I Hate The 911 Victim's Families

[Procrustes Stretched]

uh, no it wasnt
it was a section of a much larger radio show
no film involved
'the photos in the video were added by the maker of that video, beck had ZERO to do with it

Okay, so it was "tape" rather than "film."

It was still his own words, not spliced, for the full two minutes. There the fact remains that there is nothing contextual in existence that would alter their intent.

it was cut out of a 3 hour radio program

isnt that what everyone was pissed off about breitbart for?
because he didnt post an entire 43 minute video?

it would be nice to have a little consistency

anyone who can and does listen to Beck for 3 straight hours needs to be committed to a mental institution.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Okay, so it was "tape" rather than "film."

It was still his own words, not spliced, for the full two minutes. There the fact remains that there is nothing contextual in existence that would alter their intent.

The context I was referring to was about the title of this thread. Which seeks to imply that he said it about all the families when clearly he was referring to a few families. The OP also clearly intended people to think this was current as he did not mention it was 5 years old in his original Post.

I wont defend What beck said, But I will attack the OP for his attempts to misrepresent what he said or at least who he said it about.

You're really reaching now.

nothing is misrepresented as the OP -- moi --- linked to all the evidence Chuckie cites.

 

[DiveCon]

Okay, so it was "tape" rather than "film."

It was still his own words, not spliced, for the full two minutes. There the fact remains that there is nothing contextual in existence that would alter their intent.

it was cut out of a 3 hour radio program

isnt that what everyone was pissed off about breitbart for?
because he didnt post an entire 43 minute video?

it would be nice to have a little consistency

anyone who can and does listen to Beck for 3 straight hours needs to be committed to a mental institution.

the only time i watch or listen is when dipshits like you claim stupid shit that wasnt ever said

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

it was cut out of a 3 hour radio program

isnt that what everyone was pissed off about breitbart for?
because he didnt post an entire 43 minute video?

it would be nice to have a little consistency

anyone who can and does listen to Beck for 3 straight hours needs to be committed to a mental institution.

the only time i watch or listen is when dipshits like you claim stupid shit that wasnt ever said

what a moron, comparing the brietbart video to this.

 

[Toome]

Sorry, folks, but I agree with what Beck said and how he said it. In any given population, there is a small percentage who seems to spoil it for everyone else. He's absolutely right. It's not all the 9/11 victims' families or Katrina survivors. It's only a small percentage of them who manage to get the limelight who make it seem as if we're not doing enough to help them. It seems that a small percentage of folks get to hijack the attention from everyone else.

Yeah, Katrina was a horrific natural disaster. However, it would seem that it only hit New Orleans. No one talks about the other cities or other states that were affected. Not saying that New Orleans ought to be ignored; just saying that this is an example of how a small percentage seems to have successfully hijacked the agenda.

If you're not Black, then you weren't a victim. That's the message that seems to be peddled here.

do you have a single example of such a 9/11 family member that has taken this limelight you speak of ???

As a matter of fact, I do. Several years ago, the TSA revised its prohibited items list to permit small scissors on board airplanes. The biggest opposition to that came from a group representing the 9/11 crew members and a few of the 9/11 WTC families. It was a relatively small group, but it enjoyed quite a bit of attention and appeared to have a huge voice. They interjected emotions into the debate using their status as 9/11 victim survivors.

The issue boiled down to this: the number one confiscated item at the time were grooming scissors, cuticle scissors and other similar items. TSA determined that they really do not pose a significant threat and decided to change them from prohibited to permitted items. The revised version basically allows many common scissors aboard; you'd have to have something along the lines of garden shears or hedge trimmers for it to be prohibited.

I think TSA made a good common sense decision. I think the 9/11 advocacy group was standing in the way of that good decision driven by emotion instead of common sense. I don't disagree with the group's right to speak out, but the reality is that it was only a very small number of victim family members who were opposed to this measure. The vast majority of them either did not care or perhaps thought that TSA ought to pull its head out of its ass and go after real weapons rather than scissors used to trim nose hairs.

 

[Truthmatters]

Glen Beck has said enough bat shit craz stuff to fill a book.

The right just ignores it when he acts like an idiot.

 

[California Girl]

I'm sure that someone will know the answer to this question..... How many times has Beck said he 'hates' the families of the 9/11 victims? I ask because I've been digging and can find only one.

 

[Truthmatters]

Once is enough

 

[JiggsCasey]

I guess the left must be getting really, really scared of Beck if they're still dragging up ONE comment - which he put into context - from YEARS ago.

What a fucking moron our Dainty is.

Look everyone... It's our very own Ann Coulter, who somehow "does not support Glen Beck," but back for more Glen Beck defense attorney litigation!!!!

Hooray for con speak!

 

[L.K.Eder]

I guess the left must be getting really, really scared of Beck if they're still dragging up ONE comment - which he put into context - from YEARS ago.

What a fucking moron our Dainty is.

Look everyone... It's our very own Ann Coulter, who somehow "does not support Glen Beck," but back for more Glen Beck defense attorney litigation!!!!

Hooray for con speak!

careful dude, she will call you "stupid".

i mean, how clever is that.

 

[JiggsCasey]

careful dude, she will call you "stupid".

i mean, how clever is that.

Oh, she already has... It's ineffectual. And considering she's the classic con, who tries to convince the forum that war is peace, up is down, blue is red, and lefties are the real racists, I wear her assertion as a badge of honor.

