BS: what about Glen Beck?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 10:43 AM

I think it must have been cool being a Roman soldier....building straight roads, wearing a mini skirt, interesting sandals, a cool lookin helmet, a metal eagle with SQRS (Sample Queer roman Sex....?), bathtime with Laurence Olivier and Tony Curtis.....

So they crucified a few wrong people. No ones perfect.

what about Glen Morangie, Glen Miller, Glen Campbell and Jeff Beck. take a more balanced view.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 09:55 AM

ENTERTAINER? The man is not in the least entertaining .

Pathetic? yes. Ignorant? yes. Psychotic? yes. Mendacious? yes. Dangerous? yes.

But not by any means entertaining.

And those who actually BELIEVE his spew are even more pathetic, ignorant and dangerous.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: saulgoldie
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 09:48 AM

But back to Beck...we have to remember that he was (and actually still is on radio and other places) an ENTERTAINER and not a legitimate disseminater of anything we would call "news." Unfortunately, too many people who pay attention to him do not recognize this distinction.

And from what I have seen of some of his rants, he is either approaching the bend or already well-around it. I think he needs serious pshycho-treatment. I actually find him a truly sad and pathetic figure.

Saul

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 09:42 AM

Because [Glenn Beck] is crazier than a bedbug!

He's also more ignorant than he is crazy, Jean. The extent of his education is a High School diploma, and he was an indifferent student, at best.

Real pundit material.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 09:31 AM

Ah, Kent-
a document that uses the Greek equivalent of the the word "Italian" to describe a cohort in Caesarea.

Uh, no, it uses the word to describe an INDIVIDUAL. And you know that this individual (and the Cohort) was not from or related to the Roman city of Italika in Spain founded two centuries before Christ HOW, exactly?

And let me repeat: The New Testament is hardly a reputable source (ACTS in particular has some serious problems) and was written a century AFTER Jesus, was it not?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 12:04 AM

LadyJean,

Here's a clip of Glenn Beck and Herman Cain http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/05/24/glenn-interviews-herman-cain/

Here's one of Alveda King at the rally Glenn Beck organized http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKoIXeBo4DY

Here's an interview with Allen West http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4if7dfE78pU

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: LadyJean
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:44 PM

I have, on occasion, watched Glenn Beck. The man is a loon. He has his own version of the truth, that has precious little in common with the original. I suspect he's a racist. (You almost never see anyone who isn't white on his show.) But he doesn't sound like an anti Semite. In fact he spent his last weeks on Faux News fearmongering to the Jewish community, and he's doing something I probably don't want to know about in Jerusalem this summer.
With luck the Israelis will be out after him with the nets, and a nice, comfy straight jacket. Because that man is crazier than a bedbug!

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:36 PM

Greg F.,

You said, yesterday at 8:37 a.m., "In Jesus' time, there WERE no 'Italians'." You said, at 10:20 this morning, "the OED cites the first use of the word "Italian" in the 16th Century - just a bit later than the crucifixion".

I quoted a document that is unquestionably many centuries older than the 16th century, a document that uses the Greek equivalent of the the word "Italian" to describe a cohort in Caesarea.

Instead of saying "oops", you ask me what word is used in the Aramaic. Why? Acts was originally written in Greek, not Aramaic.

Nevertheless, if you prefer the term "Roman", you may substitute it. I only used the term in making the point that, contrary to the implication of DrugCrazed on July 2, Glenn Beck does not blame the Jews exclusively for the crucifixion of Jesus but rather believes that EVERYONE had a hand in it, Jew and Gentile, priest and soldier, street mob and aristocrat, king and even disciple.      

As the links in my previous posts show, Glenn Beck is a friend of Israel and a foe of those who deny the Holocaust and of those who deny Israel's right to exist. If you can't spare the minutes to look at the previous links, you might wish to spend a few seconds reading this http://www.jta.org/news/article/2011/06/28/3088339/beck-to-address-knesset-committee

   
Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 11:07 PM

I really don't hate him. But I worry about people naive enough to defend him.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 09:24 PM

Cher Jack, your last post does not wash. Earlier today you posted, out of context, a statement designed to make us believe that Glenn Beck is a Holocaust Denier. Having been caught with your knickers down, you now switch to he's trivializing the Holocaust vis a vis (so-called man-made) Global Warming. That is a different argument for a different time. Meanwhile, you've lost all credibility with me in your condemnation of Mr. Beck in your posts.

