BS: what about Glen Beck?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Aug 11 - 11:49 AM

So why does opposing the policies of the government of Israel automatically make one anti-semitic?

It doesn't. But a lot of people - out of ignorance, opportunism, or politival chicanery, confuse Anti-Zionism with Anti-Semitism.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 29 Aug 11 - 11:35 AM

There is a false equivalency given to those on the " Left" and "Right" which should be recognized as arbitrary and specious divisions defined by corporate media.

There have always been pundits who have dominated the media espousing reactionary hate speech ideas.

Few today remember, Walter Winchell, Father Coughlin, Gerald L.K. Smith, Francis Townsend, and William Dudley Palley. There is a tradition of hate speech punditry that has been with us for a long time.

There are truth tellers historically. Edward R. Murrow is one and Keith Olbermann follows in his tradition and is not the opposite of Beck, Hannity, Rush or O'Reilly but is his own voice.
This false equivalency is a propaganda mechanism used by certain members of the media to discredit any dissent from the current prevailing media cant.

Those who don't see the difference between these commentators are adding to the problem of dis and misinformation of news.

Critical thinking will dispel the idea of false equivalency and obliterate the so-called middle-of-the-road position, which in reality doesn't exist but has been manufactured by those in the media to suppress important information.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: michaelr
Date: 29 Aug 11 - 12:18 AM

To the thread topic: Glenn Beck is an idiot and it's a good he lost his pulpit. Fuck him to hell.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: michaelr
Date: 29 Aug 11 - 12:16 AM

So why does opposing the policies of the government of Israel automatically make one anti-semitic?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 28 Aug 11 - 08:28 PM

"Pro-Israel" and "Anti-Semitic"are not mutually exclusive terms.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Aug 11 - 09:09 AM

Whether or not he may or may not be an "ant-semite", he most certain;y is an ignorant, delusional, fanatical loud-mouthed asshole.

Isn't that enough?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Aug 11 - 11:18 PM

Is Israeli so desperate for friends?

You don't have to look far to find Glenn Beck saying outrageously stupid and contradictory things. He is not known for clear thinking or consistency. He makes his living telling willfully ignorant people the things they want to hear.

Regardless of what you two believe, or where you donate, I shall continue to consider complaints of Anti-semitism by the ADL as authoritative. I also heard what Beck said about Soros. I thought that it was very disrespectful of Mr Soros' heritage.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 27 Aug 11 - 06:21 PM

Jack the Sailor,

Are these the words of an anti-semite?   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dI--uBkOS9o&feature=related

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 13 Jul 11 - 11:48 AM

Jack, as one who is relatively sensitive to that evil phenomenon, I don't find what Glenn Beck said or wrote about George Soros to be anti-Semitic, but, rather, anti-George Soros. I don't know whether or not Soros did what Beck accused him of, but haven't seen any news of a suit for libel or slander by Soros against Beck...so maybe yes.

While the ADL may not like to own to it, some Jews did collaborate with Nazis during the Holocaust of WWII. Some did if for venal motives; some thinking they were helping the many by sacrificing fewer Jews. I don't know which fits Soros, assuming he was a collaborator.

Our family has diminished it's support of the ADL in the last few years, and as long as the current leadership heads the organization, we will send those donations elsewhere. Foxman does not speak for all Jews, only himself and the ADL.

Jack, there may be many reasons to dislike or criticize Beck's politics for Liberal/Progressives like yourself--or even for some centrist Conservatives--but anti-Semitism is not one of those reasons. Beck has been in Israel at least twice this year, speaking to the Knesset (legislature) on one occasion. Call me crazy, but I don't think the Knesset generally allows anti-Semites to address it. He is planning a rally in support of Israel, in Israel, in August.

I think it time you got off this 'Beck as an anti-Semite' horse, Jack.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Jul 11 - 07:11 AM

Not the Ropmans, Kent- the ITALIANS.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 13 Jul 11 - 01:06 AM

Kent,

If a complaint by the
ADL is not evidence of anti-semitism in your mind, what would it take?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 12 Jul 11 - 10:41 PM

I've been busy so didn't see Donuel's comments and Greg F.'s question until today.

