Scrapbookpages Blog

October 15, 2014

My comments on Bill O’Reilly’s book “Killing Patton”

I am not using the word “review” in my blog post about Bill O’Reilly’s latest book, which is entitled Killing Patton, because this is not a review, but rather a complaint. I am a big fan of Bill O’Reilly’s TV show; I have watched the show faithfully every night, since the show started many year ago. I previously blogged about Bill O’Reilly at http://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2011/01/26/keith-olbermann-vs-bill-oreilly-on-the-malmedy-massacre/

I was very disappointed in O’Reilly’s book, which has gotten mostly good reviews, as far as I know. However, one review, which you can read at http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/10/02/historians-rip-oreillys-new-patton-book/200986 claims that Patton was not killed by the Soviets, but died from his injuries in a vehicle accident.

I received my copy of the book last night, delivered to my front door by UPS, at around 5 p.m., a day early.  I eagerly tore open the box and started thumbing through the book, looking for the most interesting parts.  The book starts off with the details of Patton’s death, which I already know.  I skipped over to Chapter 14 which is about Auschwitz.

Why is there a detailed section about Auschwitz in a book about General Patton?  Did Patton ever go to visit any of the three Auschwitz camps?  Not that I know of.  The only camps that Patton ever visited were Buchenwald and Ohrdruf, a sub-camp of Buchenwald.

I wrote about Patton’s visit to Ohrdruf  on this blog post: http://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2010/07/03/general-dwight-d-eisenhower-the-things-i-saw-beggar-description/

On the blog post, cited above, I wrote that the reason that Eisenhower went to visit the Ohrdruf camp, and no other, is because there were rumors that the Germans had tested an atomic bomb near the camp.  I find it strange that the testing of an atomic bomb near Ohrdruf was not mentioned in O’Reilly’s new book.

In the book Killing Patton, the section about Auschwitz is very large, too large for a book about Patton, who had absolutely nothing to do with Auschwitz, but who was allegedly anti-Semitic, according to the book.  I know that O’Reilly is not Jewish, but what about Martin Dugard?  I had to do an extensive search on him before I decided that he is also not Jewish.  So why the huge, detailed section about Auschwitz? The Holocaust and Auschwitz are covered in 20 pages in two chapters, yet important information is left out.

The part about Auschwitz starts on page 173 with these words:

January 26, 1945, 1 a.m.

The earth convulses as Krema V explodes.

How many of O’Reilly’s readers will know what Krema V was? Krema is the German word for crematorium. How many of O’Reilly’s readers will know that Krema V was one of the two above-ground crematorium buildings at Auschwitz-Birkenau which had shower rooms that were allegedly gas chambers in disguise?  Holocaust deniers claim that Krema V was a crematorium which had shower rooms for the prisoners, not gas chambers.

The alleged gassing of the Jews in Krema V had stopped in October 1944, and the prisoners had been marched out of the camp on January 18, 1945.  Yet someone was blowing up Krema V on January 26, the day before the Soviet soldiers arrived to liberate those prisoners who had stayed behind.  According to the book Killing Patton, the prisoners were not marched out of the camp until January 26, the day before the Soviets arrived.

The first words in Chapter 14, about Auschwitz-Birkenau, continue with this quote:

Tongues of flame turn the coal-black winter sky bright red. Nazi guards watch the inferno intently, but only for a long as it takes to know that the destruction is complete, and there will be no need to place another round of dynamite charges.  The grisly evidence is now destroyed.

This implies that the SS men at Auschwitz waited, until 8 days after the prisoners had marched out of the camp, to blow up the evidence of gassing.  Isn’t that just like the German people?  Never planning in advance, but instead, waiting until the last minute to do something that was so important.

Ruins of Krema V at Auchwitz-Birkenau

Ruins of Krema V at Auschwitz-Birkenau

Krema IV at Auschwitz was similar in design to Krema V

Krema IV at Auschwitz was similar in design to Krema V

Before starting to read the book, I went to Amazon.com and read some of the 721 reviews of the book.

