Germany's Lilipuz: Indoctrinating Tomorrow's Little America Haters Today

(By Ray D.)

One of the most sinister media programs in Germany is one aimed at an audience too young to differentiate bias and think critically about the political messages directed at it. In this case we are talking here about "Lilipuz", a radio news program broadcast daily for children at 2:05 PM Berlin time and sponsored by WDR 5 (West German Broadcasting, Channel 5), a public radio channel funded by German taxpayers via the German government. Just a glance at the "Lilipuz" program's homepage is a lesson in and of itself:

Question for German Kids: "Why is Sex Called Sex? The Answer is on Heart Radio."

And while the kids aren't busily learning the ins-and-outs of sex on Lilipuz, they are being indoctrinated and trained to be Germany's bright new generation of future anti-Americans. Here is the translated text of a recent "Lilipuz" radio broadcast (listen to the broadcast in the original German):

Americans at a Loss

Certainly you can still remember the terrible pictures from the Iraq war. Led by the USA and England, several states attacked Iraq. They justified that primarily with the claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and threatened others. Today we know, that that is not true. And why are we reporting about it today? Barbara Paeffgen:

"The Iraq War is indeed over. But there is still no peace. One repeatedly hears of attacks, kidnappings, injuries and deaths.

The land and its people are totally agitated and simply find no way to keep peace. And the American and English troops find themselves in the middle. They are supposed to ensure justice and order, however many Iraqis don't want them in their land."

In America the people are also slowly getting angry. Many want to pull the American troops out of Iraq. Why won't they do that?

"The American government under President George Bush doesn't know at all how it will get out of Iraq. It is totally at a loss. That is why President Bush is talking up the situation in Iraq (putting makeup on a pig).

The American Defense Minister Donald Rumsfeld doesn't even want to talk about insurgents anymore and wants that nothing more negative is written about the American military.

Critics hold that for the totally wrong direction because it does nothing to change the situation."

What critics are they talking about exactly? They obviously missed the fact that the vast majority of Iraq's states are, in fact, largely peaceful and stable and that the lack of peace is limited to the central Sunni sector of the nation. The broadcast also totally failed to mention any of the positive things happening in Iraq. What about the new roads, schools, businesses, newspapers, hospitals and power plants? What about the elections and constitution? What about the increasing prosperity in much of Iraq? What about the declining infant mortality rates? Is there some law against reporting on positive things happening in Iraq in the German media? It would certainly seem so...

And President Bush certainly did not sound as if he were "at a loss" with regard to the Iraq situation in his speech to the Naval Academy this week. Here are a few excerpts from the President's speech:

"As we fight the enemy in Iraq, every man and woman who volunteers to defend our nation deserves an unwavering commitment to the mission -- and a clear strategy for victory. A clear strategy begins with a clear understanding of the enemy we face. The enemy in Iraq is a combination of rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists. The rejectionists are by far the largest group. These are ordinary Iraqis, mostly Sunni Arabs, who miss the privileged status they had under the regime of Saddam Hussein -- and they reject an Iraq in which they are no longer the dominant group. (...)

To achieve victory over such enemies, we are pursuing a comprehensive strategy in Iraq. Americans should have a clear understanding of this strategy -- how we look at the war, how we see the enemy, how we define victory, and what we're doing to achieve it. So today, we're releasing a document called the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq." This is an unclassified version of the strategy we've been pursuing in Iraq, and it is posted on the White House website -- whitehouse.gov. I urge all Americans to read it.

Some are calling for a deadline for withdrawal. Many advocating an artificial timetable for withdrawing our troops are sincere -- but I believe they're sincerely wrong. Pulling our troops out before they've achieved their purpose is not a plan for victory. As Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman said recently, setting an artificial timetable would "discourage our troops because it seems to be heading for the door. It will encourage the terrorists, it will confuse the Iraqi people."

Senator Lieberman is right. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a message across the world that America is a weak and an unreliable ally. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a signal to our enemies -- that if they wait long enough, America will cut and run and abandon its friends. And setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would vindicate the terrorists' tactics of beheadings and suicide bombings and mass murder -- and invite new attacks on America. To all who wear the uniform, I make you this pledge: America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your Commander-in-Chief. (Applause.)