Donuel, you accuse a man of anti-Semitism with no evidence, claiming that the evidence is well-hidden. Anyone can play that game. I could accuse you of hating Turks. There is no evidence that you hate Turks, but maybe you are just hiding the evidence. Or maybe not.

The absence of smoke does not necessarily mean that the fire is well-hidden.


Greg F., Tacitus provides a nice answer to your question about what the Italians were doing in Judea. This is from HISTORIES, Book V, sections 9 and 10, (Loeb Classical Library, 1931)http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Tacitus/Histories/5A*.html#9

The first Roman to subdue the Jews and set foot in their temple by right of conquest was Gnaeus Pompey;29 thereafter it was a matter of common knowledge that there were no representations of the gods within, but that the place was empty and the secret shrine contained nothing. The walls of Jerusalem were razed, but the temple remained standing. Later, in the time of our civil wars, when these eastern provinces had fallen into the hands of Mark Antony, the Parthian prince, Pacorus, seized Judea, but he was slain by Publius Ventidius, and the Parthians were thrown back across the Euphrates:30 the Jews were subdued by Gaius Sosius.31 Antony gave the throne to Herod, and Augustus, after his victory, increased his power. After Herod's death, a certain Simon32 assumed the name of king without waiting for Caesar's decision. He, however, was put to death by Quintilius Varus, governor of Syria; the Jews were repressed; and the kingdom was divided into three parts and given to Herod's sons.33 Under Tiberius all was quiet. Then, when Caligula ordered the Jews to set up his statue in their temple, they chose rather to resort to arms, but the emperor's death put an end to their uprising. The princes now being dead or reduced to insignificance, Claudius made Judea a province and entrusted it to Roman knights or to freedmen; one of the latter, Antonius Felix, practised every kind of cruelty and p193lust, wielding the power of king with all the instincts of a slave;34 he had married Drusilla, the grand-daughter of Cleopatra and Antony, and so was Antony's grandson-in‑law, while Claudius was Antony's grandson.

10 Still the Jews' patience lasted until Gessius Florus became procurator:35 in his time war began. When Cestius Gallus, governor of Syria, tried to stop it, he suffered varied fortunes and met defeat more often than he gained victory. On his death, whether in the course of nature or from vexation, Nero sent out Vespasian, who, aided by his good fortune and reputation as well as by his excellent subordinates, within two summers occupied with his victorious army the whole of the level country and all the cities except Jerusalem. The next year was taken up with civil war, and thus was passed in inactivity so far as the Jews were concerned. When peace had been secured throughout Italy, foreign troubles began again; and the fact that the Jews alone had failed to surrender increased our resentment; at the same time, having regard to all the possibilities and hazards of a new reign, it seemed expedient for Titus to remain with the army.

Kent

P.S. Some of you may be interested in Luke's references to some of those mentioned by Tacitus. There are many references to Herod and his sons (Luke 1:5, 3:1, 3:19, 23:7-11 Acts 12:1-23 and others, as well as references to Augustus (Luke 2:1), Tiberius (Luke 3:1), Claudius (Acts 11:28, 18:2), Felix (Acts 23:24-24:27), and Drusilla (Acts 24:24).

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 09:14 PM

Sunset John, thank you for the correct edit regarding Father Coughlin of the 1930's.

Glen has called himself a TV evangelist on more than one occaision and would very much like to have the immunity that "Speaking for God" gives these self proclaimed men of God.

Glen Beck may now take his place along side other shock jocks and shills who have had a brief TV exposure, people like Michael Savage, Mark Levine, Rush Limbaugh, laura Ingram and Joseph McCarthy (in news reels)

I have no proof that Beck is a anti semite. I suspect the only thing that holds him back from a personal full disclosure is his attempt to accuse Obama of being an anti semite regarding his policy towards Isreal which is pointedly against the far right wing of the Isreali Government, in which Netanyahu is a member.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 08:56 PM

Well, SOMEBODY needs to tell me why the Italians were in Judea & what they had against Jesus.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 07:03 PM

As I recall from Kent's earlier post the use of the word 'Italian' was his, not Becks...so I guess you gotta ask Kent.

My work is done here.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 06:14 PM

OK, then, so what were all these "Italians" that were responsible for the crucixion of Christ according to Beck doing in Judea?

They lost?