I used the Find feature to find out what the readers had said about “Auschwitz.” Not one of the 721 reviews had mentioned the word Auschwitz.

I skimmed through the text to find the word Gleiwitz. Prisoners from the Auschwitz III (Monowitz) camp were marched toward Gleiwitz, but Gleiwitz was not mentioned in O’Reilly’s book. Prisoners from Auschwitz-Birkenau were marched towards Wodzislaw, which is also not mentioned in the book.

This quote is from my own website:

On January 18, 1945, the three Auschwitz camps, called Auschwitz I, II and III, and the 40 satellite camps were abandoned by the Germans. The gassing of the Jews at Auschwitz II, also known as Birkenau, had stopped at the end of October 1944. The evacuation of the Birkenau survivors to other concentration camps in the West had already begun in early October. Anne Frank and her sister Margo were on one of the first transports out of Auschwitz, which took them to Bergen-Belsen, where they both died of typhus. Aerial photos taken by the Allies showed that the roofs of crematoria buildings Krema II and Krema III at Birkenau had been removed in November 1944, so that the cremation ovens could be removed by cranes. [...]

According to Danuta Czech, who wrote a book entitled Auschwitz Kalendarium, the total count from the last roll call on January 17, 1945 was 67,012 prisoners in all three Auschwitz camps.

According to Otto Frank, the father of Anne Frank, the prisoners were given a choice between staying in the camps until the Soviet troops arrived or going on a 50-kilometer fast hike through two feet of snow to the border of the old German Reich where they would be put on trains and taken to camps in Germany. This was a “death march” with those who couldn’t keep up being shot and left alongside the road, including SS guards, according to a survivor. Those who were too young, too old or too sick to march were left behind. The VIP prisoners, a group of famous scientists and intellectuals, were also left behind.

Elie Wiesel, the most famous survivor of the Holocaust, was in a hospital at Monowitz, recovering from an operation on his foot, when he chose to join the march out of the camp, and eventually ended up at the Buchenwald camp.

In his book entitled Night, Elie Wiesel wrote the following regarding his decision to join the Germans on the march out of Auschwitz:

Begin quote:  The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor, get him (his father) entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the others. “Well, what shall we do, father?” He was silent. “Let’s be evacuated with the others,” I told him.  End quote

Around 60,000 prisoners chose to go with the Germans and many of them didn’t survive the march. Those who couldn’t keep up were shot and their bodies were left in the snow. Many more died on the trains taking them to Dachau, Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen or Mauthausen. Otto Frank chose to stay in the camp and he survived.

There were 611 children in the Birkenau camp who stayed behind when the camp was evacuated on January 18, 1945. According to Danuta Czech, the evacuation began in the early morning hours when 500 women with children were escorted out of the camp by SS guards. They reached Wodzislaw on January 21st. The men arrived the next day and all were loaded onto open box cars and taken to Germany.

The prisoners at Monowitz and all the prisoners in the sub-camps marched to the four concentration camps at Gleiwitz near the German border, arriving on January 21st. They were then taken on trains to Buchenwald, Dachau, Sachsenhausen or Mauthausen.

There were 4,428 women and girls and 169 boys who stayed behind. Around 2,000 prisoners were left behind in the men’s camp at Birkenau; there were around 1250 men in the main camp who did not join the march out of the camp and 850 who chose to stay behind at Monowitz.

This quote from Killing Patton is on page 173:

The [Auschwitz-Birkenau] prisoners are ordered to march. Their destination is unclear, but the road soon takes them past the train station [in the town of Auschwitz] where they first entered this hellhole, and then on to the commandant’s lavish house.  They are leaving Birkenau, though they know not why.

Wait a minute! The prisoners don’t know why they are leaving Auschwitz?  The Soviet liberators are on their way, but the prisoners have not been told this?  They have not been told that they have a choice: they can join the march out of the camp, or stay put until the Soviet soldiers arrive.

Why were the prisoners being taken to the Commandant’s “lavish house” which was located just outside the Auschwitz I main camp? Did the Commandant want to wave goodbye to them? No, Commandant Rudolf Hoess was at Birkenau, organizing the march out of the camp.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that the Commandant’s lavish house would have been seen by the marching prisoners BEFORE they saw the train station, which was farther away from the Birkenau camp.