BTW, I believe I'm the one who called you out on your hate of Beck. I'll own it and stand by it.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 09:10 PM

Yeah,

John you dismissed what I said as "hate" for Beck. but I do not hate him. I don't find him credible, I don't hate people for being mentally ill John. But that does not mean I have to listen to their ravings.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 09:02 PM

I'm sorry, John but the rhetorical device of trivializing the Holocaust to make a relatively minor point about Global Warming strike me as not useful to Israel or to any neutral observer. To me it is proof enough, piled upon many other examples that the man is so full of shit that it is a pure waste of time to listen to him.

Which brings me to Kents statement. No, I don't hate Beck. I don't hate people because they are mentally ill. But that doesn't mean I have to watch their rants.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 08:15 PM

...how words can be anacronistically conflated for effect...

I assume you use 'conflate' in its secondary meaning of 'confuse'?

That's theater, John. Or posibly demagoguery. Not history.

Hasta la vista, baby.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 07:19 PM

Greg F. Learn to frickin' read. For the third time, I know what I wrote was not accurate...it was meant as an example of how words can be anacronistically conflated for effect. So bother me no more on this!

I did not dismiss out of hand anything Jack said, nor did I dismiss him, at least, perhaps, in my last post. In fact, I followed-up on his suggestions and actually read and posted what Beck said. Which, I might add, neither you nor he seem willing to do.

Ironically, I probably ave spent more time listening to Glenn Beck today than the rest of 2011 'til now. I may listen to him more frequently in the future.

Sayonara

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 07:05 PM

I tried your suggestion Jack, and found it. I've taken the liberty of posting the entire paragraph which contains what you consider to be a 'damning' statement. Well, not so much! Beck is guilty of rambling almost to incoherence, but when you get through it you will find that he is saying that Global Warming (the subject of the piece) activists consider Warming denial the equivalent of Holocaust denial. Beck is being ironic in copping to denying Global Warming. I must say I thought better of you, Jack, but if this is the best you can do, Sayonara.

"Where were all the global warming advertisements, where was all of the global warming stuff during the campaign? Did you notice it just mysteriously disappeared during the campaign? Why is that, do you suppose? Maybe, oh, I don't know, because they know people don't buy into it? That they know it is – I'm sorry. Yes, it's me, the Holocaust denier. Holocaust, what Holocaust? Holocaust schmolocaust. Yes. We know that it's a bunch of bullcrap. How do we know it? Because we've engaged in something I like to call common sense. Just when you get really down and you say, "There's not a single person on Earth that gets it anymore," know that, yes, Americans know the global warming thing is a scam. "When we stop the assault on our Earth, when will we – "gosh darn it, I've been holding the temperature gauge upside – the paper, I had it upside down. I'm sorry. Oh, jeez. Wow, it's actually the coldest year of the decade. I thought it was the warmest there. It's weird how all of Al Gore's spending of several hundred million dollars on a mass campaign of convincing you that global warming is real has resulted in less than 20% of the American people who actually agree with him. Think of this. Think of the propaganda: Less than 20%."

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/18996/

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 06:59 PM

It's a shame you're so hate filled towards Mr. Beck...

Now who's "dismissing out of hand"?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 06:56 PM

As for the age of the term "Italian"... Notice that last word Italikas.

Unless the term refers to the ancient city of that name in SPAIN....

P.S. - the New testament is hardly a credible source. And what word is used in the Aramaic?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 06:51 PM

Forgive me, Jack, the ADL notwithstanding, I find nothing offensive to Jews in that four year old story...and I'm pretty well attuned to what constitutes Anti-Semitism.