Subject: RE: BS: Italian Problem
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 09 Jul 11 - 05:42 PM

I think we can solve the Italian problem...somewhat.

In researching Roman Legions, I came across the website livius.org. which incorporates a short history of the various armies. There were three Italic Legions, ironically named I, II & III respectively.

Italic II and Italic III were mid-late second century CE legions and apparently never saw action in Palestina (formerly Judea). Italic I was founded by Nero c.66/67CE, about thirty years after the crucifixion, so it could not have seen action in Judea at the time of Christ. However, parts of the Legion may have fought in the Bar Kochva Revolt in Judea in the 130s CE.

So if Luke wrote Acts, it is unlikely that he would have used the term Italian Legion/Cohort/ Regiment in referring to a specific army. It didn't exist for him. This leaves at least three possibilities. Acts was indeed written by Luke and later edited incorrectly. Or Acts was written later than Luke, and probably later than the Bar Kochva Revolt, by an author who could have been aware of Italic I, and anachronistically puts Cornelius in that Legion at the time of Christ. Or the Latin source quoted at Livius is wrong, in which case we're back where we started.

All of that said, this does not negate the contemporaneous use of an equivalent term Italia/Italic/Italian referring to people and geography, pre-Crucifixion, in the area now known as Italy at the least, or within any part of the Roman Empire. I'm satisfied it was so used, until someone comes up with evidence to the contrary.

Note — CE=AD

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 11:38 PM

I think Donuel meant Father Coughlin, a Catholic priest who promoted isolationism, was anti-New Deal, anti-Communist and anti-Semitic. He had a populist radio program through the 1930s until demoted by the Church in 1942. Actually, except for the anti-Semitism (I'm not sure about isolationism), Glenn Beck may share some of Coughlin's ideas in a context for today.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:48 PM

Sigh...is anyone able and willing to fix the link or the Greek letter display? The letters were just slightly distorted in the message preview.

Kent

P.S.

Donuel, to what were you referring when when you wrote of Glenn Beck "I don't think he ever really got his church thing established in any organized way". His "church thing" is the LDS church. It's about as organized as they come.

And why do you attribute the founding of Regent University to Jerry Falwell? Jerry Falwell didn't establish Regent.

And when you write "HE is a modern day Father Flanagan", what do you mean? Father Flanagan is known for establishing a orphanage in Nebraska in 1917, which was a pretty cool thing to do, but I'm not seeing the connection with Glenn Beck.

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:34 PM

Is this pertinent?

"Etruscan civilization, highest civilization in Italy before the rise of Rome. The core of the territory of the Etruscans, known as Etruria to the Latins, was northwest of the Tiber River, now in modern Tuscany and part of Umbria. The Latins called the people Etrusci or Tusci, and the Greeks called them Tyrrhenoi [whence Tyrrhenian Sea]; they called themselves Rasenna

Read more: Etruscan civilization — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0817803.html#ixzz1RNmwrcbB"


Etruscan or Italian?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:28 PM

Still didn't work. Click on the 3rd word of the 9th line in the link that does work, then click again on "Middle Liddell". Here is the "cut and paste" since I can't get the link to work. The "cut and paste" does NOT correctly preserve the Greek letters. The first letter, the thing that looks like a capital gamma, is actually a capital iota with a smooth breathing mark.

Ἰôáëéþôçòfrom Ἰôáëßá 1

[select] an Italiote, i. e. a Greek inhabitant of Italy, Thuc.:—fem. Ἰôáëéῶôéò, éäïò, adj. Italian, id=Thuc.

1 *)italiw/ths, ou,

Kent

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:19 PM

2nd try with translation http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=*%28ellhnikw%3Dn&la=greek&prior=a)koh=|&d=Perseus:text:1999.01.0199:book=7:chapter=

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:17 PM

Greg F.,

Thucydides (died around 400 B.C.), PELOPONNESIAN WAR, Book 7, chapter 87, in this link, the ninth line, the third word http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:abo:tlg,0003,001:7:87

Translation of the word http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=*%29italiwtw%3Dn&la=greek&prior=h)\&d=Perseus:text:1999.01.0199:book=7:chapter=87&i

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Donuel
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:50 PM

Racism, bigotry and hate mogering aside,
deep down Glen is just an effeminate mesoginist with a man crush on the Koch Bros. or any multi billionaire willing to pay for his shilling talents.