Media Double Standards: Ignoring Lieberman while Lauding Murtha

And of course the German media has widely ignored the positive statements made by Senator Joe Lieberman (D) on Iraq while trumpeting the negative, defeatist statements of Representative John Murtha. This is because Lieberman's remarks violently contradict the prevailing ideology in German media and politics while Murtha's confirm them. The same is largely true of the American media. Murtha's statements have been headline news for days while Lieberman's statements on the successful progress in Iraq are largely sidestepped by the "mainstream" media. If German media had an ounce of credibility (which they don't) they would give just as much play to Lieberman's remarks (which they won't). In any case, here are some of the things the Senator from Connecticut wrote on Iraq:

"I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.

Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress. (...)

None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.

The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.

Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.

The leaders of America's military and diplomatic forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey and Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, have a clear and compelling vision of our mission there. It is to create the environment in which Iraqi democracy, security and prosperity can take hold and the Iraqis themselves can defend their political progress against those 10,000 terrorists who would take it from them.

Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week."

Senator Lieberman clearly demonstrated a high degree of intellectual and moral courage in writing the above, especially considering how members of his own party are likely to react. The intellectually dishonest ideologues who run much of the German media are certain to largely ignore Lieberman's comments because they represent a threat and contradiction to everything they have been reporting to the German people on Iraq for the past three years.

Peace the Lilipuz Way

So how would "Lilipuz" have dealt with Iraq? Of course not attacking would have meant more of the same sort of "peace" that prevailed under Saddam Hussein for over two decades (but of course WDR doesn't want to inconvenience the children with that information because it doesn't fit into the anti-American, anti-England indoctrination program):

 

Saddam's Victims: "Peace" the Lilipuz Way

And just like their predecessors, elements of today's German state-run media recognize how important the hearts and minds of German youth really are. Americans, along with Brits and Israelis, can only view this sinister and shameless form of German media indoctrination with a sense of foreboding and dismay for the future. Perhaps the most upsetting aspect of all this is that the German government (and not some insignificant private entity) is sponsoring these profoundly biased programs.

You can contact the staff of "Lilipuz" here. Be sure to fill in your first name and email address on the left-hand side before composing your message in the box provided. To send, click "Abschicken".

(Here's more on anti-American youth manipulation in Germany. Scroll down page.)

Update: Check out this outstanding montage put together by Moonbattery and based on this piece.

Update #2: Erik of No Pasaran writes us that French kids receive a "much healthier and objective view" of Uncle Sam.

(You may want to cast your vote in this competition for the "Best European Blog" (Non UK)).

Comments

[joe]

If current projections about demographics are anywhere close to being correct, these young Germans will find America is way down on their list of concerns.

In fact, if this program really was preparing these young people for the future it would have to include an arabic language lesson.

[PacRim Jim]

America is at a loss, and yet it out-performs Germany by almost any measure. What does that make Germany?

[joe]

france's closest ally

[Gabi]

BTW: The DEMOCRATIC Governor Mike Easley denied mercy for Lee Boyd. SPIEGEL does not mention that he is DEMOCRATIC. I know why.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,387983,00.html

[Gabi]

Nebenbei gefunden (anderes Thema)

Die SZ hat einen netten Artikel:

"Schweizers Nachforschungen ergaben, dass Chomsky sich seine wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten jedoch über Jahre hinweg direkt und indirekt vom Pentagon finanzieren ließ, während er gleichzeitig zur Verweigerung von Wehrdiensten und Steuerzahlungen aufrief.

Auch seine persönlichen Finanzen hat er weitgehend von jener Utopie der „postkapitalistischen Gesellschaft“ ausgenommen, für die seine Anhänger kämpfen sollen. Chomsky lebt in einem stattlichen Eigenheim, das rund 850.000 Dollar wert ist, und besitzt zudem noch ein Ferienhaus im Wert von 1,2 Millionen Dollar."

Und über Michael Moore:

"Der wettert zwar gerne gegen Konzerne und die Börse, besitzt jedoch Anteile einiger jener Firmen, die er sonst verteufelt.

Da finden sich in seiner Steuererklärung Aktien der Energiekonzerne Haliburton und Sunoco, der Pharmafirmen Pfizer, Merck und Eli Lilly sowie des Energie- und Rüstungskonzerns General Electric. Auch seine Starallüren passen längst nicht mehr zum Image des Medienhelden der Arbeiterklasse.

