Beck's Incendiary Rhetoric Has Motivated Threats, Assassination Attempts
During an interview on MSNBC's Hardball, Media Matters President and CEO David Brock accused Glenn Beck of being "responsible for three thwarted assassination attempts this year." Indeed, in each of the three examples Brock cited -- Gregory Giusti, Charles Wilson, and Byron Williams -- the incendiary and often violent rhetoric spewed by the Fox News host and elsewhere on the network was said to be a motivating factor, if not the inspiring factor, in the men's actions.
Brock: Beck "Has Been Responsible For Three Thwarted Assassination Attempts"
David Brock: "Glenn Beck Himself Has Been Responsible For Three Thwarted Assassination Attempts This Year." On January 12, Brock appeared on Hardball to discuss whether the violent rhetoric on cable news shows may have led to the shooting in Tucson, Arizona, that injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ). During the exchange with host Chris Matthews, Brock alleged that "Glenn Beck himself has been responsible for three thwarted assassination attempts this year":
MATTHEWS: I think we used to say, maybe back in the Churchillian age, your voice was your power, your ability to speak up. That's certainly Norman Rockwell's notion, the man, you know -- the standing up at a meeting, at a public meeting and saying, "Here's what I believe." But, now, it's standing up with your arms, standing up with your ammo, your gun sites, your bull's eye.
Why do you have -- this is a problem I have with the tea party. Why so many guns at these events? Why constantly referring to guns? What is it? Is it a throwback to the revolutionary age? They think they're in an armed revolution?
BROCK: Right. What does the tea party moniker stand for? Armed rebellion, right? This has been a theme of the Republican candidates and of Sarah Palin all year.
MATTHEWS: Excuse me. History lesson: The Boston tea party was a nonviolent economic statement against the Stamp Act, I believe. They threw the tea in the water. No guns.
BROCK: That's right.
MATTHEWS: They dressed up like Indians. It was a demonstration. It was street theater, OK? No guns.
BROCK: But this is not street theater, as you know. I mean, Glenn Beck himself has been responsible for three thwarted assassination attempts this year, and Sarah Palin hasn't condemned that.
MATTHEWS: How is he responsible for them?
BROCK: Well, you want to know what they are?
MATTHEWS: You said it.
BROCK: Yeah, sure. So, he burned Nancy Pelosi in effigy on his set. He tried to poison her with a chalice, OK? Some weeks later, somebody tried to firebomb Nancy Pelosi's house. That guy's mother went on television and said he gets all of his ideas from Fox News. Do you know about Senator Patty Murray and the death threat that she got?
MATTHEWS: No, go ahead.
BROCK: OK. It's recorded -- the guy says after the health care vote. He says you have a target on your back and I can accomplish what I want to accomplish with one bullet. Now he's tried, convicted, and in the sentencing phase, his cousin writes in for leniency, and she describes in a very chilling memo -- it's on our website -- that he was slowly drawn into Glenn Beck's world. And she portrays the guy, the attempted assassin, Charlie Wilson, as a victim of Beck.
And number three, which you probably do know about, this liberal foundation in San Francisco was targeted by a gunman, Byron Williams, in June. The shooter gave jailhouse interviews, and we published them, and he says Glenn Beck is this schoolteacher on television and points to specific episodes of the Glenn Beck show that inspired him do it. [MSNBC, Hardball with Chris Matthews, 1/12/11]
Beck Inspired Byron Williams, Who Planned Mass Murders At Tides, ACLU
On July 18, 2010, Byron Williams was stopped by California Highway Patrol and engaged in a shootout with law enforcement. He later said he was on his way to murder individuals at the Tides Foundation and ACLU.
Williams Wanted To "Start A Revolution" By "Killing People Of Importance At The Tides Foundation." On July 18, 2010, Byron Williams, a convicted felon, engaged in a shootout with police after being pulled over on I-580 in California. Williams was heavily armed, wearing body armor and wielding "a 9mm handgun, a .308-caliber rifle and a shotgun." After being taken into custody, Williams reportedly told investigators that "his intention was to start a revolution by traveling to San Francisco and killing people of importance at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU." [San Francisco Chronicle, 7/21/10]
Williams' Mother: Son "Was Upset" With "The Way Congress Was Railroading Through All These Left-Wing Agenda Items." The San Francisco Chronicle further reported that Williams' mother, Janice Williams, described her son as "angry at left-wing politicians" and at "what's happening to our country." The Chronicle further reported: "Williams watched the news on television and was upset by 'the way Congress was railroading through all these left-wing agenda items,' his mother said." [San Francisco Chronicle, 7/19/10]
Williams: "The Things" Beck Exposed "Blew My Mind." During an interview with reporter John Hamilton after his arrest, Williams said: "I would have never started watching Fox News if it wasn't for the fact that Beck was on there. And it was the things that he did, it was the things he exposed that blew my mind. I said, well, nobody does this." Williams continued: "You need to go back to June -- June of this year, 2010 -- and look at all his programs from June. And you'll see he's been breaking open some of the most hideous corruption. ... A year ago, I was watching him, and it was OK, he was all right, you know? ... But now he's getting it." [Media Matters, 10/11/10]
Williams Was Driven By Belief In Conspiracy Theories That Have Been Pushed By Beck. Hamilton wrote that in one letter to him, Williams "repeatedly cites Beck when discussing the Soros-Obama-Petrobras story and insists I check out Beck's 'June' shows." Hamilton continued:
In his letter to me, Byron writes: "I have been praying for a media advocate; one, to make people aware of why I'm in here (public opinion could help me), and two, to make people realize that corrupt killers are in power, and want re-election! I was also fearful that this issue would be 'burried.' "
Byron writes, "You want to know about Soros and Tides, yes, Glenn Beck is doing very well uncovering his wickedness, check his 'June' programs for 'Petrobraz', also look into 'DiscoverTheNetworks.com.' "
Byron also writes that "very good information regarding 'Petrobraz' can be found in Glenn Beck's 'June' shows, where he accurately covered the Obama-Soros-Petrobraz-Chicago (Crime Inc.) connections for several days. It's all true."