His shtick is as old as the hills. Maybe the only thing new is the way he usurps the good works of MLK and other great humanitarians, while simultaneously setting up a "university" system like Jerry Flawell's Regent college. I don't think he ever really got his church thing established in any organized way.

HE is a modern day Father Flanagan with an understanding of accusing any populace movemwnt with the faults and crimes of the Corporate Republic class.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:30 PM

If you were not implying that Beck hates Jews, what exactly were you implying?

Once again, Kent, I wasn't "IMPLYING" anything.

I was saying that both Holocaust deniers and Beck are idiots of the same stripe not worth wasting time on & that attempting to "debate" with either only serves to legitimize their lunatic bullshit.

Thanks for the BBC bit, but their use the word "Italy" isn't at issue.
What IS at issue, is did they use the word "Italians".

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:23 PM

John, far be it from me to tell anyone what sources they can use. However, if one uses crap sources, one shouldn't be surprised if one is called on it.

But be that as it may & to get back to the point at issue: your excerpt still doesn't indicate or even suggest that any group of people were referred to at the time in question as "Italians".

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:42 PM

Hmmm. I didn't know that in argumentation you could tell the other fellow what sources he's allowed to argue from. Be that as it may, Greg, I would think if mine was ohhh so bad, you easily could have demolished it with facts, rather than snide innuendo and dismissal. Live and learn.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 07:05 PM

Greg F.,

I apologize for not making it clear that, in the post-script to my post of 8:32 p.m. yesterday, I was writing to you, not writing about you.

I can see how you might have taken it the other way.

However, although I was writing to you (NOT about you), you did bring up THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION (July 4th, 10:10 a.m.) and you did say "I would not waste my time debating a Holocaust denier & Beck's idiocies place him in the same category" on July 4th, 2:45 p.m. If you were not implying that Beck hates Jews, what exactly were you implying?

Kent

P.S.

Here is an etymlogy of the word "Italia" which indicates that both Thucycdides and Aristotle used the word "Italy". The source is the BBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A72812108

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 06:37 PM

>>>"Obama, has a deep seated hatred of white people"

Whom are you quoting, Jack? The guy who periodically passes out anti-Obama literature in front of my post office? Your next door neighbor? Did whomever say this alleged quote provide instances that would support that assertion? Did you just make it up?

Jack, you've already be caught quoting out of context at this thread. You've posted nothing (a@3:43A) that deserves an answer or rehabilitates your credibility. <<<

Why don't you just answer the question about whether it is racist or not?

You didn't "catch" me. I immediately told you how to find the context. Stop flattering your self and use your brain.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:20 PM

...showing that that term Italian was extant in Augustan times...

No, John, you posted a screed from Blog-O-Pedia (a source not accepted by most high-school teachers, by the way)- that "...the multi-ethnic territory of Italy was included in the Roman Italy (Italia)..."

Note "multi-ethnic".

Nowhere does your excerpt, be it fact or fiction, indicate or even suggest that any group of peoples were referred to at that time as "Italians".

But that is besides the point. I've been discussing and enquiring about about Kent's posting, not yours.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:49 PM

A few days ago I posted showing that that term Italian was extant in Augustan times (pre-Crucifixion). You did not like my source, but you have not offered a counter-source. So as you have not rebutted my conclusion that 'Italian' may have been a suitable term (in first century Judea and even in the Gospels) it stands. It is not up to me to give you another source until you've proved your assertion, or at least disproved source.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Wesley S
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:39 PM

Wow - 100 posts about Glen Beck. Any chance we're giving him more attention than he deserves?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:06 PM

correction ... a rat's ass about him

100 !

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 02:05 PM

"what about Glen Beck"

personally I don't give a rat's about him.

On saying that I wouldn't get my drawers in a knot about him or what his says .... anyway, his ratings are falling.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 01:27 PM

"Whom are you quoting, Jack?"

snip----

On Fox & Friends today (July 28, 2009), Glenn Beck called Obama "a racist" during a discussion of how the president handled the arrest of Henry Louis Gates.

"This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy, over and over and over again, who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture," Beck said. "I don't know what it is."