So verlangte er etwa für seine letzte Lesereise einen Privatjet. In London steigt er regelmäßig im Ritz ab – nicht ohne sich für Interviewtermine zusätzlich Zimmer in billigen Hotels anzumieten. Man hat schließlich ein Image. Und obwohl er die Waffennarren und die Angst des US-Bürgertums in seinem Film „Bowling for Columbine“ thematisierte, umgibt er sich mit bewaffneten Leibwächtern."

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/artikel/445/65380/

[jlwb]

What is an American to do to reverse this type of propaganda? We can write letter until our fingers drop off, but we are “not to be trusted”.
Until Germans take a stand against such misinformation, there is not much an American can do to dispel the lies. (Thank you, David and Ray for just such a stand!)
Today I talked to one of my German host sons about the EU, Iraq, German economy, the current movement in Germany.
Who elected the EU government? Where do they get their power?
Iraq. My host son says there is a lot of talk about the archeologist who has been taken hostage. I doubt very much if it would be popular to ask the Americans for help in this situation. I have no doubts that help will be offered.
The German economy. There are models that could be used to help the economy. I doubt one example will be used. The US GDP was 4.3% for the last quarter. It has been above 3% for what? 10 quarters? The unemployment rate in October was 5%. We’ve had a recession that started in 1999, 9/11, 2 wars, some major natural disasters and provided aid to Africa for Aids and Asia for the Tsunami to name just two. But, I doubt that Germany would ever use the USA as an example of what works for the economy. How could Germany use an idea, even if it works, from a county that its’ people so dislike!
And so Germany stagnates and thinks it is safe from radical Islam.
Last summer, in Marineplatz, there were Arabs wearing Hamas symbols.
Jlwb
Ps…many Americans do not speak or read German. Our students tend to take Spanish, Japanese and Chinese in my area.

[Huan]

David and Ray

I commend your continued effort. It is a herculean task but i fear it will be for nought. Get out while there is still time.

[RayD]

@ jlwb,

Thanks for the post. I just want to ask that you treat your German host son with great respect. If you want, let him read this comment.

I say that because I want to make it clear that it is NOT his fault that some of the German media do what they do. No one should ever have to feel guilt by association. One thing that really hurt me (as an American) during my time in Germany was the feeling that some Germans held me responsible for everything they thought my country was doing wrong. It was as if I was to blame for all of the bad things they read about in SPIEGEL and Stern. That's not fair and it hurts.

Let's be honest: If we are ever going to start a reasonable conversation between Germans and Americans, we have to treat individuals with respect and give them a chance to listen to us and voice their opinions, even if we don't agree on everything. And we have to strive to be gracious with others (wherever they come from) even if they act childish at first or seem misinformed or come at us loaded with stereotypes from the media or elsewhere. Getting into a shouting match will not solve the disagreement although sometimes it is REALLY difficult to engage in a constructive conversation.

So I guess my point is that the type of exchange program you are can be incredibly useful, educational and rewarding. People can disagree on the issues and still be friends. I have wonderful friends in Germany AND America who have a totally different political outlook than me. Try to listen and understand. And try to explain and bring your host son to understand your position. Sometimes you just have to agree to disagree on certain things. Above all, keep your respect for others and don't pre-judge them.

[FranzisM]

This is truly sinister, because sex education is an issue where much can go wrong if kids turn to imports instead of homegrown programs... but, in support of Lilipuz it can be said that the political propaganda is not mixed directly into the sex education - the anti-America sermon is accessed by clicking on the globe not the pinboard. Still it must be really ugly to have been fed with this as a kid, only to discover later that one had been entangled by an echo of the first post-war generation's denial of the Nazi crimes.

[clanRichter]

This is a bad omen for the future. They are preparing the children to be sheepish followers to what? The type of thinking: "Then all the bad things will be made to go away. Everyone will live in a media utopia. All you have to do is vote for the strong leader on the White Horse." Does this sound familiar? Probably not to the more recent high school graduates who have lost the history books. I fear this is an opening a future dictator will easily manipulate for final takeover of Europe. It sounds just like the propaganda fed by Hitler/Goebbels to the Hitleryouth and by Stalin to the Young Socialists. Propaganda the dictators originally used to get into power and then hold onto it. Why do Europeans insist on repeating the mistakes of the past?