She has one set of ethics for RW "journalism", and another entirely for LW "journalism." ... When it really suits her, she pretends she can't find any examples of RW'ers mudding facts with opinion. Then, when examples are presented, she punts to "I can't verify that," or "what's the context?"

This is connish bloviation in the 21st century.

Not... fooling.... anyone.

 

[California Girl]

I guess the left must be getting really, really scared of Beck if they're still dragging up ONE comment - which he put into context - from YEARS ago.

What a fucking moron our Dainty is.

Look everyone... It's our very own Ann Coulter, who somehow "does not support Glen Beck," but back for more Glen Beck defense attorney litigation!!!!

Hooray for con speak!

^^^^^ Look everyone. A drooling fool who thinks that putting something in quotes makes it a legitimate quote.

I just like to see people who make claims about 'hate speech' etc prove it.... and one comment about 9/11 does not earn the label of 'hate' speech.

 

[L.K.Eder]

careful dude, she will call you "stupid".

i mean, how clever is that.

Oh, she already has... It's ineffectual. And considering she's the classic con, who tries to convince the forum that war is peace, up is down, blue is red, and lefties are the real racists, I wear her assertion as a badge of honor.

She has one set of ethics for RW "journalism", and another entirely for LW "journalism." ... When it really suits her, she pretends she can't find any examples of RW'ers mudding facts with opinion. Then, when examples are presented, she punts to "I can't verify that," or "what's the context?"

This is connish bloviation in the 21st century.

Not... fooling.... anyone.

you are supposed to send her PM's asking nicely for her sources. she is a writer, you know.

 

[California Girl]

careful dude, she will call you "stupid".

i mean, how clever is that.

Oh, she already has... It's ineffectual. And considering she's the classic con, who tries to convince the forum that war is peace, up is down, blue is red, and lefties are the real racists, I wear her assertion as a badge of honor.

She has one set of ethics for RW "journalism", and another entirely for LW "journalism." ... When it really suits her, she pretends she can't find any examples of RW'ers mudding facts with opinion. Then, when examples are presented, she punts to "I can't verify that," or "what's the context?"

This is connish bloviation in the 21st century.

Not... fooling.... anyone.

Give me examples - and that doesn't mean just putting " " marks, it means provide me with evidence and I'll consider it. You are not a valid source of a quote. Perhaps I would be less skeptical if I didn't keep seeing the same lies perpetuated by the same drooling fools time and time again.

I sometimes wonder how many people actually understand the term 'hate speech'.

 

[L.K.Eder]

careful dude, she will call you "stupid".

i mean, how clever is that.

Oh, she already has... It's ineffectual. And considering she's the classic con, who tries to convince the forum that war is peace, up is down, blue is red, and lefties are the real racists, I wear her assertion as a badge of honor.

She has one set of ethics for RW "journalism", and another entirely for LW "journalism." ... When it really suits her, she pretends she can't find any examples of RW'ers mudding facts with opinion. Then, when examples are presented, she punts to "I can't verify that," or "what's the context?"

This is connish bloviation in the 21st century.

Not... fooling.... anyone.

Give me examples - and that doesn't mean just putting " " marks, it means provide me with evidence and I'll consider it. You are not a valid source of a quote. Perhaps I would be less skeptical if I didn't keep seeing the same lies perpetuated by the same drooling fools time and time again.

I sometimes wonder how many people actually understand the term 'hate speech'.

if you'd finally figure out how to use your bib - it has a nice teddy bear on it - you'd probably get over your "drooling" fixation.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Give me examples - and that doesn't mean just putting " " marks, it means provide me with evidence and I'll consider it. You are not a valid source of a quote. Perhaps I would be less skeptical if I didn't keep seeing the same lies perpetuated by the same drooling fools time and time again.

I sometimes wonder how many people actually understand the term 'hate speech'.

Are you too keyboard challenged to cut and paste any of those statements into a Google search and "disprove" them for yourself? Anyhow, a perfect example of requested "context" sits waiting comfortably for you in the other thread. Hop on over and spin it as only you can.

But you "don't support Beck," of course.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

careful dude, she will call you "stupid".

i mean, how clever is that.

Oh, she already has... It's ineffectual. And considering she's the classic con, who tries to convince the forum that war is peace, up is down, blue is red, and lefties are the real racists, I wear her assertion as a badge of honor.

She has one set of ethics for RW "journalism", and another entirely for LW "journalism." ... When it really suits her, she pretends she can't find any examples of RW'ers mudding facts with opinion. Then, when examples are presented, she punts to "I can't verify that," or "what's the context?"

This is connish bloviation in the 21st century.

Not... fooling.... anyone.

you are supposed to send her PM's asking nicely for her sources. she is a writer, you know.

you really believe Cali-boil is any kind of a real writer? WTF does she write, notes to herself?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I Hate The 911 Victim's Families

[youtube]suc1ZpU2f2I[/youtube]

yeah, what is it this man represents, honor?

honor, conservative style.

 

[Charles_Main]

I Hate The 911 Victim's Families

[youtube]suc1ZpU2f2I[/youtube]

yeah, what is it this man represents, honor?

honor, conservative style.

No it's honor Beck style. he in no way represents all conservative. Definitely not me.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I Hate The 911 Victim's Families

[youtube]suc1ZpU2f2I[/youtube]

yeah, what is it this man represents, honor?

honor, conservative style.

No it's honor Beck style. he in no way represents all conservative. Definitely not me.

He has more followers than most conservatives on the national stage. The truth sucks.

sucks to be you, doesn't it?