Byron adds that he "found allusions to the Horizon disaster as a 'false-flag' operation in Alex Jones 'Info.Wars.com' and 'PrisonPlanet.com.' "
"Think like a conspiracy theorist," Byron tells me during the interview. "Except don't use the word 'theory.' Because the conspiracies are not theories. The official report is the lie; the conspiracy is the truth."
Byron says he thinks Beck has improved in recent months. "I don't think he's a natural newscaster, you know what I mean?" he says. "I look at it more like a schoolteacher on TV, you know? He's got that big chalkboard and those little stickers, the decals. I like the way he does it." [Media Matters, 10/11/10]
Williams On Beck: He Denies "Violent Approach" and "Conspiracies" To "Protect Himself. ... I Understand What He's Doing." In his interview with Hamilton, Williams also said that "Beck is gonna deny everything about violent approach and deny everything about conspiracies, but he'll give you every reason to believe it. He's protecting himself, and you can't blame him for that. So, I understand what he's doing." Williams continued:
"And I'd say, well, you know, that's the thing. It's that anything you do is going to be considered promoting terror attacks or promoting violence. So now they've got Beck labeled as this guy that is trying to incite violence. And what I say is that if the truth incites violence, it means that we've been living too long in the lies.
"Because it's gonna be too many -- it's gonna be more and more people that are, you know -- when you become unemployed, desperate, you can no longer pay your bills, when your society has come to a standstill, and cannot grow anymore, you're becoming socialized, everything, you know -- companies are moving overseas, what do you think is gonna happen? You know, for crying out loud. It's gonna get worse. And more and more people are gonna get desperate." [Media Matters, 10/11/10]
Beck Linked With Stoking "Fears" That Caused Charles Wilson To Threaten Murray
In October 2010, Charles Murray was sentenced to a year and a day in prison for threatening Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) with "violence" in phone calls to her office.
Wilson Said He "Want[ed] To [Expletive] Kill" Murray Because Of The Passage Of Health Care Legislation. In an April 6 article, Politico reported that Wilson "allegedly called Murray's office on numerous occasions" saying that she " 'had a target on her back,' and 'I want to [expletive] kill you,' according to court documents." Politico also reported that Wilson "allegedly told undercover FBI agents that he carries a concealed firearm with a permit, and said he was 'extremely angry' with the passage of health care legislation." The article continued:
On March 23, the day President Barack Obama signed the health care reform bill into law, the caller said, "I hope somebody kills you, and I hope somebody kills [the president]. Yes, die, dead."
"Not only do I say, 'Kill the Bill' I say: Kill the [expletive] senator," the caller said.
When the FBI reviewed phone records for Murray's office, it found Wilson's number appearing several times, with some calls made as early as 4:34 in the morning, according to court papers.
On April 1, an agent called Wilson's home number posing as a representative of "Patients United Now," a group that was "ostensibly" attempting to have the health care reform law repealed.
In the course of the phone call, Wilson allegedly told the officer that he regularly called Murray and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.).
According to the documents, two other phrases in that conversation convinced the FBI that Wilson was man who had left the stream of threatening voicemails: He called Murray and Cantwell "Pike Street whores" and called Murray "sneaker shoes Murray" -- both phrases captured when he allegedly called the senator's office from a blocked number. The man who made the phone calls also said "they need to be strung up, and I mean put [in] the gallows" adding that "they want to come throw me in jail, they can go ahead and do that. that's fine."
The caller also mentioned that he was registered to carry a concealed weapon.
"I do pack," court documents say Wilson told the FBI agent -- a term that refers to carrying a gun. "And I will not blink...when I'm confronted, and that is a guarantee. It's not a threat, it's a guarantee." [Politico, 4/6/10]
Wilson To Murray: "Kill The Fucking Senator! ... Now That You've Passed Your Health-Care Bill, Let The Violence Begin." In court documents, federal prosecutors pointed to several voicemail messages Wilson left for Murray that raised "serious concerns," including:
"Just remember that as you are politicing for your reelection. It only takes one piece of lead. ... Kill the fucking Senator! Kill the fucking Senator! I'll donate the lead. ... Now that you've passed your health-care bill, let the violence begin. Let the violence begin."
"By your attempts to overtake this country with socialism, somebody's gonna get to you one way or another and blow your fucking brains out, and I hope it does happen. If I have the chance, I would do it."
"Kill the fucking Senator! Hang the fucking Senator! I hope somebody puts a fucking bullet between your fucking eyes. Far left liberal socialist democratic bitch. You mother-fucker. You sold the fucking people of the country out for socialism. I hope somebody fucking erasers your fucking life. Yes, I hope somebody assassinates you, you fucking bitch."