Did not Stalin and Hitler promise such things including - since there was a reason to hate someone else we can make all problems go away? It is no longer the Jews it is the Americans that must be hated, and blamed for all of the European problems?

If the media and their elites are allowed to continue down this path, I see a future where Europe falls apart again into a dictatorship in the West based on these principles and the newer Eastern European countries trying to go a new way - democratic and free. The western parts of Europe will be attacked directly by Islam both internally and externally, if the Middle East is not turned to more democratic patterns of thought.

I beleive this website, among others, and Chancellor Merkel will have an impact, thereby making this mode of thinking a part of the past. It is a new day for Germany, and will take a while to remedy, but for France it is still a few years off.

[Liam]

The USA and England? Certainly England has a soccer team and a rugby team, but as a political entity it is only a part of the United Kigdom of GB and NI. Disenchanted Englishmen often refer to the Blair government as the Scottish Raj. That might be a little over the top, but does serve as an indication of the Britishness of the British government. I am usually inclined to regard such references to _English governments_ as evidence of a desire to see Britain (the UK) go the way of Yugoslavia.

[Vic]

Lieberman is living in a fantasy world, and is not taken seriously by anyone. Here is what Time Magazine Baghdad bureau chief Michael Ware said the other day:

"I and some other journalists had lunch with Senator Joe Lieberman the other day and we listened to him talking about Iraq. Either Senator Lieberman is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line. Because one of my colleagues turned to me in the middle of this lunch and said he's not talking about any country I've ever been to and yet he was talking about Iraq, the very country where we were sitting."

[americanbychoice]

@Vic
Do you ever have an original thought of your own?
All you ever do is quote anything negative about the USA uttered by someone else. Add to that insignificant others voicing their own opinion.

You certainly do not seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer.

[americanbychoice]

It may be time to see your proctologist for a lobotomy. It may help your brain functions.

[RayD]

@ Vic,

The problem with Michael Ware's statement is that he has probably never left the green zone. He's also a member of an elitist media, two-thirds of which is convinced the US will fail in Iraq. By comparison, two-thirds of US soldiers actually in Iraq believe the mission will succeed. This is about ideology Vic, pure and simple. The Angry Left media elite will never be able to admit the slightest progress in Iraq. They have turned defeat into what they want to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. The only problem is that reality is beginning to catch up with them. Despite all the ongoing difficulties in Iraq, the nation is making real and substantial progress. Germany was hardly a paragon of democratic achievement in 1948 either.

[Pamela]

@Vic
Lieberman is living in a fantasy world, and is not taken seriously by anyone

snort

The entity no one takes seriously is Time magazine - and Newsweek and the NYT, etc. The MSM's credibility could not be lower if it simply rose en masse and renamed itself Pravda.

FYI, I spoke with a Lieberman staffer yesterday. She told me the office is being absolutely flooded with kudos from all over the country, not just his home state of Conn. - generated by his piece in the WSJ. Having worked with her for awhile, I'm comfortable whe would not have offered that up were it not the case.

[Don Miguel]

I know quite a few people who have been or are in Iraq and their comment would be something like "Either Michael Ware is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line." Of course, they don't spend all of their time in a hotel in the Green Zone.

[Helian]

If all the media Jeremiahs are really convinced Iraq is a “disaster,” a “quagmire,” and a “defeat,” one wonders why they don’t lay their reasons for that conviction on the table in quantitative form. In other words, why don’t they compile a reasonably broad list of plausible measures of the health and vitality of a nation, and demonstrate that Iraq is a) worse now than it was before the war, b) is continuing to get worse, and c) there is no light at the end of the tunnel in the form of a reasonable expectation that things will get better. Certainly their point of view must be based on something more substantial than propaganda exploitation of the 2000th troop fatality, or hand waving about the latest IED attack. I think the reason they don’t do that is that they can’t. They don’t have a leg to stand on. Let’s consider a measure I think everyone can agree on: human life. Before the war, the people now so vocally promoting defeat were always wringing their hands about the human cost, the prospect of civilian casualties, and, particularly, the suffering the war would bring to the children of Iraq.