Following up on Beck's ridiculous claim, Fox's Brian Kilmeade pointed out that Obama is surrounded by white advisers like David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanuel.

"I'm not saying he doesn't like white people," Beck said. "I'm saying he has a problem. He has a -- this guy is, I believe, a racist."

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:14 PM

Can't have it both ways, John.

It was Kent who made the claim of use at the time of the Crucifixion in an attempt to refute a posting of mine.

According to your own "rules" (the same rules you keep beating me over the head with) its HIS job to substantiate his claim.

Which he, as yet, has not done.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 12:00 PM

One good pedant deserves another Greg.

"AT THE TIME OF THE CRUCUFIXION" Your job. Earn your degree.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 11:57 AM

"Obama, has a deep seated hatred of white people"

Whom are you quoting, Jack? The guy who periodically passes out anti-Obama literature in front of my post office? Your next door neighbor? Did whomever say this alleged quote provide instances that would support that assertion? Did you just make it up?

Jack, you've already be caught quoting out of context at this thread. You've posted nothing (a@3:43A) that deserves an answer or rehabilitates your credibility.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 11:55 AM

without scrolling through all his or your posts

Perhaps you should, to refresh your memory.

but it seems to be the accepted word today

Yes, John, but we're not talking about today. We're talking about the word' existence, or non-existance AT THE TIME OF THE CRUCUFIXION. Kent has still not provided any credible evidence.

And thanks for the pedantry. I stand corrected in my mis-use of "penultimate", typed in haste. But you DID figure out what I meant, despite all that.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 11:33 AM

You're right Greg, I misspelled your name, for which now everything I've written is invalidated. However, in both Greg and Gregg, there is one--and only one--penultimate G. Only the position is changed. G(penultimate)reG(ultimate)/G(antepenultimate)G(penultimate)reG(ultimate). Enough jocularity.

As I recall (without scrolling through all his or your posts), Kent offered Greek and English versions the word Italia/Italian in a context. The Greek may be correct...it may not be, but it seems to be the accepted word today. Was it written long after Christ...yes. Are there earlier versions? Perhaps. Are those versions which would prove that Italian is an incorrect usage/translation for that period extant? I don't know, but I'm guessing not. So if you deny the validity of the accepted sources, translations and usage, it is YOU who have to produce credible alternatives to refute Kent. That endeavor might merit a PhD. Good luck.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 10:49 AM

That's one penultimate "G", John. Please pay attention.

But thanks for the compliment & your support of my efforts. Appreciated!

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:44 AM

Keep dancing Gregg, you're doing fine.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 09:26 AM

He has provided current instances of generally accepted wording.

No, John.

In the first place we're not talking about "current instances" but evidences of the use of the word "Italians" - as a descriptor for the inhabitants of the country of Italy- in use 2000 years ago.

He claims that there are such. He has provided no actual evidence, other than a book of the the New Testament, written a century after Jesus' time, and copied/translates/edited/revised & etc some hundreds-if not thousands- of times since. I'm simply requesting the closest thing available to primary source material.

Its HIS claim that the term "Italian" is contemporary with the life of Jesus and so far he has provided nothing credible to substantiate the claim.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 05:56 AM

Is Kent the one who used to advertise Kent cigarettes in Readers Digest? The style is similar.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Jul 11 - 03:43 AM

"Obama, has a deep seated hatred of white people"

Kent, John, is that racist or not?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 11:12 PM

Greg, you just don't get it. "Now, please tell me the date of the oldest extant manuscript in Greek of Acts:10 that exists, so we can see at what date errors of translation may have originated & simply been perpetuated."

That's your job if you want to refute Kent. He has provided current instances of generally accepted wording. Altho' he did not name any specifically, I found the term in the KJV, Douay (Catholic), NIV, and NAB, so I know you can do even better. If you want epigraphic, or historical research, that's on you.

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

I just checked twenty-five different translation of Acts 10:1.

Twenty-five, huh? Good Job, Sunshine.

Now, please tell me the date of the oldest extant manuscript in Greek of Acts:10 that exists, so we can see at what date errors of translation may have originated & simply been perpetuated.


people will state or imply that a man hates Jews, or that he is a racist, and then, when it becomes apparent that the charges are slanderous, don't even acknowledge their error?

