Did Glenn Beck Rape and Murder Girl in 1990?

[mynameis]

Can a mere domain name be defamation? Glenn Beck says yes

Hugely popular conservative talker Glenn Beck has sicced his lawyers on a satirical website that's been up for a week, but the attorneys may have a point on this one. The site, called glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com, toes the line on defamation—and may have stepped across it.

When someone registers a domain like glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com, they probably expect to hear from Glenn Beck's lawyers. In this case, it took two days. The site's anonymous operator tells Ars that the whole thing is satire—but that may not be enough to avoid charges of defamation.

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/09/10/500x_Picture_8.jpg

No lawsuit has yet been filed, and it's not clear how far Beck's lawyers will take the matter. Unless the site owner responds to the WIPO domain dispute, however, he will lose the original domain.

On the site forums, readers are already thinking of ways to extend the satire. "Glenn Beck hosts a daily radio show from 9am-noon," wrote one. "I think we should begin calling and asking why he refuses to address his alleged rape and murder of a young girl in 1990... If you do call in, please record and upload, so we can share his answers (or lack there of) with the world."

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/09/10/lawyers-for-tv-uberd.html
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/09/can-a-mere-domain-name-be-defamation-glenn-beck-says-yes.ars?utm_source=microblogging&utm_medium=arstch&utm_term=Main%20Account&utm_campaign=microblogging

Glenn Beck: Did he murder & rape a young girl in 1990? - YouTube

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/untitled1.jpg

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mugshot1.jpg?w=140&h=180

DURHAM, CT. - According to a recently discovered Durham County Police report Glenn Beck raped a woman in 1990. Calm down!! Chances are the suspect in the case is just someone who shares the same name as the FoxNews show host.

Despite the great likelihood of this being the product of a simple mix up of names- there are some eerie coincidences that are worth mentioning. For starters, the crime remains unsolved. The manhunt for the suspect briefly caught the attention of Durham’s local media after numerous reports were leaked stating that the rapist, not the victim, cried throughout the encounter. This led to the local Durham media giving the wanted suspect the nickname – “Crying Rapist.”

http://unreasonablysafe.com/2009/09/01/beckrape/

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/woffunreasonablysafe1.jpg

[michael christopher]

This is just silly. It's kind of amusing to see him get a little karmic retribution, and maybe on some level he deserves it. Still, the people who created that website backed down pretty damn quickly if they are calling it a "satire" - so of course it either really was a satire, or they were full of shit. The second seems extremely likely.

[frase]

Saw the twat pretending to cry on the news last night as he remembered 9/11.
totally bizarre....disturbed me.
How on earth is this guy on the news?!!

[michael christopher]

Saw the twat pretending to cry on the news last night as he remembered 9/11.
totally bizarre....disturbed me.
How on earth is this guy on the news?!!

I thought you were starting to like him?

[yozhik]

So is Glenn Beck, through his lawyers, claiming he owns the name Glenn Beck?
Because the police report certainly shows that a Glenn Beck WAS charged with rape in 1990.

The website domain doesn't make any reference to WHICH Glenn Beck - it certainly doesn't specify the Glenn Beck "who works for fox dot com" ...

So unless Glann Beck can prove that this site specifically points to HIM, or specifically identifies him as the "victim of defamation", I'm struggling to comprehend the grounds for the legal action here.

[michael christopher]

So is Glenn Beck, through his lawyers, claiming he owns the name Glenn Beck?
Because the police report certainly shows that a Glenn Beck WAS charged with rape in 1990.

The website domain doesn't make any reference to WHICH Glenn Beck - it certainly doesn't specify the Glenn Beck "who works for fox dot com" ...

So unless Glann Beck can prove that this site specifically points to HIM, or specifically identifies him as the "victim of defamation", I'm struggling to comprehend the grounds for the legal action here.

Excellent point. I didn't think of it that way.

Still, if they are slandering him with a false accusation by implying that the Glenn Beck was the famous Glenn Beck from Fox News, then he will have a lawsuit. But they didn't even have a site up, right? Which means he has no idea what they were going to do.

They shouldn't have replied that it was satire.

[jm22]

the crying rapist picture kind of looks like him.

[motleyhoo]

How on earth is this guy on the news?!!

Because that's how many idiots we have in this country who actually tune into that crap and like it. He's really drawing in the Tea Party crowd, which makes their movement look ridiculous.

.

[newworldengineer]

the crying rapist picture kind of looks like him.

it eerily does and that ain't an understatement!! lol

[januspolanski]

So it could be a case of do what we say or we send you to jail for the murder of that girl.

[yozhik]

You really think the guy in the picture - Glenn Beck rapist - is the same guy as on Fox - i.e. Glenn Beck the Disinfo Agent and Corporate Shill?