"We are going to fuck you up. We are going to fuck you up as bad as we can. Yes, the independents. The real people of this country, not you spineless fucking socialists. You better watch your fucking back, baby, because there's people gonna come after you with fucking both fucking barrels, bitch." [Media Matters, 10/28/10]
Relative: Wilson's Threats Occurred Because He "Was Under The Spell That Glenn Beck Cast." A relative of Wilson said in publicly available documents filed in federal court that Wilson's "fears were grown and fostered by Mr. Beck's persuasive personality" and that Wilson's actions occurred because he "was under the spell that Glenn Beck cast." In a September 17 letter, Wilson's cousin wrote:
What happened later with Charlie is something I think I can understand. He became basically housebound due to illness and his small world became even smaller. His brother got him a computer and he was able to stay connected with family. And he watched television and found Glenn Beck... I found Glenn Beck about the same time Charlie did. I understand how his fears were grown and fostered by Mr. Beck's persuasive personality. The same thing happened to me but I went in a different direction with what I was seeing. Rather than blame politicians for the current issues, I simply got prepared for what Glenn said was coming. I slowly filled our pantry as Glenn fed fear into me. I did not miss watching his show and could not understand why the rest of the world didn't get it -- Glenn became a pariah to me. But I was finally able to step away and realize the error of my ways. The media lost its grip on me. But it still held very tightly to Charlie.
While his actions were undeniably wrong and his choices were terrible, in part they were the actions of others played out by a very gullible Charlie. He was under the spell that Glenn Beck cast, aided by the turbulent times in our economy. I don't believe that Charlie even had the ability to actually carry out his threats. [Media Matters, 10/28/10]
Fox Allegedly Inspired Gregory Giusti To Repeatedly Threaten To Destroy Pelosi's Home
In December 2010, Gregory Lee Giusti was sentenced to a year and nine months in federal prison for threatening to destroy former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's home if she voted in support of the health care reform law.
Giusti Admitted To Making "More Than 30 Phone Calls" Threatening Pelosi Not To Support Health Care Reform. The Associated Press reported in April 2010 that in one recorded call, "Giusti said, 'if you pass this freaking health care plan don't bother coming back to California cause you ain't gonna have a place to live,' according to a transcript of the message included in an amended complaint." The AP added: "Officials said the caller often recited Pelosi's home address and said if she wanted to see it again, she should not support the health care overhaul bill that since has been enacted. Giusti left at least two recorded messages containing threats involving one of Pelosi's residences in Northern California, according to the complaint." [The Associated Press, 4/8/10]
Giusti Called Pelosi "A Witch" And Said He Didn't Like Her Pushing Health Care Bill "Down The People's Throats." The AP further reported that Giusti "told investigators he had phoned Pelosi about a half-dozen times, called her a witch and said he did not like her 'pushing the health care bill down the people's throats,' the complaint stated." [The Associated Press, 4/8/10]
Giusti's Mother Blamed Fox News For Son's Actions. During an interview with the local San Francisco ABC affiliate, Giusti's mother, Eleanor Giusti, stated that Fox News was a factor in her son's actions. She stated:
ELEANOR GIUSTI: Greg has -- frequently gets in with a group of people that have really radical ideas and that are not consistent with myself or the rest of the family and -- which gets him into problems. And apparently I would say this must be another one that somehow he's gotten onto either by -- I'd say Fox News or all of those that are really radical, and he -- that's where he comes from. [ABC's San Francisco affiliate, KGO-TV, 4/7/10]
After all, even if, as I have said before, they found a letter from this guy detailing how he was influenced by anyone, Loughner himself is the only one who will suffer the consequences of his vile act.
Even if he claimed that he thought someone on the radio or television was subliminally urging him to specifically do this crime, only he would pay the price for it.
Given that, what reason would law enforcement have to release any evidence of influence?
I'm not saying that there is any, or even that he was influenced by anyone. I am just saying that, as far as the law is concerned, it makes no difference either way, and why would they release information that is almost guaranteed to start a firestorm of it's own.
what about the manufacturing czar ron bloom? What about
this guy saying they believe that political power is gained
by the barrel of a gun? Why is this never brought up? What about
all the violence from the likes of Bill Ayers and the Weatherunderground? Where are all of you on this?
What gives me pause is that I can't seem to find anything that isn't cut up and edited, so I don't really know what the context is. Based on the editing and the subtitles, I am guessing that what Ican find is video specifically edited to make him look bad, like the Reverend Wright "God d@mn America" sermon was.
Do you have a link to video of the entire unedited speech so that I can make an informed opinion?
The phrase alone WAS the message. AS WAS BLOOM's message. If a man threaten's another's life with words, the rest of the context is moot.
Such comments are VERY far from Beck's rhetoric. Beck takes a man's own quotes and warns of the danger he sees. For someone else to turn that into violence (behavior Beck himself REPEATEDLY decries) is not Beck's responsibility.
The notion that someone should LEAP to make that connection, to try to make Beck responsible for another's bad decisions, is silly.
Why didn't media matters run headlines about Awlaki, the imam who "inspired" Hasan to shoot up Fort Hood, and how it was Awlaki's fault for REAL violence.
Seriously. This website is proclaiming that acts of violence were the fault of Beck!? When in actual fact NO ACTS OF VIOLENCE HAVE OCCURRED!! EVEN IF THEY HAD, our law still holds people responsible for their OWN actions (for now...mostly).
What kind of wonderland is this you people (Media Matters) are conjuring? Do you really want American riding this slippery slope down?
so what "violence" was Ayers convicted of? And in fact one of the main tenets of the WU was to avoid harm to people when engaging in protests that involved property damage. nothing like you baggers who love to fantasize about killing
I did not know, for example, that one could buy high capacity magazines for a semi-automatic pistol. How did Loughner know this if he was not acquainted with people of the gun culture? And have you ever met "gun" people or been to a gun shop...where you may be able to find targets with Barack Obama's picture on them? These are serious ant-Obama, anti-government people...the hard core.
I just think we haven't begun to learn about Jared Louyghner...