It's a shame you're so hate filled towards Mr. Beck, that you won't spend a couple of your precious minutes to hear his words in context. I just watched what Kent linked to, and also to the first part (address below) of that show. Unfortunately, I could not find the final part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HNjWgSBd-w&feature=related

I agree with most of what Beck says in those segments (sans any Christian messages) more, even, than several Rabbis I've heard or known.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 06:38 PM

I have a degree in History...

Apparently not in U.S Colonial History, however, eh John?

...what are you insinuating?

Only what your febrile mind can conjure up, Kent. I merely made a comparison.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 04:50 PM

Why don't you just watch five minutes and learn, not what other people say about Beck, but what he actually says and does, how he is using his influence to defend Israel and to discredit Holocaust-deniers.

Kent

P.S.

I couldn't watch the thing all the way through. I don't like to cry.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 04:41 PM

Kent,

I am not going to watch 13 minutes of Glen Beck. I hope for your sake you wouldn't either.

Here is something more to the point.

To call Beck a defender of Israel is a mockery of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 04:38 PM

Jack the Sailor,

I hope you were joking. Watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7baI4t9_Qs

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 04:31 PM

John, did you know that google is fully indexed, that is you can search on any phrase on the Internet that the google search engine can see.

try googling "Yes, it's me, the Holocaust denier" but before you jump all over me, keep in mind that I said this in my previous post. "I'm no expert on Beck, but as with the Bible, I am pretty sure that you can find a quote of his to support any position. Ravings are like that. "

As for what Colbert, or Stewart say, no I don't give what they say all that much credibility at all. But if they show video of a person contradicting themselves, I give that some credence. Beck is a spewer, he talks so much there is tape of him saying just about anything.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 04:22 PM

Jack--can you narrow down where on Beck's website I might find that quote in context? I have no way of knowing, but it seems from the wording that he is being a bit ironic. But maybe he is being anti-Semitic. I did try Snopes, "Glenn Beck Holocaust Denial", but nothing comes up.

I promise to read, in full, and in context whatever you point me to. No snippets, no Glenn Beck 'says'...only full articles, speeches or commentaries of Mr. Beck, either from his website or other media.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 04:02 PM

Jack, I would question Beck (or anybody else on any subject--and I do often) the operative phrase being "would question". You and Greg F. and some others dismiss out of hand seemingly without questioning. That's my objection and complaint. I don't give a rat's tail that you disagree with Beck or me (which does not mean I agree with Beck, as I hear so little of him) or with any one else. My beef is that you don't seem to actually listen to those you disagree with, but that you listen to what a John Stewart or a Stephen Colbert, or a Rachel Maddow wants you to hear of Beck...or for that matter anyone they (and probably you) disagree with.

My MO to try to get to the original source of a quotation or a sound bite in context. Then I form my opinion as to the credibility of the quotation. I do this even for headlines, statements and bites from sources I mostly agree with. No person or statement is sacrosanct.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 03:52 PM

This is directly from Beck's website.

"I'm sorry. Yes, it's me, the Holocaust denier. Holocaust, what Holocaust? Holocaust schmolocaust. Yes. We know that it's a bunch of bullcrap. How do we know it? Because we've engaged in something I like to call common sense. "

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 03:49 PM

I'm no expert on Beck, but as with the Bible, I am pretty sure that you can find a quote of his to support any position. Ravings are like that.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 03:45 PM

Greg F.,

With your references to "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and to holocaust-denial, what are you insinuating? Glenn Beck is neither a holocaust-denier nor one who believes that "The Protocols" are genuine, and he is a vocal supporter of Israel, so why are you using those references?

As for the age of the term "Italian", consider Acts 10:1 *Aner de tis en kaisaria onomati koranlios ekatontarkas ek sneiras tas kaloumenas italikas (At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort). Notice that last word italikas.

Your "Sunshine",

Kent

*I can't get the Greek letters to show up properly. Here is the link http://classic.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2010:1&version=TR1550

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 03:31 PM

I won't deny that John. But that does not make Beck any more credible. As a student of history, would you not question a source that has been proved unreliable even once?