If you are asserting that I said either of those things your either an idiot or a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 09:03 PM

It hardly matters if he is racist. The lunacy overshadows that.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Kent Davis
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 08:32 PM

Mr. F., Sir,

I just checked twenty-five different translation of Acts 10:1. Each translation disagrees with your assertion that the passage "uses the word to describe an INDIVIDUAL". All twenty-five indicate that it describes the cohort. All twenty-five translate the word as "Italian" or a variant such as "of Italy".

If indeed your translation corrects the errors of four centuries of Koine Greek scholarship, it seems surprising that you thought the passage was originally written in Aramaic.

Kent

P.S. Isn't it odd how people will state or imply that a man hates Jews, or that he is a racist, and then, when it becomes apparent that the charges are slanderous, don't even acknowledge their error?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jul 11 - 01:09 PM

Glen Morangie! NOW you're talkin' !

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.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: DrugCrazed
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 10:25 AM

Glenn Beck, the only man in the world who would take it upon himself to tell his viewers that Jews killed Jesus.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 01:00 AM

Wouldn't he just say it was Spiderman?

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: LadyJean
Date: 02 Jul 11 - 12:14 AM

Glenn Beck, his current wife and 2 bodyguards went to see a Hitchcock movie in a park. The young woman sitting behind them was having a glass of wine, and spilled some. She let the Beck's know that she'd spilled some wine, and that it was getting on their blanket and Mrs. Beck's pants. Then she texted something called #makemefamous, to tell them the story.
Meanwhile, Mr. Beck announced that he had been attacked by an angry mob, that poured wine all over his wife.
Somebody should drop a net over that man!

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 09:17 PM

Sawzaw my tribe is humanity. I don't fight people. I fight BullShit. In terms of BS, KO would not make the top 10 on Fox. But his self righteous lecturing can be hard to take. But I do not fight self righteousness.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 08:48 PM

Yo, LH...

Must be nice to be "classless and free"...

They came for the communists but I was not a communist
They came for the trade unionists but I was not a trade unionist
They came for the Jews but I was not a Jew
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me...

(Martin Niemoller)

Jack is right (correct), sometimes you have to take a stand other than the "classless and free" one that means absolutely nothing about who you are...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Sawzaw
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 08:25 PM

What was that about a mashed up bag of meat with lipstick?

Was that something on the menu or a description of someone from the other tribe?

Who was that monkey posing as a newsman?

I guess I am not going to be invited into Jack's tribe.

I can think of a good example of tribalism when Bush said "you are either with us or against us on terrorism"

At the time I thought it was good that he was getting people focused on terror.

But then later I realized it was a logical fallacy known as the false dichotomy. It proposes that you have only two choices when there are more than two. It is an attempt to divide people.

You can be against terrorism and willing to take different degrees of action from launching a nuke to feebly sending diplomats to work things out.

I think we saw a good bit of that "we have to be fully against everyting the other side says or does no matter if it is wrong or right" Tribal thinking here.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 12:39 AM

Little Hawk, Maybe you should stick to advocating what you do believe rather than whining about how and why others disagree. Its easy for you to be misunderstood when you criticize without taking a stand.

Sawzaw. You don't watch Olbermann. I know this because he does not do any of the things you accuse him of.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Jul 11 - 12:13 AM

You're absolutely right, Sawzaw, that people need to think independently instead of just thinking along tribal lines. They shouldn't support someone in an kneejerk fashion just because he or she is:

a) a Democract
b) a Republican
c) a "conservative"
d) a "liberal"
e) white
f) black
g) Native American
h) female
i) male
j) gay
k) hetero
l) Christian
m) non-Christian

etc....

But so VERY often...they do! And when I take them to task for it, the following hilarious thing happens: they either accuse me of "colorless neutrality"...or they make the mistake of thinking that I am "on tbe other side" of the tribal divide...and I am not.

Ain't that amazing? I am anything BUT neutral, that's for sure...but I do not sing in tbe tribal chorus, because to do so is not to think at all...it is to dance automatically to a pre-written tribal script.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Sawzaw
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 11:15 PM

Ooops. The other horse's ass on Current TV is Olbermann.

Ya know Amos, I think it is better if people find things to agree on rather than finding things to disagree on and argue about.