Let’s look at the actual numbers, and see what’s really happened since the fall of Saddam Hussein. According to UNICEF, the infant mortality in Iraq during the last year before the war was 102 per 1,000 for children under one year of age. In 2004, that number declined to 50.25 per 1,000. The most recent data available indicate a further decline of infant mortality in 2005 to 32 per 1,000. The document containing this seemingly encouraging statistic was hardly pro-US, and included the following interesting item: “Infant mortality data indicated 32 deaths during the first year of life per 1,000 births. ILCS acknowledge that this may be an underestimate and say that since the start of the conflict there has been a ‘progressive worsening of the situation for children.’” Telling, isn’t it? If the numbers come in too low, refuse to believe them. Then, in the teeth of the evidence that infant mortality has declined by more than half, wave your hands and claim that there has been a “progressive worsening of the situation for children.” What “situation” are they referring to, I might ask. Are they aware of some “situation” that is worse than death?

Let’s ignore the “excessively encouraging” data for 2005, and just use the generally accepted data for 2002 and 2004. Based on this data, and assuming a mean birth rate over these years of around 750,000 per year, we conclude that 37,500 children are now alive who would have died if the coalition had never deposed Saddam. We’re not talking about the unborn here. We’re talking about 37,500 living, breathing children. In no way are their lives less valuable than those of the men and women who died and continue to die to save them, yet the number of those brave soldiers who have fallen is recited every day on CNN and countless other MSM outlets. We are told they only do this because the number of fallen is significant information, important if we are to make informed decisions about the war. Why, then, are the lives of 37,500 children so insignificant they can never be mentioned? Could it be they just don’t fit in the defeatist agenda? For that matter, are any of the proponents of immediate withdrawal concerned about what would happen to these children in the civil war that would likely ensue? What has become of all the crocodile tears and hand wringing about the “poor children” we heard before the invasion? Have the pacifists concluded that the lives of children don’t matter anymore? The hypocrisy is mind-boggling, isn’t it?

[Cousin Dave]

@Helian: The problem is that the critics will settle for nothing less than magic. The infant mortality rate isn't "good" because, if America really cared, it would have waved its wand and the infant mortality rate would have dropped to zero instantly in 2002. Such a trivial thing... just pick up that stick and move one's hand about a bit... but those evil heartless racist homophobe Americans won't do it! It goes back to my contention in a previous post that Europe holds America to a standard of absolute perfection, and nothing less is even slightly acceptable.

A related example: Recently on another blog (was it Atlas? Pamela, do you recall this one?) a lefty moonbat was linking to a graph of total U.S. casualties and saying, "Look, it's not going down! This proves America is losing!" Pointing out that the graph represented *total* casualties and not the casualty rate (which is in fact going down) did no good at all. The moonbat was blaming Bush for failing to raise the dead -- literally, for not being God!

[Carl Spackler]

Helien

Nice catch and post!
Also, I assume the mortality rate would remain the same, or even get worse, if Saddam stayed or either of the juniors took over, so.....the 35,000 is ever year forward. Thus in two years 70,000 kids, three years 105,000, and so forth.
Also, regardless of the infant mortality rate, are the total numbers of babies going up? I suspect so. This would signal improved conditions for young families, hope in the future....that kind of thing. Of course the nutters would say it's because .....well...fill in whatever...

[Vic]

I can recommend the book "Night Draws Near: Iraq's People in the Shadow of America's War" by Pulitzer-prize winning author Anthony Shadid. Shadid is a fluent Arabic speaker and definitely spent his time in iraq outside the Green Zone. His stories are those of ordinary Iraqis and they will break your heart.

[Pamela]

@Cousin Dave
>>was it Atlas? Pamela, do you recall this one?)

I do remember this but not where I saw it - I think it ended up being referenced on several sites.

Body count is a stupid argument for the anti-war types to use. I give them 2 figues and they shut up.

- We lost over 80,00 in the Battle of the Bulge - over 6 weeks.

- Over a period of two and a half years in Iraq, we have yet to reach in KIA the losses we took on one day - 9/11.

Body count, in and of itself, is a uselss measurement of success or failure of a military endeavor.