The photo below shows the “lavish house” where Commandant Hoess lived with his family, just outside the main Auschwitz camp.

hoesshouse01

This quote from Killing Patton indicates that the prisoners were marched from the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp to the main camp, aka Auschwitz I:

Now, as the SS men prod the prisoners through the snow, moving them to another section [...] those child prisoners unwilling or unable to walk the mile from the Birkenau section of the camp to the main camp are immediately shot dead.

Actually, it was more than a mile from the Birkenau camp to the main camp, but this is only a minor error. The important point is that child prisoners were shot if they couldn’t walk to the main camp.  Why did they have to walk to the main camp? The way I heard it, the prisoners marched out of the Birkenau camp to the German border where they were put on trains and taken to camps in Germany.  German soldiers led the way, tramping down the snow for the women and children.  Many survivors mention the German soldiers leading the way, and that there was a sag wagon for the women and children to ride for awhile if they became too tired to walk.

On the next page of the book, there is a photo which has the caption: “The entrance to Auschwitz.”

Photo of the alleged entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau

Photo of the alleged entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau

Survivors leaving the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp after being liberated

Survivors leaving the Auschwitz-Birkenau camp after being liberated

Compare the two photos above.  The first photo, which is shown in O’Reilly’s book, has the pedestrian gate on the right hand side, but the photo of the prisoners leaving the camp shows the pedestrian gate on the left hand side.  This is because the first photo does NOT show the ENTRANCE into the Birkenau camp, but rather the INSIDE of the camp.   This mistake is frequently made, but O’Reilly should have had some fact checkers reviewing the book before it was published.

My 2005 photo of the entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau

My 2005 photo of the entrance into Auschwitz-Birkenau shows the pedestrian gate on the left side

I wrote about the location of the Commandant’s house, just outside the main Auschwitz camp, on  this blog post: http://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/the-grandson-of-rudolf-hoess-is-still-bothered-by-the-shame-associated-with-his-family-name/

Moving right along to page 175, we find this quote from O’Reilly’s book:

But even now, when their thoughts are filled plans to escape, the SS cannot stop themselves from killing.  It has become a way of life for them over the past few years, as routine as eating breakfast. They have shot thousands by lining them up against the notorious “Black Wall,” as the firing squad barrier next to the medical experiments building is known.

Do the authors of this book think that no one will bother to look up the “Black Wall” on the Internet?  If anyone does a search on the “Black Wall” they might find this quote from this page of  my website http://www.scrapbookpages.com/AuschwitzScrapbook/Tour/Auschwitz1/Auschwitz05.html

It was in front of this black wall that political prisoners, mostly Polish resistance fighters, who had been convicted by the Gestapo Summary Court, were executed. These prisoners were brought to the Auschwitz I camp, but were not registered as inmates; they were housed in dormitory rooms on the first and second floors of Block 11 while they awaited trial in a courtroom set up in the building. After they were convicted, the prisoners were taken to a small washroom in the building where they were ordered to strip naked, after which they were marched to the wall in groups of three and executed with one shot to the neck at close range. Some of the prisoners, who were sent here, were Czech resistance fighters from the Gestapo prison at the Small Fortress in Theresienstadt.

A photo of a painting of the “Black Wall” is shown below.

The "Black Wall" at the Auschwitz main camp where convicted crimals were execute after a trial

The “Black Wall” at the Auschwitz main camp where convicted crimals were execute after a trial

On page 208 of the book, we find the photo below.

Photo of General Patton on page 208 of O'Reilly's book.

Photo of Patton on page 208 of O’Reilly’s book.

I have the same photo on my website at http://www.scrapbookpages.com/EasternGermany/Buchenwald/GeneralPatton.html

I purchased an original copy of this photo in an antique shop several years ago. The un-cropped photo was in a frame that was 11 by 14 inches. The photo included more of the picture which is not shown in my photo, nor in the cropped version in O’Reilly’s book.