At least the rapist in the photo was honest ... Glenn Beck Fox [mind]fucks innocent men and women everyday, without consent ... and without recall ... instead of Rohypnol/Ruffies he uses MSM as his "date rape" drug of choice.

[revolutionary_jam]

beware of "strictly moral" types many have very bad skeletons in their closets.

[vreeswijk]

what is very suspect about that mugshot is how it is cropped at the bottom, so that all you can read is "police department". if it were real, you should be able to read the entire letter board he is holding. someone attempting to truthfully expose a person for a past crime would know that this would be necessary to validate the mugshot. it makes me chuckle that someone trying to fake a glenn beck mugshot would have him crying though :D

[phantom]

As much as I hate Glenn Beck and want him to be revealed as the crying rapist, I have to ask, could the black and white image be photoshopped?

Look at both pictures side by side and compare the facial lines, the nose, the mouth, the eyes, the frown and the shadows. They look to be virtually identical. The only difference is, the ears are not the same and in the later picture Beck is obviously fatter. (Has Beck had surgery and pinned his ears back?)

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mugshot1.jpg?w=140&h=180 - http://media.bonnint.net/seattle/2/261/26162.jpg - http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/1298/beck4.jpg - http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/8576/beck7.jpg

[dangermouse]

As much as I hate Glenn Beck and want him to be revealed as the crying rapist, I have to ask, could the black and white image be photoshopped?

Look at both pictures side by side and compare the facial lines, the nose, the mouth, the eyes, the frown and the shadows. They look to be virtually identical. The only difference is, the ears are not the same and in the later picture Beck is obviously fatter. (Has Beck had surgery and pinned his ears back?)

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mugshot1.jpg?w=140&h=180 - http://media.bonnint.net/seattle/2/261/26162.jpg - http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/1298/beck4.jpg


so your saying he is her father? :D :eek:

[phantom]

dangermouse - :confused:

The black and white image is of the crying rapist known as Glenn Beck and not the woman who was rapped.

If the black and white picture is original then it would look as if Glenn Beck is indeed the rapist.

[newworldengineer]

As much as I hate Glenn Beck and want him to be revealed as the crying rapist, I have to ask, could the black and white image be photoshopped?

Look at both pictures side by side and compare the facial lines, the nose, the mouth, the eyes, the frown and the shadows. They look to be virtually identical. The only difference is, the ears are not the same and in the later picture Beck is obviously fatter. (Has Beck had surgery and pinned his ears back?)

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mugshot1.jpg?w=140&h=180 - http://media.bonnint.net/seattle/2/261/26162.jpg - http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/1298/beck4.jpg

well that answers my question, that's an exact replica!! surely you can't pull the same face twice :-|... the way I see it is, I wouldn't put it past a shill like Beck to have done something as horrifying as that... but also don't condone accusations without real evidence you can get your teeth around, and I don't find it funny if it is some childish defamation prank cos the peeps that invented the site just plain don't like Beck... there's a rape case being tossed around casually and it's very disrespectful if there isn't a ounce of truth behind it.

[phantom]

newworldengineer I don't find it funny if it is some childish defamation prank cos the peeps that invented the site just plain don't like Beck... there's a rape case being tossed around casually and it's very disrespectful if there isn't a ounce of truth behind it.

I totally agree.

Hopefully the pic I put together will get passed around the net so that others can see that the B&W image may have been photoshopped from a later pic of the cock, Glenn Beck.

[bobbydiva]

not for nothing but that pic is f-ing hilarious

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mugshot1.jpg

[hadabusa]

dangermouse - :confused:

The black and white image is of the crying rapist known as Glenn Beck and not the woman who was rapped.


bhwawahaha

[mynameis]

So did he or didn't he? Why is he trying to put injunction on someone who has a website that doesn't outright claim he is the rapist?

[netta]

As much as I hate Glenn Beck and want him to be revealed as the crying rapist, I have to ask, could the black and white image be photoshopped?

Look at both pictures side by side and compare the facial lines, the nose, the mouth, the eyes, the frown and the shadows. They look to be virtually identical. The only difference is, the ears are not the same and in the later picture Beck is obviously fatter. (Has Beck had surgery and pinned his ears back?)

http://unreasonablysafe.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/mugshot1.jpg?w=140&h=180 - http://media.bonnint.net/seattle/2/261/26162.jpg - http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/1298/beck4.jpg - http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/8576/beck7.jpg

Aw, heeey, good catch. Yeah cause I was thinking to myself wow, that rapist does look like Glen Beck.


So now I know it's a photoshop. Thank you.

[rayne]

Aw, heeey, good catch. Yeah cause I was thinking to myself wow, that rapist does look like Glen Beck.