(BTW: Just to avoid any confusion, I'm not Atlas' Pamela. Yeah, I know - two Jewish chicks named Pamela?! - altho we do have mutual friends)

The anti-war meme that gets me is the 'greeted with smiles and flowers'. As though someone tried to sell this idea that war is a walk in the park and they were dumb enough to buy it. They seem to have forgotten all the pre-war discussions of the 'fly-paper' tactic, or the 'rock in the pond' strategy.
I know for a fact that there were many discussions in which in was stated this is going to be a decades-long endeavor, not just on the blogs but by military talking heads, etc.

If I heard one - just one - honest argument against the war in Iraq - and 'it will never succeed' isn't one of them - at least I'd have a worthy adversary to bat around. But this - it's like kick-boxing air.

So, here is my re-write of Barbara Paeffgen's opening graphs. My substitions are bolded.
-------
"World WAr II is indeed over. But there is still no peace. One repeatedly hears of attacks, kidnappings, injuries and deaths.

The land and its people are totally agitated and simply find no way to keep peace. And the Allied troops find themselves in the middle. They are supposed to ensure justice and order, however many citizens of the defeated Axis powers don't want them in their land."
----------------

War is messy. It's ugly. Bad, sometimes terrible, things happen. And sometimes it is absolutely necessary.

[beimami]

Thank you Ray for bringing some attention to this disturbing trend in the German media. I have grade school age children here in Germany and have also noticed a strong recent trend toward anti-Americanism and unabashed promotion of Leftism in German television shows for children. That said, I can report that there is (currently) little overt anti-Americanism in the school my children attend, though the teachers are all dedicated Leftists.

[beimami]

@Pamela

Like your comment and agree with the sentiment completely. I am, however, not so sure about the 80,000 figure for the Battle of the Bulge. That could be correct as far a casualties are concerned, but deaths were, I believe, about 19,000.

P.S. If you are ever in the area, there is a fine WWII museum and memorial just outside of Bastogne. The town square itself is still dominated by a Sherman (I think it's a Sherman) tank that children can climb up on and play on. Veterans of the Battle of the Bulge can still eat for free in many restaurants there.

I also recommend the memorial at Baugnaz, a small town just outside of Malmedy, where approximately 80 American POWs were murdered by the German army on Dec. 17, 1944. It's a rather small memorial, but the names of the murdered GIs are inscribed on a wall there.

Also interesting is the American Cemetery in Luxembourg. It is located near the Luxembourg airport and Patton is buried there.

OK, I just ended three paragraphs with the word "there." Time for bed.

[Cousin Dave]

Let's see...
-

@Pamela: Oops, my apologies. I just assumed...

And you make an excellet point about the aftermath of WWII. Not to mention the fact that one of our WWII allies (the Soviet Union) turned on us the moment the war was over. (Good thing for us that France didn't join the Iraq coalition.)

While I have to admit that I don't understand why dead-enders keep trying to fight a war that is clearly lost, I'll have to say that history shows that it does happen more often than not. (Hey, where I live, there are people still trying to fight the American Civil War, at least in words.) And one thing that people have to remember about the "flypaper strategy" is that we *want* the terrorists to come to Iraq, because by doing so, we make them fight us in a time and place of *our* choosing. It actually kind of amazes me that so many Islamists know that we have set a trap for them in Iraq and they come anyway, but apparently their ideology compels them to. (My definition of how to tell a good relition from a bad religion: a good religion doesn't require that its followers do stupid things.) This does have some effects on the Iraqi population which are tragic at times. But I would point out that it wouldn't be nearly so tragic if it were not for the evil tactics of the terrorists who violate all recognized laws of war by using innocent civilians as fortifications. And the point must be remembered too that Islamofacists are killing fellow Muslims all over the world in countries where the U.S. has no presence -- Indonesia, Thailand, Algeria, and Egypt, to name a few. So I reject out of hand the argument that the U.S. presence has somehow "caused" the violence in Iraq.

[Pamela]

Let's see if my can of Bold-be-Gone is working.
@beimami
>> I am, however, not so sure about the 80,000 figure for the Battle of the Bulge.

Yes, that is why I used the term 'lost' instead of KIA. But I see that the clarification is needed, thank you. The Ardennes offensive Allied KIA was approx 31,000 - over 10,000 known KIA and over 21,000 MIA assumed dead.