Call him crazy all you want (and he is). The reality is Beck knows exactly what he is doing, but like all bigots/racist he lives by a sense of entitlement and privilege. Logic and rationale is a repellent. It is useless, especially when it comes to race.
As long as he has an audience, as challenged as they are, and as long as he is not held accountable for his nonsense, like Sarah Palin, Beck isn't going anywhere. Fox News like what Beck brings to the table: lies and propaganda.
The truth is Glen Beck is a dangerous man.
I've said that very thing all over this thread and could barely manage to earn one thumbs up on any of them. I guess I just forgot to insult anyone's ideology afterwards.
Here's a poor analogy (or whatever) - lets say that for the past few years the RW has been describing the president and the democrats as alcoholics and drunk drivers who are going to kill you and your family and destroy the country. Then a member of Congress is killed by a drunk driver. Does anyone think it would be at least reasonable to reflect on the rhetoric and language used to describe ones political opponents as maybe a little over the top when faced with an tragedy that involves actual lives and is no longer rhetorical?? Gee drunk driving is a terrible thing may I shouldn't throw around those examples so lightly.
Byron Williams own admissions here or the admissions of the other perp's relatives.
things that come to mind about beck
...Hitler..Stalin...Hate..Overthrow the government..Persecution of Jews..drug addiction..violence
yet you stand behind this man
There is a difference between thought and action. Actions stand on their own.
He tells people. The deranged listen. They may also listen to others on the right, on the left, and sometimes the voices in their head. There is no predicting what they will act on.
I decry violent rhetoric not because it is "wrong" per se, but because it is almost always a sign of undisciplined thinking and/or agitprop. As such, it is harmful to civil debate and therefore, harmful to America.
MMFA is calling Beck out as a responsible party here, but NOT advocating violence. Beck calls out people, groups, and organizations and THEN ADVOCATES VIOLENCE.
Do you see the difference now?
Talk: assigning blame
Incitement: advocating violence
I have accused MMFA of nothing. In response to Brock's statement I posted a hypothetical question that none of the responders have yet answered.
Regarding your hypothetical question: it's likely no one is responding to it because there are real situations now worth considering, reflecting upon, and debating. We've moved on from "what if..." scenarios because certain (sadly, predictable) what-ifs have already occurred.
MMfA actually says "Push back" and other worse things in the past.
What about Obama, talking about Republicans, saying "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun".
How about this often-cited example on the Daily Kos, posted less than a week before the shooting (and shortly after deleted, at least for a while): "My CongressWOMAN voted against Nancy Pelosi! And is now DEAD to me!" by BoyBlue Thu Jan 06, 2011 at 11:07:17 AM PST
You find when Beck called for any sort of violence and then you can continue making that claim. Perhaps you can explain away his nonviolence pledge, the MLK version and the most recent version, that MMfA also mocked. The overwhelming evidence is stacked against you, just listen to the radio program or television program and you have a very good chance of hearing his message of a personal revolution rooted in nonviolence.
Do you really equate reporting on what Glenn Beck said with his insistence that the country is being invaded/destroyed be evil commie progressives?
Really?
Problem is, Media Matters has never engaged in this formula. They take Beck to task for things he has said, but they don't call him names, they don't equate his activities to violent attacks on America, and they don't fantasize about someone doing violence to him. Wanna know why? Because adults in serious debate do not behave this way. They just do not. But Beck has made a career off of stupid people who can only feel powerful when they're fantasizing about hurting someone they can first blame for all of their problems.
Beck's television program follows Goebbel's formula for successful propoganda. Seriously, I'm not breaking Godwin's Law here, I'm just calling it like I see it. I don't think Beck's a Nazi, I just don't think he cares how he makes his money. If people get hurt because some poor deranged fool acts on his apocalyptic rhetoric, so be it. Beck gets his, and that's all that matters.
Why did he chose that image for the cover of this book?
Oh, and Beck is lying. What he says is not true. Prove to me that what Beck says is true. (See what I did there? I bet you were going to post a response like; "Show me examples of when Beck has lied.) Again, look at this site and do your own research. He lies and makes baseless assertions daily.
Stop trying to undermine THE Constitution.
If that's what you want, at least be honest about it.
You are going after conservative talk show hosts.
And curiousindependent is a foreign interest who bad mouths the Constitution or its ideals in every other post.
How many other posters here on MM are agents of a foreign government?
Sedition: noun 1. Incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government. 2. Any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
No circumventing anything, just enforcing laws that already exist. The problem is Money and power have already bought and forced their way around the current laws. And for some unknown reasons uneducated poster like you are defending it. Why?
I'm saying when you start moving the line on what is and what is not protected speech you are heading for dictatorship.
Take a look at what's going on in Tunisia.
I keep saying that because you keep using the ridiculous "Free Speech" argument. These laws are already written they are just not being enforced. No one is saying "move the lines" we saying enforce the line. Protecting the rights of free speech is one thing but protecting those who lie to distort the way democracy works is the path of dictatorship. I'm advocating enforcing the rules that were intended to protect democracy. You can say anything you want, good or bad, about our government as long as it is true and doesn't advocate the use of violence. GOT IT!
Wow look, the fall of Democracy as supported by....well you.
When voters are misinformed democracy becomes a lie.
And by selectively suppressing speech you
are going not going to be better informed.
Sorry for calling the US a democracy, I'm sure no one has ever done that before. Really?
Stopping the lies that create falsely aimed hate isn't suppressing the truth at all. I repeat the truth should not be suppressed. Again, one more time for the slower folks. The....truth....should....not....be....suppressed. But, not allowing lies to thoroughly influence a falsely informed voting public is what is needed to preserve our "Republic". Whew, glad I got that right. fools.......