The Daily Show alone has dozens of examples of Beck spewing nonsense. Why should we take his words about Israel seriously?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 03:26 PM

You amuse easily, Jack.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 03:25 PM

"I would not waste my time debating a Holocaust denier & Beck's idiocies place him in the same category" However you did debate re Beck by entering this thread the first time. You just didn't do it well.

I need no lecture on what is History...I have a degree in History...but there there are shades and nuances, and history changes as more is learned. I acknowledged that the statement was not accurate as to the use of the term "American", and that WAS the part of the point of the example. As to "feelings" I used the word "feeling" (singular) not as a wishful, touchy-feely, kumbaya moment--an emotional feeling as it were, but as a conveying sense of time and place. But all of that seems to have fluttered over your head.

You do not need to refute other arguments, your choice, but you do not win arguments by not participating. 'Nuff said.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 02:47 PM

>>This is true whether it is Wikipedia, the Oxford History, or The Protocols or... Granted all sources are not equal, but none can be dismissed because you may not like them; <<

John, I find it very amusing that you say this on a thread where the words "Glen Beck" is in the title. While he was on HLN I dismissed Beck as a BullShitter or a looney, because even then he was saying outrageous things I knew not to be true.

I guess what I am talking about is credibility. Beck has no credibility with me. No matter what he says, I question it.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 02:45 PM

Sorry, "I would not waste my time debating a Holocaust denier & Beck's idiocies place him in the same category" should not have been in italics.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 02:42 PM

Actually, John, in the example you cite regarding the Seven Years' War, Major Geo. Washington led Virginia Militia (British Provincial troops) to be correct- and in pretty much a single battle at Fort Necessity; overall commander of the British force being General Braddock.

Using the word Americans is a shorthand,...

Yes it is- and its still incorrect.

and it gives one the feeling for where and who they were

and that "feeling" is misleading and largely incorrect.

REAL history is about fact, John, not "feelings" and wishful thinking.

As for other criticisms you might have made of Beck's arguments[/I> I would not waste my time debating a Holocaust denier & Beck's idiocies place him in the same category.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 02:14 PM

"I don't think you had to be from Rome to be considered a Roman"

This may be both true and untrue. One was generally considered part of the conquered province, then under control of Rome, but not Roman. However there were many paths to Roman citizenship, being born of Roman citizen parents, service to Rome, purchase of citizenship, etc. For instance the Judean Saul (later Paul, later St. Paul) held Roman citizenship, but was still a Judean. Jesus, a Judean in that Roman Province was neither a citizen of Rome nor Roman at all.

I have not studied general Roman History for nearly 50 years, so maybe someone else can expound on this more fully.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 01:53 PM

Greg, you may find a source questionable...you may disagree with facts or interpretation, but you must refute them, not just dismiss them out of hand. This is true whether it is Wikipedia, the Oxford History, or The Protocols or... Granted all sources are not equal, but none can be dismissed because you may not like them; you must show where they are wrong, or unreliable. In the case of the Protocols, that's pretty easy. Wikipedia is often correct, sometimes not. you have to determine which it is when. You haven't done that. Even the Oxford histories are not totally correct, and are revised and updated periodically. So until you refute, I stand by the quotation I posted.

It is interesting, that of all the criticisms you might have made of Beck's arguments, you chose the alleged misuse of the term 'Italian' to focus on, something not germain to his comments. For example, suppose in commenting about the French and Indian War I wrote the following: 'Colonel George Washington led American troops in battles against the French.' But wait. He did not lead Americans, he led Colonists (probably mostly from Virginia) against the French. Those Colonists would not be Americans until the Declaration of Independence a dozen years later, or perhaps until the ratification of the Constitution. Using the word Americans is a shorthand, perhaps imprecise, for the soldiers Washington commanded, and it gives one the feeling for where and who they were. But that's not the importance of the statement; what is important is that Washington commanded troops and fought the French. Incidentally he did so with troops who would later in history be called Americans.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 12:37 PM

Were not the members of the Roman Empire from all parts of it? I don't think you had to be from Rome to be considered a Roman. But even if that were case, blaming a current group for anything a small number of its members did 2000 years ago seems pretty bigoted.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 10:20 AM

"Italians" was my term not, as far as I know, Glenn Beck's term.