I took the photo, which I had purchased, to a photo shop, where I had it reprinted in a sepia tone, and cropped to show only the important part. I can tell you that the original photo was not taken at close range, but from a distance.  The photo that O’Reilly used has also been cropped.

The version of the photo, in O’Reilly’s book, has no photo credit, but the same cropped photo, that he used in the book, is advertised for sale on e-bay for $2,500.  There might be a problem here, since O’Reilly did not give a photo credit.

O.K., that’s it for me.  I have been totaled out.

Page 175 goes on to tell about Eva Moses and her twin sister, who stayed behind when the prisoners were marched out.  Be sure to read the footnote on page 175 which tells about Dr. Mengele sewing together two twins back to back to create Siamese twins.

I wrote about Dr. Mengele and the Siamese twins experiment on this blog post: http://furtherglory.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/dr-josef-mengele-dont-it-make-my-brown-eyes-blue/

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 8, 2014

After reading a bad review of “Killing Patton,” I ordered the book

Bill O’Reilly’s new book has been out for several weeks, but I have delayed ordering it because I thought I would probably not like it.

This morning I read a bad review of the book here.  In reading this bad review, I learned that the book is rich in detail and “meanders” off the track a lot.  That’s what I like when I read books.

I want to know that the tablecloth at the Potsdam Conference was red. I already know about Hitler’s diet, but I might learn more details about his diet from O’Reilly’s book.  Call me crazy, but I want to know the details.  Readers of my blog and my website know that I dote on the details.

General Patton pees into the river as he crosses the Rhine in March 1943

General Patton pees into the river as he crosses the Rhine into Germany in March 1943

This quote is from Patton’s book:

“I drove to the Rhine River and went across on the pontoon bridge. I stopped in the middle to take a piss and then picked up some dirt on the far side in emulation of William the Conqueror.” General George S. Patton, March 1945

I wrote about Patton on my website section on Buchenwald at

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/Buchenwald/Liberation8.html

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. This quote is from the review of “Killing Patton”:

Soon, though, Patton would become the commanding officer in Southern Germany and, with the end of the war, be responsible for the so-called Displaced Persons camps in Bavaria and elsewhere. Many of these displaced persons were Holocaust survivors. Patton had contempt for them. He called them “animals” and, in letters to his wife and in diary entries, made his anti-Semitism as plain as could be. Here, in reference to a critical report on the condition of the DPs by an official named Earl G. Harrison, is a sample diary entry: “Harrison and his ilk believe that the Displaced Person is a human being, which he is not, and this applies particularly to Jews who are lower than animals.”

[...]

But how is it possible to write over 300 pages on Patton and not once mention his rancid Jew-hatred? How is it possible to mention the flower beds at the Potsdam Conference and not pause to cite Patton’s mistreatment of people who, just a short time before, had been in Auschwitz? How is it possible not to mention that Patton ran his camps in such a manner that President Harry Truman, in a letter to Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, said, “As matters now stand, we appear to be treating the Jews as the Nazis treated them except that we do not exterminate them.” Golly, gee, Bill, isn’t that colorful enough for you?

O’Reilly, like Patton, forgets why World War II was fought in the first place – to combat the evils of Nazism. Foremost among the evils was anti-Semitism, which provided the rationale for the Holocaust. O’Reilly could easily have mentioned Patton’s repellent anti-Semitism, but it clearly was not all that important to him. He didn’t have a tight narrative. He has a narrow mind.

As soon as I receive my copy of O’Reilly’s book in the mail, I will search for any mention of the famous slapping incident when Patton slapped a Jewish soldier. In my humble opinion, this incident angered the Jews to the point that his death was inevitable.

This quote from this source is about the slapping incident:

Patton also created controversy when he visited the 15th Evacuation Hospital on 3rd August 1943. In the hospital he encountered Private Charles H. Kuhl, who had been admitted suffering from shellshock. When Patton asked him why he had been admitted, Kuhl told him “I guess I can’t take it.” According to one eyewitness Patton “slapped his face with a glove, raised him to his feet by the collar of his shirt and pushed him out of the tent with a kick in the rear.” Kuhl was later to claim that he thought Patton, as well as himself, was suffering from combat fatigue.