Should everyone trust you for that task? I think not.
Your text to link here...
Where do you draw the line when infringing on free speech? If you keep moving that line where do you stop? Were laws about speech concerning the POTUS really necessary or were they the first step to break down our free government?
There is danger living in a free society. If you want to live in a place where hateful speech against the government is illegal, go move to some place with a dictatorship.
Sedition: noun 1. Incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government. 2. Any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.
Please leave...go educate yourself (at least a little)....then return for more abuse.
I'm not quite ready to trade the Constitution for a dictionary.
Your text to link here...
PREPAR YOURSELF!
But, riddle me this, how many times have you heard him sound the warnings that the left is calling for violence? That there's life threatening danger coming from the left? That the left might infiltrate some of Beck's favorite events and might set up certain groups to make it look like they are violent? That somebody could be/should be/may be shot in the head?
Revolutions are coming. The "Chicago Way," is here. The "Perfect Storm," is both here and coming. If an imaginary doctor shows up on Beck's doorstep wishing to administer an imaginary government program of flu shots/broccoli enemas to Beck's children he'll introduce said imaginary figure to Misters Smith and Wesson.
Beck makes his living selling fear. He's been very effective in selling that fear. One look at the comments on The Blaze shows that more than a few of them believe they are in mortal peril.
So, you'll understand why we display a significant amount of skepticism every time Beck utters a variation on his, "Don't be violent," lines shortly after he's told he audience that he can't disprove that FEMA concentration camps are coming. We see the contradiction in his arguments. We recognize the hypocrisy.
We're hoping more will see and recognize those things about Beck as well.
In my opinion this is a call for violence!
Beck is like a cult leader to most of these folks, and there is very little that will make them believe that he is not the paragon of truth that he has convinced them that he is.
I've said before I don't call for the silencing of people. However as Maimon would say "Fight the lords of illusion". Continue to keep throwing fox, beck, palin and all the other serpents into the light and they will be exposed for the lying manipulators that they are. That's really all we can do.
Although one could argue that inspiring violence is not protected speech... but I'll leave that to lawyers and judges far more versed in Law than I.
Bearing in mind that the U.S. is a Common Law nation a relatively astute lawyer should be able to bring these people to book without congress making a law abridging freedom of speech or of the press etc... Certainly there is scope for civil action regarding implied an threat of violence to individuals (and remember that corporations including community oriented groups are now effectively persons) or an aprehension of violence. Restraining orders anyone?
It should be possible to restrain threatening or hate speech without violating a person's right to criticise - note: criticise not demonise.
It should also be possible to characterise certain activities by these ratbags as harassment - legal remedies to such activities would not be the result of congress passing a law to abridge freedom of speech. The law is as much art as sausage factory and it thrives on creative application. The guiding principle should be the common good.
In such a situation Congress has enacted no statute - the law is just there and the person has a right to relief.
BTW a theory is something that is backed up by evidence or facts. If it isn't then it is conjecture or a hypothesis.
"Grab your guns" and "drive a stake through the heart of the bloodsuckers" if that doesn't work the we'll "put poison" in Pelosi's wine. "To the day I die, I am going to be a progressive hunter." when you find one "Shoot to kill."
All of those are Beck quotes. NO ONE can defend these statements as non-violent. You are being duped. You are defending a position that has been proven wrong. When intelligent people come across new factual information, they adjust their opinion accordingly. I assume you just adjusted yours. Beck is calling for violence the proof is in his words not mine.
Hehe, man do you have egg on your face.
he isn't serious
if you can't tell that, then yes, maybe you are the type who would go out and do something stupid,
ON YOUR OWN FREE WILL...
Beck: “I’m thinking about killing Michael Moore, and I’m wondering if I could kill him myself, or if I would need to hire somebody to do it."
Beck: "I would like to beat Rep. Charles Rangel with a shovel."
David Brock says that Beck is responsible for THREE assassination attempts. If you keep listening to this Beck idiot, you will never know the truth. Unfortunately, conservatives have nothing. They can't show any actual facts or data to support their ludicrous theories. Grow up and start paing attention to facts, not the fiction that FOX, Hannity, Beck, O'Reilly, or any others on the whacko right wing side keep trying to feed the public.
How does it feel to have that directed at you? Although, if you had some education you may notice that MY interpretation was spelled correctly. And used correct grammar.
No thanks, we need more speech, if anything.
2. Charles Wilson - The only evidence you have is a relative looking to deflect some blame off his cousin. It would help to have the actual words of Charles Wilson when blaming anybody else but Charles Wilson. Fail #2
3. Gregory Giusti - Oh, look, another family member looking to deflect part of the blame to somebody else. Again, it would be very helpful to hear the words of Gregory Giusti before blaming Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck isn't even mentioned by the mother yet MMFA blames him anyways. Fail #3
1. Never rat out your friends.
2. Keep your fricken mouth shut.
Why would someone throw their idol under the bus? Of course they wouldn't incriminate him. Sheesh. Want to sell common sense.
Another thing that doesn't seem to ever be mentioned is the fact that these people did not like the way Congress was passing hundreds of bills, some without even reading them. It seems to me that neither Wilson or Guisti liked the Health Care bill.
Blaming Beck is the easy way out, because as the LiberalEagle pointed out below, "Why would someone throw their idol under the bus?"
And by the way, members of Congress NEVER read the full bills they vote on. Their interns read them and summarize them. You don't even know how government works! Do you think the repukes actually read the Patriot Act before voting on it?
Just dumb.
Any CEO that doesn't know and approve of every policy of his company is a poor CEO.
