Why don’t peace activists remember killing fields?

Nashville City Paper ^ | 02/28/03 | Bill O'Reilly

[Puppage]

...because it doesn't suit their agenda. That's why.

According to Dan Rather, and The Village Voice...IT NEVER HAPPENED

[Blue Collar Christian]

I hate war. I hate anti-Americans alot more.

Anti-Americans are the worst of the hyphonated-Americans.

[backhoe]

The Killing Fields & Murder of a Gentle Land- what really happened in Cambodia a quarter-century ago

[Big Mack]

You have to know that these demonstrations are not about peace, but about down with the U.S. and up with Marxism. If it were about peace some of the turds would be chanting for Saddam to quit killing his own people.

[doc30]

the demonstrators are confident that the U.N. weapons inspectors can "contain" a murderous dictator All I can say about the idea of containing Saddam is this: Would you want to be in that container with him in charge?

[doc30]

the demonstrators are confident that the U.N. weapons inspectors can "contain" a murderous dictator

All I can say about the idea of containing Saddam is this: Would you want to be in that container with him in charge?

[CtBigPat]

Liberalism is based on immature thinking. They want big daddy government to take care of all their problems for them, they want the "truth" to be whatever they want it to be and they NEVER want to be held acountable for their actions. In their minds the "peace movment" of the 60's was a good and noble effort. So what if a few million Cambodians were killed.

[CtBigPat]

Liberalism is based on immature thinking. They want big daddy government to take care of all their problems for them, they want the "truth" to be whatever they want it to be and they NEVER want to be held acountable for their actions. In their minds the "peace movment" of the 60's was a good and noble effort. So what if a few million Cambodians were killed.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Liberalism is based on immature thinking. They want big daddy government to take care of all their problems for them, they want the "truth" to be whatever they want it to be and they NEVER want to be held acountable for their actions.

Socialism was described as a system where "the worst get on top."

They sell the idea of having a tyrannical government run by Mother Teresa, even after Mother Teresa is dead and buried. And notwithstanding the fact that Mother Teresa, if she actually were the paragon of virtue being advertised, would know that the position proposed exceeded her capacity.

[TigersEye]

They do remember. They just don't care. Their street signs and articles unambiguously say "it's not our problem".

[A_perfect_lady]

I know several of them, college professors some of them, who have convinced themselves that the slaughter happened BECAUSE the US got involved. It was a "natural reaction" to the "imperialist interference."

Yes, really.

[CyberAnt]

It's called: selective memory

[Destructor]

"Why don’t peace activists remember killing fields?"

They conveniently forget!

[Question_Assumptions]

Again, I wonder if the Vietnam peace crowd ever thinks about that.

Of course not. Once they've "succeeded", they go on to their next great cause and never look back. Like drunken drivers passing through a crowded school yard, they probably wouldn't like what they saw if they looked back.

[altayann]

Um, Bill?

Ever heard of Noam Chomsky? You know, the leftist that has been decrying the Khmer Rouge and the killing fields for years?

You know, the one that tries to insinuate that the US bears some responsibility for the killing fields?

Bill, wake up. The left has been screaming about Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge for *years*.

Does the Hollywood film "The Killing Fields" ring any bells?

[altayann]

I remember reading a book called The Killing Fields documenting the mass murder of up to 2 million Cambodians. Then I saw the movie starring Sam Waterston. What the Khmer Rouge did was exactly what the Nazis did. Yet the peace demonstrators in America said little about it, perhaps because they knew that if the United States had prevailed in Vietnam, the "killing fields" of neighboring Cambodia would not have happened.

And maybe it's because Khmer Rouge seized power in Cambodia in 1975, Bill. By 1975, the peace movement in the United States really didn't have that much to do protestwise as the US had already begun to pull out of Vietnam.

Mr O'Reilly, if you want to argue against leftists, that's fine. But you've got to start using arguments that don't make you look so stupid.

[Conservative_Rob]

One liberal quote you often hear goes something like: "More people have been killed in the name of Christianity than for any other reason." I wish to revise that to say that more people have been killed by Liberalism / Socialism / Communism (I consider them all the same) than by any other means. That fact is true even knowing that Christianity has been around for 2,000 years and Liberalism / Socialism / Communism only being around for about 150 years. You don't even have to look at wars and tyranny to see Liberals / Socialists / Communists kill people, just look at the millions of people who have died from the banning of DDT. The analogy of a drunk driving through a schoolyard is very accurate.

[On the Road to Serfdom]

Does the Hollywood film "The Killing Fields" ring any bells?

I probably should not speak for Bill, but since this is in his article: I remember reading a book called The Killing Fields documenting the mass murder of up to 2 million Cambodians. Then I saw the movie starring Sam Waterston.

I think his answer would be "Yes."

[Archimedes2000]

If I may, I think you miss the point. O'Rielly was asking where all the peace protesters were when the KR was killing millions, implying that they didn't care about people, the peace protestors only cared about hating "the US"