As for Bill O’Reilly’s failure to call General Patton an anti-Semite, this is excusable because everyone, who is not Jewish, is now an anti-Semite.  The word has lost all meaning.  Originally, it meant a person who wanted the Jews to have their own country, rather than living in ghettos in every country in Europe, where the Jews had everything that a person would normally have in a separate country.

This quote, regarding anti-Semitism, is from Wikipedia:

In the aftermath of the Kristallnacht pogrom in 1938, German propaganda minister Goebbels announced: “The German people is anti-Semitic. It has no desire to have its rights restricted or to be provoked in the future by parasites of the Jewish race.”[31]

After the 1945 victory of the Allies over Nazi Germany, and particularly after the extent of the Nazi genocide of Jews became known, the term “anti-Semitism” acquired pejorative connotations. This marked a full circle shift in usage, from an era just decades earlier when “Jew” was used as a pejorative term.[32][33] Yehuda Bauer wrote in 1984: “There are no anti-Semites in the world… Nobody says, ‘I am anti-Semitic.'” You cannot, after Hitler. The word has gone out of fashion.”[34]

August 6, 2014

Are supporters of Hamas in America un-American? The question that was not answered on Bill O’Reilly’s TV show

Filed under: TV shows — Tags: , , , , — furtherglory @ 9:17 am

My blog post today is about Bill O’Reilly’s TV show called The Factor; you can read a transcript of the segment in last night’s show, in which Charles Krauthammer spoke about Hamas and the crisis in Gaza here.

For several days, on his show, Bill O’Reilly had asked the question “Are supporters of Hamas un-American?”  O’Reilly promised that Charles Krauthammer (who is Jewish) would soon answer this question on his show.

I have been watching The Factor every night, since the show first started many years ago.  I love the show because listeners can learn the truth about what is really going on in the world.

Charles Krauthammer is a frequent guest and his comments are very enlightening, so I was expecting him to answer the question of whether supporters of Hamas in America are un-American.  The obvious implication in the question was “Are true Americans required to support Israel?”

Americans have freedom of speech and freedom of religion.  Is there an exception to those freedoms? Is a person, who does not support Israel, un-American?  Sadly, Bill O’Reilly’s show did not answer this question last night.

Bill O’Reilly started off this segment of his show last night by saying this:

Here’s what I don’t understand and I need you to explain it to me. Hamas is a terror group. Everybody knows it, all right.

If you care to be a fair-minded person, you know Hamas is a terror group. Hamas dominates the Palestinian authority through muscle, all right.

They have the guns. Iran gives them the guns so, therefore, they have the power in Gaza, West Bank, whatever. Hamas calling the shots.

So, you have a bevy of Americans who are sympathetic to the Palestinians but, by the same token, are supporting Hamas. And then you have tons of them in Europe. What’s the mentality behind that.

I was expecting Krauthammer to explain that the Palestians had been living in the land that is now Israel for thousands of years, while the current residents of this land are not the descendants of the original Jews who lived there long ago.  I was expecting him to explain that the trouble is caused by the fact that the current Israelis are known as the Khazars, or the Russian Jews, or the Ashkenazi Jews.  They are the descendants of people who converted to Judaism around the year 800; they are not the descendants of the original Jews who lived in Palestine.

Here is what Krauthammer actually said:

I would draw a sharp distinction between the European sympathizers and demonstrators from the American ones.

When it comes to Europe, I think the overwhelming factor is raw, native, deep-seated anti-Zionism. This is — 2,000-year-old anti-Zionism. Now, for a while, they discovered that if you put the veneer of anti-Zionism, the cover of anti-Zionism, you can get away with it in respectable society.

The veneer and the cover are gone. You’ve got placards being carried in Germany, of all places. “Hitler was right. [Chants] of Jews to the gas.

