About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

Beck's imaginary persecution

July 29, 2010 3:39 pm ET by Kate Conway

Glenn Beck took his audience into the realm of his imagination today in a segment on the Obama administration's efforts to alter a law in order to help the FBI more easily obtain internet records that might be pertinent to investigations on terrorism. Introducing the topic, Glenn Beck stated that the Obama administration is trying to change "four words" in the law that "stops people from going in and seizing internet records."

Beck's first sentence was technically true: The administration is seeking to add "electronic communication transactional records" to a list of the types of information the FBI may request without a judge's permission -- although it should be noted that this includes things like times, dates and addresses of emails but not the content of messages.

From that point on, however, Beck's commentary on the topic came directly from his imagination. He constructed the following ridiculous hypothetical scenario:

BECK: Let's say my company, Mercury, where we have internet records for all of our business. We also have all of our emails and everything else. Let's just say that the government decides that I'm a threat to the United States and that there's some sort of, you know, well, Glenn Beck has been communicating with a gentleman in Canada. And this gentleman in Canada has ties to a terrorist organization. Remember, they get to define a terrorist organization. Here, let me use a better one. An NRA member uses their gun to shoot something. The United States government decides that they're going to make the NRA a terrorist organization. Don't think they wouldn't do it. They make the NRA a terrorist organization. Now, anybody who has contributed to the NRA could be, in theory, scooped up and held indefinitely without a trial or a warrant. We already have that one going. They're already arguing for these things right now. It's how they define terrorist. So let's say I'm -- because I write a letter to Wayne LaPierre, he writes me back. They say, you know what, Glenn Beck has been in communication with this terrorist organization. With this four-word change, they can now not only go into the NRA without a warrant, no judge involved, on the president's word, they can go and take all internet records and seize them. Plus, this new change in the law would force the NRA or me, my company, to not be able -- we would be bound by law -- we would not be able to disclose the government has done that.

So Beck's fear of persecution hinges on his perfectly legal interactions becoming illegal or suspect through a completely artificial mechanism: The NRA being declared a terrorist organization just because one of its members shot "something." Despite Beck telling his listeners, "Don't think they wouldn't do it," it seems pretty unlikely that the government will rashly declare the NRA to be terrorists unless the NRA actually starts engaging in terrorism on an organizational level.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Mr. Katanga (July 29, 2010 3:45 pm ET)
      8  
      "They wanna take our gunnzzzz!!!!!1111!!!!"

      Did he also go to his tried and true (read: tired and stale): "They will have to shoot me in the HEAD" bit?

      Dude is as stale as seven-day-old crawfish left in the sun.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Conchobhar (July 29, 2010 4:16 pm ET)
        3  
        Dude is as stale as seven-day-old crawfish left in the sun.
        Great image, but I don't think stale does it justice. Bread goes stale, animal protein rots, and stinks. I'm just sayin'.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by indigo1968 (July 29, 2010 4:52 pm ET)
          1  
          Yeah, but the world is filled with people stupid enough to eat rotten shellfish.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by soze169880 (July 29, 2010 3:52 pm ET)
      7  
      And now, ladies and gentlemen, my impression of Beck and his ilk during the Bush administration:
      "What are you worried about if you've got nothing to hide?"
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 29, 2010 4:08 pm ET)
      4  
      I thought these people were in FAVOR of extreme methods to ferret out terorists. Under Bush I thought they were in FAVOR of The Patriot Act. I thought they believed people who opposed invasive measures were WEAK on terrorism. I thought they had nothing to hide and would gladly give up some of their privacy to combat terrorism. I thought they were OKAY with warrantless searches. What the f**k happened...?

      Now, suddenly government is Big Brother breathing down your neck? Or is this just Glenn Beck who is worried about maintaining his vast wealth?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (July 29, 2010 4:10 pm ET)
        4  
        What the f**k happened...?

        Well, we all know what happened--The Big Scary Black Man(tm) became President, so now up is down, good is bad, etc....
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Conchobhar (July 29, 2010 4:20 pm ET)
          1  
          Does this mean that Bekkky wants to go back to "the Founders" views on Habeas Corpus?

          Not holding my breath.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (July 30, 2010 10:01 am ET)
          1  
          The thing is, and I heard a report about this last night while driving home on NPR, is that the Obama administrtaion has basically adopted, and even increased some or most of the methods that Bush implemented for the GWOT.

          Such as:
          1. Increased Predator drone strikes inside of Pakistan, and in Afghanistan.

          2. Warrantless wiretapping continues.

          3. Limitless detention, still continuing.

          4. Gitmo. Still open and running.

          5. Renditions, still being carried out.

          And so on and so forth. Which is why it amazes me that folks like say, Liz Cheney, and Darth Cheney himself are so non-supportive and telling everyone that will listen to them that Obama is making American less safe, when he's doing the same things as Bush did.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by soze169880 (July 29, 2010 4:11 pm ET)
        3  
        They trusted Bush to track down the Real Turrists, but a non-white president can't be relied on to go after the dangerous (i.e. swarthy) ones. But if you bring up the fact that they invent racial motivations for every single thing the president does, you're "race-baiting" somehow.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (July 29, 2010 4:14 pm ET)
      1  
      Becky likes to leave important little distinctions out of his dooms day rhetoric. He knows he has to keep it simple for the simple-minded who worship him. In this case, the distinction is the tendency for real terrorist organizations to claim responsibility for attacks that it is responsible for.

      If an NRA member shot "something", I seriously doubt the government would be making any kind of declaration regarding the NRA unless the NRA claimed responsibility for the shooting of the "something."
      Report Abuse
    • Author by thaneb (July 29, 2010 4:14 pm ET)
      1  
      Beck's applying the same "analysis" in this hypothetical on the NRA as the right has been using on the NBPP: actions of loose canon member indict the whole organization. {Not meant to imply I support the NBPP} He's just coming off a mind-set influenced by a [not so] recent [non] event.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (July 29, 2010 4:17 pm ET)
           
        Hasty generalization IOKIYAR...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (July 29, 2010 4:31 pm ET)
             
          Or is that generic fallacy? I'm really rusty lately...
          Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (July 29, 2010 4:34 pm ET)
      4  
      Have you noticed how with nearly every crackpot conspiracy this moron pushes, it always comes back to or revolves around the safety and security of him, his career, and his empire? It actually makes him standout a little amongst his fellow right-wing professional liars, because the rest of them tend to make their viewers and listeners feel like they are the ones who are alone and surrounded by hostile forces. But in the case of Beck, it is he that the viewers and listeners need to worry about and look after.

      What stronger message do his loyal followers need to see that Beck doesn't give a ***t about them or their lot in life?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by grrson (July 29, 2010 4:52 pm ET)
      1  
      With as many lobbyists as they have, the NRA practically IS the government.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (July 29, 2010 5:04 pm ET)
        2  
        The government is whoever throws the most money around the right people.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by AC_Mem (July 30, 2010 8:36 am ET)
      2  
      Gee glenda, your theory sounds familiar....

      From Wiki - The USA PATRIOT Act (commonly known as the "Patriot Act") is an Act of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The Act dramatically reduced restrictions on law enforcement agencies' ability to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial, and other records; eased restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States; expanded the Secretary of the Treasury’s authority to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities; and broadened the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts. The act also expanded the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism, thus enlarging the number of activities to which the USA PATRIOT Act’s expanded law enforcement powers could be applied....

      ****
      Those 9 year old facts are pesky things.
      Report Abuse