Exactly. He's who I was referring to, not you, Sunshine.

Unless I am much mistaken, a person from Italia would be an ...Italian.

You are much mistaken. As one example the OED cites the first use of the word "Italian" in the 16th Century - just a bit later than the crucifixion

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Jul 11 - 10:10 AM

If you don't like my source, it is incumbent on you to counter it with a different source.

Hardly. Particularly if yours is a questionable source.

But perhaps you believe all "sources" to be of equal value - The Protocols of the Elders of Zion being the equivalent to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 02:22 PM

Greg F.,

"Italians" was my term not, as far as I know, Glenn Beck's term.

The province in which Rome is located was called "Italia" in Roman times, as a quick look at any historical atlas will show. Unless I am much mistaken, a person from Italia would be an ...Italian.

I am sorry you think those of us who use the term are "lunatics".

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 11:07 AM

Sorry Mr. F--It don't work that way. You make an unsubstantiated assertion. I gave you a source that refutes your unsubstantiated assertion. If you don't like my source, it is incumbent on you to counter it with a different source.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 10:43 AM

IF you believe Blog-O-Pedia.

Do you have any real sources, John?

"Not Precise"? GREAT example of weasel-words. Translations: wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 10:33 AM

"In Jesus' time, there WERE no "Italians"."

From Wikipedia: "By the time of Emperor Augustus, the multi-ethnic territory of Italy was included in the Roman Italy (Italia) as the central unit of the Empire; Cisalpine Gaul, the Upper Po valley, for example, was appended in 42 BC."

So it seems that while Beck was not precise in his blaming Italians rather than Romans for the death of Christ (if he actually did so), he was not entirely wrong using that umbrella term.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jul 11 - 08:37 AM

He blames the Italians for the crucixion...

That's even more lunatic than blaming the Jews.

In Jesus' time, there WERE no "Italians".

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 09:52 PM

Glenn Beck is strong supporter of Israel, using his considerable fame and fortune to encourage the Jewish state http://www.glennbeck.com/israel/

As to him saying or not saying that the Jews killed Christ, I will eat my hat if anyone can find any evidence in his writings, or in his broadcasts, that he blames Jews EXCLUSIVELY for the crucixion.

He blames the Italians for the crucixion, and Herod, and the Sadduccess, and the Pharisees, and Pilate, and the high priest, and the Sanhedrin, and the military, and the mob, and the sinfulness of mankind, both Jew and Gentile.

The Jews did kill Christ. So did the Gentiles. That is what he says. That is also what all the available evidence says.

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 07:52 PM

There have been media personalities in the past such as the infamous Father Coughlin, Gerald L.K.Smith, Joseph McCarthy and even Walter Winchell that have been given to demagoguery. Beck is just the end of the line. These guys have always been around and eventually forgotten just like the aforementioned.

They ultimately have nothing of consequence to contribute to the US and therefore are "sound and fury signifying nothing", except that because of these little media tyrants, people have lost their jobs.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: kendall
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 07:45 PM

People who don't think for themselves will be told what to think by others.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: gnu
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 04:07 PM

Haven't read the thread. Just heard a snippet of him on a US talk show website (Jimmy Kimmel)... the guy is Looney Tunes. He said Obama is a racist (on that site and it was an audio clip).

WTF? How can this guy... oh, nevermind... idiots and idiot followers are many. Sad but true. What a total no-mind asshole.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 04:07 PM

Yeah, He said it. But he said it was "victory" for Christ to be killed. IMHO, he is a dangerous scatterbrained lunatic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QttAXEGz3g Your mileage may vary.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 03:57 PM

With the admission that I don't much listen to Beck--usually the last 10 or so minutes of his radio show, sometimes--I have never heard him speak ill of Jews or Israel. The few references I've heard were very positive to both. If he has referenced Jews as Christ killers elsewhere, it wouldn't jibe with what little I've heard.