This is raw antisemitism, finding a semi-respectable outlet. And you get the foreign ministers of Britain, of France, Germany and Italy issuing a joint statement denouncing antisemitism in their country.

In the United States, it is very different. Antisemitism is not a major factor here. You know, of all the countries that the Jews have lived in in 2,000 years, this is the most tolerant, friendly, loving country that the Jews have ever known.

What I think is the most important factor here is sheer, raw ignorance. They have no idea what Hamas is, all that you said, they have no idea, for example, that there is no occupation in Gaza.

The Israelis left in 2005. They tore out their settlements. There’s not a settler, there’s not a soldier, there is not a Jew left in Gaza.

Do any of these people know it, no. Are they aware that just a few days ago, the spokesman for Hamas in Lebanon said on Arabic television that the Jews lust for the killing of children. After all, they have always used the blood of children in their mazahs on passover.

And when he was asked about that again, I think it was yesterday, on a major American network, he refused to retract. This is the oldest blood libel of all.

Are they aware of the fact that Hamas’ charter calls not just for the destruction of Israel but for the killing Jews everywhere in the world. This is an openly genocidal organization.

This whole problem could be easily solved by giving Palestine back to the Palestinians, and giving the state of New York to the Jews.  Many of the Jews in America already live in the state of New York and upstate New York is not heavily populated.  All the Jews in Israel could easily fit into the state of New York which is bigger than Israel.

May 3, 2013

Bill O’Reilly’s comments about Nazi Germany and religion

Filed under: Germany, Holocaust, World War II — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 10:23 am

I have long suspected that Bill O’Reilly does not know the meaning of the German word “Angst.”  He typically uses the word Angst when it is clear that he means “anger.”

On his show last night, Bill said “Angst” and Fox news anchor Megyn Kelly answered, using the word “anger,” making it clear that Bill meant anger when he used the word “Angst.”

But that was not the only mistake that Bill made on his TV show last night.  He said something about Nazi Germany and religion.  This morning, I searched and searched to find the exact quote, but couldn’t find it.  Was that part of Bill’s commentary cut out of the transcript because someone on the Fox News staff recognized that Bill had made a mistake?

The gist of what Bill said about Hitler and Nazi Germany was that Hitler was against religion.  That is not correct.  Hitler was baptized a Catholic and he never apostatized, although he never went to church in his later years.  Catholic priests were put into concentration camps, mostly at Dachau, but not because of their religion.  Jews were “persecuted” but not because of race or religion.

This quote is from Wikipedia on the “National Socialist Program” [Nazi program]:

18.00 We demand struggle without consideration against those whose activity is injurious to the general interest. Common national criminals, usurers, profiteers and so forth are to be punished with death, without consideration of confession or race.

Here is another translation of Number 18 in the 25 points of the Nazi party:

18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

Hitler believed that the Jews were working to the injury of the common welfare because they were working for the interests of International Jewry, not for the interests of Germany.   I explained all this in a previous post, which you can read here.  I also wrote two previous posts about Dietrich Bonhoeffer, which you can read here and here.  Bonhoeffer was arrested because he was a traitor to his country, not because of his religion.

January 26, 2011

Keith Olbermann vs. Bill O’Reilly on the Malmédy Massacre

Filed under: TV shows, World War II — Tags: , , , — furtherglory @ 8:24 am

I know that I am a bit late in blogging about Keith Olbermann, who has been in the news lately, but it took me a while to remember why I stopped watching his TV news commentary on MSNBC, and started watching Bill O’Reilly on Fox News instead.  On his show on June 1, 2006, Olbermann was outraged as he pointed out that Bill O’Reilly had said that it was U.S. troops that had killed German POWs in the Malmédy massacre during World War II.

During an interview with former NATO supreme commander, Wesley Clark, on May 30, 2006, O’Reilly had compared the incident at Malmédy to the alleged killing of 24 Iraqi civilians by U.S. soldiers in Haditha, Iraq.

I looked it up on the Internet and here’s what O’Reilly said:

“In Malmédy, as you know, U.S. forces captured SS 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.”   (more…)

The Silver is the New Black Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 254 other followers