It takes me about a week to read 400 pages in only my spare time in the evenings. If I gave it an 8 hour day not even three days would get through 2000 pages why? Oh, and oddly enough I had time to read the HCB and the CBO report on that bill all while on a week stay-cation and while watching the debate on TV. When I was done reading most of it Retardicans were still saying they didn't have time to read it. LIARS.......
As for a CEO, no they do not. As one time manager for a nationwide construction company many of our local policies were mine. Show times, material procurement, truck maintenance program and insurances, all with the trust of the CEO but not his personal authorization and or concern, not even close. And definitely not when or where my guys could take breaks.
Boo fricken hoo. You write to your congress person then if you don't like legislation. You don't commit violence against people because you're unhappy with legislation. Start a petition campaign, write letters, go out and VOTE. Don't shoot other people or plan murder just because the majority approved something. If you're in the minority, tough luck. That's the way the cookie crumbles.
Orly? Liberals are the ones to rush to judgement? I guess Texas and their putting mentally retarded people to the chair is the liberal capital of the world? Give me a break. That point is crazier than a sh!thouse rat.
Yeah? What's your point? 2 + 2 = 4. Just because it's easy doesn't make it wrong. PWNED.
Don't you dare pull a Fox and try to twist my words fool. Zombies like you eat brains, you don't have them.
PEACE.
Wow. Really? I see why you think Fox tells you the truth.
Dallas, Texas is pretty freaking Republican. And Dallas county leads the nation in convictions overturned by DNA evidence.
Evidence that, by the way, the former(Republican) DA fought to suppress. You may recognise his name. Henry Wade. He was the Wade in "Roe v. Wade".
This was a Republican who convicted people for murder and rape and then suppressed evidence that might have turned over his convictions.
So far, 19 of this Republican DA's cases have been overturned on DNA evidence. When the present (Democratic) DA was elected, he fought to bring about a LOT of exonerations through DNA testing.
Point me the liberals.
You'd make a lousy defense attorney, Mag.
Bryon Williams flat out said he already knew all the information Beck was saying. He flat out said he wanted to attack Tides because Beck wasn't doing enough on Tides. How does that make Beck responsible in any way, shape, or form?
Beck would never advocate violence, ". . .but will give you every ounce of evidence that you could possibly need."
"If the truth incites violence, if means we've been living too long in lies."
All direct quotes from Byron Williams. All facts that certainly matter.
None of us are saying Beck tells people to kill. We have been saying that his fear, hate, and paranoia mongering can serve as inspiration and justification for a very small percentage of unbalanced people to base a rationalization for terrible deeds upon.
Williams says as much. Those with closer access to Williams and Giusti than you do have said as much.
If you wish to run with the idea that Beck's words can't influence people you'll have to match that thought against the fact that Beck's paycheck comes from selling advertising and frequently offers personal endorsements for the products being offered by his sponsors.
A defense of, "My words couldn't have possibly influenced terrible acts by people who have acknowledged they listen to me--don't hold me accountable," that comes from a man who tells potential ad buyers, "Look at my loyal audience! Look at how they respond to the endorsements I make! Look at the influence I have that brought people to my rally in Washington DC!" is, to say the least, contradictory.
Here is a quote from your last reply:
To this I ask: Why do you give credibility to their twisted justification?
Methinks you need a dictionary.
For me, once you have initiated an act of violence, or otherwise infringed upon someone else's rights, your reasons do not matter. A starving man robbing a store is still theft. Maybe he is feeding his starving children. Is that not still theft? It is.
In this current case, a deranged man opened fire into crowd killing 6 and wounding 13. I don't care what his reason is. Because those reasons are irrational.
Just because Beck didn't personally do it, does not absolve him of those crimes. Those people commited their crimes based on things Beck was saying and have mentione being influenced by Beck. Poplawski killed policemen because he beleived Obama was going to take his guns, something that Beck was mentioning frequently shortly after Obama's election. Byron Williams was planning on shooting up the Tides Foundation, a relatively small group who only gianed national notierity because of Beck's accusations.
Beck's words have consequences.
Manson had a direct role in planning the tate murder. Therefore he was tried and convicted of conspiacy to commit murder. It may come as a surprise you that he was never accused of or convicted of murder. Somebody put up that ridiculous argument yesterday so I looked it up.
There were many Nazi officials, includung Hitler, who did not personally kill any Jewish people. Most who where found to have given orders to exterminate these people were found guilty and jailed or hanged. Most who were found to have no direct link to the genocide were only jailed or released based on their individual circumstances.
To your third, and most ridiculous question:
Did the person jump? Or did he/she come back off the ledge?
Did the person who yelled jump somehow force that person out on the ledge? If the person did jump, did the yeller push him off?
If the answer to any of those are no, then the yeller is not guilty. He is in poor taste? Yes. Is he guilty of the death of your hypothetical suicide? Absolutely not.
Likewise, Beck may or may not be guilty of bad taste. But he in no way planned, endorsed, or called for the killing of these people. If I am wrong on this I suggest you contact a lawyer and present your evidence. I'm absolutlt positive you won't have any trouble finding a lawyer and a judge who would like nothing more than to hang beck from the White House portico.
If they acted MORALLY, these attacks just might not happen as often. But since they are IMMORAL, the attacks on Democrats will likely continue.
It's not a LEGAL argument, it's a MORAL argument. And how difficult is it for human beings to act MORAL? Guess it's harder for some than others.
Hope that explains it for you.
The morality in question sould be Jared Loughner's and no one else's.