Some people find themselves defending bullshit that they know is wrong in an attempt to reinforce what they believe to be right.

Nobody is right all the time and nobody is wrong all the time. People should be free to decide on whether an individual thing that someone, a politician for example, said or did is right or wrong rather than blindly having to support everything that person says or does.

You have to be able to separate the good from them bad. Right from wrong or you are just a drone controlled by group think, Tribal politics.

However people like Beck, Mr Ed, Olberman, Limbaugh etc instill this tribal thinking and divide people into two camps. Then they proceed to make gobs of money by pitting people against each other.

Are we a bunch of sheep? Aren't we capable of independent thought and judging things for ourselves? I hope so.

When you hear these people telling you "now when they say this, what they really mean is that". Why do we need them to interpret things for us? Do they think we are too dumb to figure it out on our own?

I am not about to taken for granted as part of a herd to be stampeded into going the same direction as the rest of the heard.

Scare tactics do not convince me of anything. They merely alert me that the person using scare tactics is disingenuous.

Scare tactics is the tool of terrorists to over ride the common sense people were born with. They are used to control people, affect their judgment and cause them to do things they would not do otherwise.

Maybe a few things Beck says are right but mostly they are wrong and the percentage is getting higher as he tries to appeal to a certain audience and get them locked in so he can make even more money.

I am not falling for it.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 10:37 PM

I am happy to report that I agree completely with Sawzall, for once!


A

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Sawzaw
Date: 30 Jun 11 - 10:32 PM

Well Well Well. Glen Beck has Queeet [a west va term] Fox News.

Good riddance. Maybe he will show up on Current co hosting a show with Mr ED the other horse's ass that got so extreme he had to queet too.

postchronicle.com

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 01:56 PM

Having him stop the violent rhetoric, for now, is a start.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 01:49 PM

Beck on his recent Friday show reversed his "grab your gun and take aim" rhetoric was replaced with "Be non violent like Gandhi" rhetoric.

Now he can show this Gandhi segment in response to a future sad and violent tragedy that will have his hate speak fingerprints all over it.

Too little too late.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Sawzaw
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 01:41 PM

Glen Beck was funny at one time on the radio but has transformed himself an idiotic clown trying to appeal to a certain fringe for his personal monetary gain.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: olddude
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 01:27 PM

Simple one line answers to complex problems. Blame the other guy mentality   Offers no solutions, only complains about anyone who wants to make something better or even try to ...   typical of the far right today ...

yet, the less thinking people, some very good people ... get swayed by his speeches ... sad ... very sad ....

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 12:16 PM

Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity and Palin have the function of reinforcing the prejudices and false beliefs of those who want to cling to their false beliefs and still satisfy the urges of these people who were taught as children to base their positions on information and facts.

Since any objective search for truth quickly dispels many of theirs positions, such as, for example, that it is better for a private sector, profit motivated, bureaucrat to decide the fate of their health care rather than a government bureaucrat who has much less motive to let them die, the above mentioned media personalities provide alternate "facts" which suit their beliefs.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 12:11 PM

I've got one of them in my family (one that I know of, anyway). His viewers and supporters are gullible, easily manipulated, easily brainwashed people who are incapable of critical thought.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Neil D
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 12:05 PM

katlaughing, that Republican top dog you mentioned is David Frum. I don't know that he's a top dog but he was a Bush speechwriter. I had previously cut and pasted the entire blog on the Republican Waterloo thread.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Alice
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 11:47 AM

Jon Stewart did an excellent satire of Glenn Beck on the Comedy Network, complete with the conspiracy diagrams, chalkboard and visual aids. Very funny.

