Pardon me for my ignorance, but doesn’t it seem odd that Glenn Beck criticized Time Magazine for omitting the “Tea Party Movement” from 2009’s a Year in Pictures, but avoids debate on the 9/11 truth movement ?
Wouldn’t and shouldn’t he support seeking answers to the single largest terror incident in U.S. history?
Am I missing something here?
If you are a watcher of the Glenn Beck program, perhaps it is time to take his rhetoric with a grain of salt. At least, that’s the position I have decided I’d better take.
I say this because I have had time to digest Beck’s overall position and message, and certain things have become glaringly apparent. I really would love to believe Beck is sincere and genuine, but like the old saying “once bitten, twice shy”, we need to be careful.
Beck has time and again told his audience that he has read many books on the nation’s history, and on the Progressive Movement, etc. In short, he has been very focussed on discussing issues of how bad the political road has been in the United States. He has also been very critical of both parties. He even sneaked in a comment on “false flag terror” in one of his broadcasts that took me by surprise.
Could Beck be trying to tell us something from amongst the cover of a large network I asked myself? The jury remained “out” , as I would prefer not to judge, but to formulate opinion on observable facts moving forward. After all, it would appear Beck has done the “truth movement” and the “grassroots” movement some good since his change of heart that began late last year.
But there is something that’s just not right, and I knew given enough time we could figure out whether the argument Beck is making is “real” or not.
Here are the facts…
Beck has read, by his own admission plenty of books and other literature on the history of the progressive movement in the world, and particularly the U.S.. He has beaten up several politicians both past and present along the way. He has interviewed the authors of said books, and presented a good case against the apparent direction of the U.S. into communistic territory.
We would be led to believe that Glenn Beck has taken an opportunity to see the “big picture”, and from there has filled in the blanks with knowledge – suddenly seeing the light and advising the world. How nice!
Let’s think about this. How do we come to our own conclusions? How do we assess a situation? When you want to attack the reason for something you look at the big picture, right? You would look at all the evidence leading up to the current situation. Investigation 101 – examine all the evidence.
Remember Beck’s criticism of Time Magazine for not covering the Tea Party Movement of 2009. Remember this moving forward because it is key.
It is my belief that Beck has looked at all events in U.S. history, but he would prefer not to discuss one of the most important. Yes, the events of 9/11.
9/11 is the root of much debate, and one could say that 9/11 holds crucial evidence. And, many real Tea Partiers are 9/11 investigators and truth seekers.
But, on one program, Beck discussed Van Jones as a danger to the safety of President Obama because he was a 9/11 truther. Yes, according to Beck, forget debate on 9/11 – the truthers are bad!
What happened to debate? The same debate that Beck is fighting for and has criticized Obama for not allowing.
A fatal flaw in the Beck direction of discussion is this critical need to get 9/11 on the debate table. When they say the Tea Party Movement is divided, perhaps Alex Jones is right when he claims that Beck and Sarah Palin are fronts for more confusion.
In the interview Beck had with Palin, Beck asked Palin if she felt the Tea Party Movement on its own would be powerful enough. Palin told Beck that she supported change through the current political structure, and that it would be better to try to persuade patriots to act inside the Republican Party, and so here we are.
If the Tea Party Movement is in trouble it is truly evidenced by what would seem to be a “directing and dividing” approach.
According to Beck, there is no debating 9/11 but everything else is open. 9/11 truthers that no doubt make up many in the Tea Party Movement are all crazy, and ready to commit violent attacks. That direction is no doubt creating division when Beck is proposing America come together as a Tea Party. Sorry, there is a contradiction here, and unfortunately any guy that reads book after book, after book on the dry history of Progressivism must surely have spent some time looking at three buildings falling straight down, creating huge concern it was by design.
We should push Glenn Beck to get out the chalkboard and bring in real people that can present the evidence and spend as much time on the possibility that the government false flagged their own terror on their own people.
Yes, as “bad” as some of those nasty “progressives” are, it is time to bring in the big picture! No doubt Beck doesn’t want to open that can of worms and we should be demanding the answer – why not? Why not debate on all issues?
If Beck is truly about debate and freedom of discussion, and is concerned with getting to the bottom of all the events leading up to the changing of America, he is acting hypocritically. Not discussing the largest terror attack in the U.S. is far greater than the omission of a few pictures in Time Magazine, sorry.
Beck has said time and again he cannot believe he is doing this, meaning seeing a government heading to socialism, perhaps communism. In 2007, Beck could not believe people would think their government would create terror by running planes into buildings in NYC. Has he changed his thinking, or is going communist so much easier to accept and believe as a nation? Is it okay to believe a nation can become dictatorial heading to communism, but not that it would create false flag terror on its own people? Sorry, didn’t Hitler do that to his own people?
Beck needs to look at the bigger picture alright, because hearing about Progressivism is getting a little old already. Hearing about a symptom to the underlying disease is looking at the wing of a fly under a microscope, without examining the whole bug first.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a pattern that is shaping here, and as much as I would have hoped Alex Jones was wrong, it appears his argument against Beck is making more and more sense.
Where is Ron Paul in discussion with Glenn Beck? Where is Debra Medina and the grassroots Tea Party movement in Texas – big news being avoided by the man professing honesty and debate.
And, as time goes on, will we see more evidence of the direction to move the grassroots Tea Partiers to the republican party façade?
A sick game in the name of honesty? How pathetic if that turns out to be true.
If Glenn Beck wanted to get the red phone to ring he would bring in honest debate on the events and the truth behind 9/11. Those 9/11 truthers aren’t crazy after all.
To use Beck’s own words, “Am I missing something here? I don’t think so!”