But I'm not going to argue a fictional store theft with you. Your straw-Jean Valjean scenario has nothing to do with the very real shootings, nor does it in any way reinforce your all too ridiculous idea that I've offered some kind of creditability to people I've called irrational for their acts which I've called twisted. I said they look for justification which in no way, shape or form calls their horrific deeds justified.
If you believe those two statements, then you cannot continue this discussion claiming that Beck, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, or any other conservative outlet is in any way responsible for any of these crimes.
In this very post you claim Fox News and alcohol is responsible for Byron Williams' crimes. Listing our greivances and stating our fears is not a crime. Hunting people is a crime, as you will claim to know. Byron William is guilty of that crime; no one else.
I know you are going to claim to agree with this. Then in the next sentence you will attempt again to show why conservative talk is in some way responsible for the deaths in Arizona, and in Oklahoma, and in Pennsylvaina, and the crimes of Byron Williams, and whoever else you can think of.
The whole reason for this entire line of thought is to discredit conservative opinion by linking us to murder. And that's it. You are trying to justify the actions of all these criminals you keep naming. You try to make these murderers a victim of an ideology that you claim drove them to commit their horrendous acts.
As we established yesterday, rational people do not commit such acts based on what they hear. Irrational people do. These irrational people need to be punished. The people who put their opinions out in public, whether it is me to you, or Beck to his millions of listeners, do not deserve punishment for their opinions, whether you agree with us or not. You and those who agree with you are trying to punish the free speech of others by linking them to these crimes.
You wish for these conservatives to be discredited and silenced. You want Beck to be taken off the air and everyone to "Drop Fox". Well I for one am not buying it. Beck is no more guilty of these crimes than I am or you are. And there is no way you can prove otherwise.
No, we don't.
Do you know who Byron Williams is? I suggest reading up on him and then get back to us.
Palin, Limbaugh, and a host of others have hooked on to this "blood libel" line, offering the idea that words of criticism are potentially dangerous--while, of course, curiously backing away from how the ideas that a map with sniper scopes that featured Rep. Giffords' name, calls for Second Amendment remedies, and Tweets that say, "Don't retreat. Reload!" may have indirectly contributed and regretfully encouraged a horrific deed. You get that? They are willing to accept the oft repeated "words have consequences."
And the idea that I, or anyone else here, is trying to discredit conservative opinion--intellectually dishonest nonsense on your part. To begin with, I've already told you I do not consider Beck, Limbaugh, or Palin to be conservatives. I even offered a sample of names of those who I do consider to be conservatives. I told you where I thought lines were being crossed showing examples of valid concerns being raised by responsible voices versus out and out lies being pushed by those who have found ways to gain profit and power through falsehoods and fear mongering.
I have not accused Glenn Beck of violence. I have accused Glenn Beck of using reckless, irresponsible, fear heavy, fact light words and arguments to gain fame and fortune. This article shows that his words and arguments provided inspiration for terrible deeds. This is not theory--the jail house interview with Byron Williams proves it. Beck, he said, was like a teacher. Beck, he said, provided him with every ounce of evidence he needed. Beck inspired him--inadvertently, and unintentionally it certainly was, but he is the source of Williams' twisted motivation regardless. And what does Beck, who has told us "words have consequences" do when faced with the consequences of his words? He intentionally, and quite purposefully uses it as an opportunity to grandstand and further self promote with an all too obviously insincere "pledge" in his hand.
If you do consider yourself a conservative, act like one. Recognize the personal responsibility these people have for the words they say. Acknowledge that they, as high profile media figures, have an undeniable influence on the thoughts of their audience. Accept that there can be and are terrible consequences, however rarely they occur, that can follow lie based rants that call for their audience to be suspicious, be afraid, and to hate, hate, hate those who dare to offer a different point of view.
Maybe Obama will issue an executive order that will be extended by the next president as some sort of corrupt tradition.
Hopefully in the future idiots like Laughner will be put in an asylum. It's better to have freedom and its accompanying danger than to live in tyranny.
Never let a crisis go to waste applies to both sides of the political extreme.
My position has been, and continues to be, that people can be influenced to do the unthinkable. We've been hearing from more than a few that certainly seem to be acknowledging this can happen, but who, nevertheless, keep running with the idea, but not this time.
I can't offer a solution; only a suggestion. It's the one I offered in the last paragraph of the previous post--that those who speak of personal responsibility actually exercise personal responsibility.
Ladies and gentlemen of the supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider: (pulling down a diagram of Chewie) this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense! (jury looks shocked)
Why would a Wookiee -- an eight foot tall Wookiee -- want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense!
But more importantly, you have to ask yourself: what does that have to do with this case? (calmly) Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense!
Look at me, I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense.
And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense.
If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.
If relatives of the accussed, noting his fasination with (fill in the blank), can be written off as an attempt to deflect blame, doesn't it work in reverse? If the accussed said "I did it because of what I heard on (fill in the blank)" can't you write that off as an attempt to deflect blame?
Come on, I know it is a stretch, you can get there is you actually think about it.
I disagree with ONPRCTR that Beck and Palin know they are guilty. I think Beck is just plain crazy and Palin is just too stupid to know anything except that the cameras are on her and that is all she is interested in anyway. Murdock, the RNC, and the rest are just using them to create their own propaganda machine. It is working very well, isn't it?
BS... all he's doing is advancing conspiracy theories to the weak minded viewers and listeners.
And we're all still waiting for Beck to tell his beckerheads the truth.
"The angry, sometimes violent rhetoric used against conservatives is the same type of propaganda that was used against the Jews during Nazi Germany."
Think you can get a little more shrill?
"There are at least two FB pages wishing Sarah Palin's death."
I'd love to see your source on that lie!