Jon Stewart parody of Glenn Beck VIDEO

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 10:04 AM

the only positive thing about the Tea Party is that it will most likely fragment the Republican vote in the next election

Not a chance- complete wishful thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: MARINER
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 09:27 AM

That is frightening all right. Can you imagine President Palin and Vice President Beck?. They would knock you back into the stone age. The Dirty Digger is well known in this part of the world too.From my point of view the only positive thing about the Tea Party is that it will most likely fragment the Republican vote in the next election and help Obama carry on with his reforms.It has always puzzled me that America is the only country in the developed world that claims it can't afford to look after their old ,sick and vulnerable.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Maryrrf
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 09:21 AM

I have unwillingly through circumstances been subjected to Glen Beck's television show. Unfortunately this dangerous buffoon has many supporters and a large audience who believe what he says and tune in regularly to his hate filled right wing propaganda program. They aren't the smartest people around but there are quite a number of them and he fires them up. I think it is frightening that such a person has enough followers to warrant having his own television program. It scares me and I don't like what it indicates about our society.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 09:13 AM

Well, yeah, M.... That's what FOX/FIX is all about... It is owned by Rupert Murdock who is as far right as far right can get without coming full circle bgack to the left (lol)... He also owns the Wall Street Journal and is trying to buy the supposed liberal New York Times...

But the reality is that FOX has such a hypnotic effect on it's full-timers that they believe everything that FOX reports and loves all of FOX's entertainers, Beck being one... But the scarey part if that FOX is out there to capture a certain number of the people that make up their market and then selll ads to companies based on that market share and in doing what they do, which BTW they do well, they have created an entire political party, the Tea Party, which is now runing the Republican Party ragged... This is a recipe for disastare... It used to be that the Rush Limbaughs and Glen Becks were just political entertainers... Now they are controlling one of the two major politcal parties???

I know, go figure???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: MARINER
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 08:45 AM

I feel I should add though, that I find Fox "News" a most odd channel. It is full of opinion and little real news and appears to be populated by people that are unable to read their teleprompters properly. In particular one of the many blonde presenters called Megyn Kelly, who stumbles over her words regularly. Mind you, seeing as she can't spell her name properly, it’s normally spelt "Megan”, I shouldn't be surprised.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: MARINER
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 08:28 AM

I don't watch him on any kind of regular basis,but I had heard so much about his shenanigans on camera that curiosity got the better of me and I tuned in to see what it was all about.Maybe that's the reason he acts so crazily, to attract curious viewers.I will have to stop these occasional visits though, lest I put my foot through the tv in exasperation.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 08:23 AM

Yeah, M, I got a good friend with that stuff... She is a mess... So then, why do you watch him??? I'm real curious???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: MARINER
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 08:07 AM

I think Betty Ford might be of more help to Beck and perhaps Hannitty. Although I believe Beck has been down that road before and it doesn't seem to have worked for him. And I don't find Beck entertaining. I don't even find him Entertaining. I just think he's a man with problems, maybe some kind of Tourets Syndrome. Then again you seem to know more about that kind of thing than I.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 07:50 AM

Two words, MARINER: Betty Ford...

Yup, it might not be too late but then again, seeing as I don't kow you, maybe Betty Ford won't help becuase you may very well be one of those lower IQers you said would find Beck intertaining... I donno???

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: MARINER
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 07:21 AM

God yes, I had forgotten the vile Hannity. He’s a bit like the proverbial barber's cat, full of wind and piss. Even Jesse Ventura put him back in his box. I have never seen Limbaugh, but some of his pronouncements that I have heard would not be tolerated in this part of the world. What worries me is that there seems to be an audience in America for the likes of them. I have an email friend from New Jersey who considers them to be Gods and the saviours of America.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 07:00 AM

And, older folks, even. I have no idea why. Just read an op/ed piece which quoted a top dog GOP member, sorry can't remember who, deploring the GOP being taken over and led by such as Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh.

Subject: RE: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: Amos
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 05:28 AM

Buffonery is his most important product, quite right. Children from six to sixty get mesmerized by him.


A

Subject: BS: what about Glen Beck?
From: MARINER
Date: 27 Mar 10 - 04:46 AM

Lately I've been forcing myself to watch The Glen Beck programme on Fox. It’s not easy; the man appears to be a total, albeit a dangerous, buffoon. What I've been wondering is, just who is his target audience? Given his constant use of visual aids, blackboards etc I am coming to the conclusion that it is either elementary school children or mentally challenged adults. Surely otherwise the use of such "aids" are superfluous and an insult to the average adult intelligence. Any sign of intelligent analysis of any of his chosen subjects seems to be absent from his shows. It appears to be replaced by screaming, jumping about and "gurning" (making faces to you non Brits) at the cameras. Could I be correct in my assumption that his show is not really for adults?