You know that when your MIA are over twice your known dead and on this scale, the numbers have got be considered approximate. And for the Germans it was worse - over 12,000 KIA and over 30,000 MIA.

That was one helluva battle

Regarding Malmedy: I've seen the films of Allied troops recovering the bodies. I had no idea Patton was buried abroad. My uncle served under him (hated him too!)

[Pamela]

@Cousin Dave
>>@Pamela: Oops, my apologies. I just assumed...

LOL! You do know me tho' - as 'grayp' on LGF.

>> It actually kind of amazes me that so many Islamists know that we have set a trap for them in Iraq and they come anyway, but apparently their ideology compels them to.

That Belgian woman who just blew herself up in Iraq is the exception that proves the rule - it is ideology not culture - the ideology of Islamism. And I think there are some shared traits between Islamism and Utopianism, especially as evinced by the project that is the EU.

In both cases, it is the desperate aspirations of losers. I've got more thoughts on that meme, but this isn't my blog.

[Erik S]

Fortunately, kids in France receive a much healthier and objective view of Uncle Sam…

[hooded avenger]

[i]a public radio channel funded by German taxpayers via the German government[/a]

I thought my GEZ (fee that owners of TV-sets or radios pay) financed the radio - and not my taxes?
Is there something I have not understood about the GEZ?

[LC Mamapajamas]

@Vic: "by Pulitzer-prize winning author Anthony Shadid."

A Pulitzer Prize is a strike against this author at the outset. You shouldn't attach either that or the Nobel Prize to the names of people you want to impress us with. We know the kind of f@#kwits the Pulitzer and Nobel committees favor.

[beimami]

@Pamela

>> That Belgian woman who just blew herself up in Iraq is the exception that proves the rule - it is ideology not culture

You pegged it there. And that fits right in with the essence of Ray's post. One has to wonder what the long term consequences of the anti-American indoctrination of young Germans will be.

[thibaud]

By all means, write letters, all of you who read this thread. This kind of brainwashing is not only disgusting, but also sows seeds of hatred that will be directed at our own children for many years to come. This is poison. It must be challenged and defeated. FWIW, here's my letter sent just now:

My letter:

I am American and my wife is European. We are raising our two boys in the US (X, 3, and Y, 5 mos.) and hope in future to take them to Europe each summer to give them a solid grounding in their European heritage. To that end, we have placed X in a French/English international school here and are teaching them to be trilingual.
We were profoundly sickened to read that your radio program for children seeks to brainwash German children about a progressives' war that, despite all its horrors, brought to an end the most vicious and bloody dictatorship seen since Stalin's.

It is shameful for you to fail to tell your young and impressionable listeners that Saddam patterned his party and his rule upon Stalin; or that only the US/Coalition invasion made it possible for Iraqis today vote and craft their own constitution and express themselves freely; or that Bush's re-election (made possible by ca. 3 million pro-Iraq War Democratic voters like myself) was not a clear mandate to continue the heroic and difficult task that our soldiers are close to completing.

Then again, as parents, perhaps we should thank you (and the internet) for at least giving us advance notice regarding all the lies, half-truths and agitprop that our sons will confront when they visit Europe. And also to help teach our boys elementary principles of psychology: your attempt to cast Americans in the role of Nazis will serve nicely as an example of projection, or how one can be hated for reasons that have nothing to do with either reality or your own behavior and everything to do with the internal anxieties of the hater.

Sincerely,
[name and address, in Texas]

[RayD]

@ hooded avenger,

I guess you can argue about whether GEZ is technically or definitionally a "fee" or a "tax." For all intensive purposes it is a mandatory, state-imposed tax on anyone who owns TV or radio in Germany (with a couple of exceptions including US military and people on welfare if I remember correctly).

[Toby]

@hooded avenger

And WDR is still a public radio/tv network: it is financed by a government enforced levy (not matter what you call it), an "institution of public law" and of course controlled (in its supervisory board) by politicians. therefore, it is considered a public entit, which is why they are bound by the same human rights as the government (unlike any private network).

[cba]

Fact: the government does not influence "Lilipuz" or whatsitcalled. Period. If you think journalists working with public radio / TV stations are less independent or have less freedoms than their collegues at private stations - lol. The opposite is the case. By the way, what has the "why is sex called sex?" thing to do with that?