"people started saying that Pat Robertson should die"
And that lie also.
Care to go for the record and post more lies?
You have not the slightest idea what Nazis said about Jews. While you may think you have made a clever point here, facts will show that you can find quiet some similarities in Beck´s propaganda with the actual propaganda used by the Nazis.
One constant topic in the Nazi propaganda was the stereotype of Jews controlling the world behind the curtain. The idea behind was there was some rich Jews who act like puppet masters. Sound familiar? Does that maybe ring a bell? Like Beck talking about Soros?
Another constant theme of the Nazis was to connect Jews, Marxists, Socialists under the headline "the conspiracy of the international Judaism". Google it. Look for yourself. You say, wait I have seen something on Beck´s chalk board. Beck has connected the dots, "exposed" a international conspiracy of Socialists, Marxists and a Jew on top.
Another fact is Nazis always played on the notion that"the conspiracy of international Judaism" was aimed to destroy Germany
with the goal to make Germany a socialistic, marxistic country. Sound familiar? Like Obama, Piven and everyone want to destroy the U.S. and turn it into a socialistic, marxistic country.
No doubt a comparison of propaganda content and techniques between Beck and Nazis would bring up astounishing parallels. I would also dare to say you could find also the use of the same expressions, partly the same metaphors and a striking parallel in the way the audience is adressed. MMFA get someone to research that. Useful sources are Goebbels diaries, all the Nazi literature and speeches. Its worth the research.
So, just before anyone thinks I am saying Beck is a Nazi. Hes not. He has no political convictions whatsoever. Hes a charlatan of the worst kind, but he and his team are first class propaganda pros who know all the tricks.
You know what conspiracy means, right? An illegal act planned by a group of people in secret. Which of his theories meet those criteria? Name just one for me. You won't be able to, everything he has stood up for is backed up by primary sources, has anyone else even bothered to check them out?
Think I should have just said that he's full of crap? Does that work better?
I've see more violence and hatred from the followers of Karl Marx and Prophet Mohammad than any of Glenn Beck's viewers.
2) You can't believe what he says, he's a liberal.
or
4) Where is his website's money coming from?
though they might try
1) how can he get away with saying something that despicable
and
3) He's trying to infringe on my God and Founding father given constitutional rights
And they will never try to use the words "it's a lie" because they can't.
No, it only led to the American Revolution!
Am I understanding correctly that Brock is claiming Beck is responsible for three separate acts of attempted murder?
Might this not encite some deranged individual to do a little pre-emtive self defense on Glenn Beck?
This site's contention that right-wing "hate talk" has contributed in any way to this massacre in Arizona and the many other crimes mentioned by these articles and many of the posters here is ridiculous. It is nothing but political drivel. The blame lies with the people who perpetrate the crimes. Not with whatever deranged political ideal they subscribe to. Lets get this straight; whatever political ideology Jared Loughner subscribes to, if any, it a bastardization of whatever a sane person claims his ideology is about.
These people are not sane. They wanted to kill. Wanting to kill someone for a difference in opinion is not rational.
The other manipulates facts and his audience, uses violent metaphors 24/7, fantized about killing someone ON AIR, scares his audience with fabricated future scenarios, plays with antisemtic and racist stereotypes around and is all in it for selling his merchandise.
Clearly, both are exactly doing the same thing.
I love how they state this as fact without offering more than a few anecdotal quotes from family members.
Oh, and here is a choice quote from Byron Williams that lays to rest any inclination that Beck motivated him.
“I’m actually mad at Fox. I’m mad at them because they go on to something else. It’s like they drop the issue and it lands on a shelf somewhere to collect dust. And that’s what’s happening to the truth. It’s going out and collecting dust. I say you’re not going to let these people get away with this stuff. You can’t let them get away with it. So this was my action because of Fox’s neglect.”
Clear. Concise. Factual. This quote lays to rest the notion that Glenn Beck and/or Fox inspired this man to attack Tides.
Byron specifically stated that Glenn Beck inspired him to do what he did. The audio of the interviews are right here. Clear. Concise. Factual.
You lose.
Great point! Because FoxNEws stirred up the pot to begin with, pointed out what is going on this country, suggested they will do something and of course failed to do so, the guy all worked up and angry caused by the coverage on FoxNEws felt he needed to do something instead. You just proved what you are trying to disprove. Well done.
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200904070009?f=h_top
Oh, and if you really believe this, you should most definitely sue to have him taken off the airwaves. Take him to court, present your "evidence", and make the case.
CatsRBigLuv
coldteablues19577325
curiousindependent
epkklk851
grmce
izaccy
kalentros
kamrom
Nasty Liberal
opopop
osakaCat
RKAllen
robyn20094113
Stonerscum
TomJoad
wolf kotenberg
Over the next 24 hours, thrown bricks shattered the glass doors and windows of party headquarters from Rochester, N.Y.,
A propane gas line at the Charlottesville home of Rep. Tom Perriello's brother was severed Tuesday after a self-identified "tea party" activist posted what he believed to be the Virginia Democrat's address on a Web site and urged opponents to "drop by" to convey their opposition to his yes vote on the health bill.
A vandal threw a brick into the glass doors at the Monroe County Democratic Committee's headquarters in Rochester.
Gregory Giusti arrested for threatening to firebomb Pelosi’s home. Tied to Beck statements by family.
Charles Wilson, Beck "his teacher" inspired him to threaten life of Senator Murray.
Charles Turner Hammerman, upset over taxes arrested for threatening life of Congressman.
Byron Williams wounded in shootout with police on his was to attack Tides foundation, Inspired by Beck, per his family.
Yeah, no evidence of a radical right at all!