong? YES.
So own up: The attack by Matthews was predicated on wrong information. Admit it, G, it won't kill you.
Ok, Gonz, how many attacks against Americans in Germany do your sources say? I'm having trouble pinning down anything like a reliable number.
Any luck yet?
Still waiting on number of Americans killed by the Werwolf, Gonz...
Garret, you seem to have a problem staying on point. Or researching.
http://www.cdiss.co.uk/Documents/Uploaded/CDISS%20Programme%20-%20Database%20of%20Terrorist%20Incidents%20-%201940-1949.pdf
Now will you admit Matthews was wrong?
Ok, 3 American civilian officials were killed, in one attack.
OMG! MATTHEWS WAS OFF BY A TOTAL OF THREE!!!!!! FIRE HIS ASSS!!!11!!eleventy!!1!
Post a Comment