So now I now it's a photoshop. Thank you.

That photo also proves his crocodile tears over the constitution on his show were faked, as that's the exact face he did when crying about it.

[jesuitsdidit]

Glenn Beck has forced Van Jones to resign as Obama's "green jobs" adviser for signing a 2004 Statement from 911truth.org calling for a new investigation of the events of 9/11.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15227
contains links

Join the Appeal for Truth about 9/11

by Peter Dale Scott and Michael Berger and Janice Matthews

.
Global Research, September 15, 2009
911 Truth - 2009-09-11

In the last few days Glenn Beck and the Washington Times have forced Van Jones to resign as environmentalist "green jobs" adviser to the White House. His principal offense: having signed a 2004 Statement from 911truth.org calling for a new investigation of the events of 9/11.

This is a moment of truth for all who want America to be an open society. As the Los Angeles Times reported on September 8, "Other conservatives, smelling blood in the water, are sharpening their knives." Why should they not? The White House has just capitulated to a dishonest attack claiming that Jones, because he signed the 911truth Statement, "thinks the Bush administration blew up the World Trade Centers and covered it up." You can check Beck's capacity for accuracy by comparing this claim to the relevant call in the Statement itself: "for immediate public attention to unanswered questions that suggest that people within the current administration may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war."

Supporting Beck are authors like Charles Krauthammer, arguing that “truthers” – those of us who signed the 911truth statement -- are creating “a hallucinatory alternative reality in the service of a fathomless malice.”

In the wake of these attacks, three of the original hundred signers -- Van Jones, the environmentalist Paul Hawken and Jodie Evans of Code Pink -- have asked that their signatures on the 911truth Statement be removed. I am hoping that numbers of other responsible community leaders will stem this flight from rational inquiry by coming forward to sign the statement at this time.

In fact, nine such individuals have done so already at Salon.com. In "Would you still sign the 9/11 Truth petition?", reporter Vincent Rossmeier contacted 30 of the original signatories and asked, simply, "If you had to do it all over again, would you still sign the statement?" Of the responses published, all but two "expressed their full-fledged support for the petition." Several of these people not only reaffirmed their endorsement of the statement, but went on to put forward clear arguments supported by overwhelming facts as to why they now do so.

I am one of the university professors who signed the Statement. One of the many reasons I did so was because of my awareness that Vice-President Cheney had given two conflicting accounts as to whether he was in the White House bunker in precisely the crucial minutes when the most important orders of that day (including the institution of so-called "Continuity of Government" measures which continue to this day) were issued from that place. I discuss this in my book The Road to 9/11 (University of California Press, 2007), pp. 200-03, 228-30, of which the following draft excerpt is available on the Internet:

Cheney himself told Tim Russert of "Meet the Press" on September 16, 2001, in an interview still available five years later on the White House website, that he arrived in the PEOC before the Pentagon was hit, i.e. before 9:37 AM.15 But the 9/11 Report follows a later and very different account in Newsweek, based on an interview with Cheney, which now had him leave his office at 9:35 and arrive in the PEOC "shortly before 10 a.m." We shall see that new evidence, which only surfaced in 2006, corroborates Cheney's first story, and makes his revised time-table extremely unlikely. Clearly one of Cheney's two accounts of his arrival (before 9:37, and around 9:58) must be wrong. Moreover what is at stake is not trivial. Important orders were issued in this hour from the PEOC: one alleged order (whose content is uncertain) which Mineta claims to have heard about 9:30, a second order to ground all planes at about 9:45, and a third tripartite order (which according to Clarke included a shoot-down order) at about 9:50. By Mineta's account, corroborated by Clarke, Cheney had arrived in the PEOC in time to give all three of these orders; by Cheney's second account, he arrived after all three were given.

The case for a new investigation of 9/11 is now far stronger than it was in 2004, because even those responsible for the 9/11 Commission inquiry have since complained that it was flawed. The two co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, noted in their book, Without Precedent, that they were given insufficient time and "a dramatically insufficient [initial] budget of $3 million." Later they wrote in the New York Times (January 2, 2008) that the CIA "failed to respond to our lawful requests for information about the 9/11 plot. [and] obstructed our investigation."

The Washington Post (August 2, 2006) has reported that "Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission."

Lee Hamilton has also said that "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only "the first draft" of history."

Louis Freeh, FBI Director at the time, has written that

"Even the most junior investigator would immediately know that the name and photo ID of [lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed] Atta in 2000 is precisely the kind of tactical intelligence the FBI has many times employed to prevent attacks and arrest terrorists. Yet the 9/11 Commission inexplicably concluded that it 'was not historically significant.' This astounding conclusion--in combination with the failure to investigate Able Danger and incorporate it into its findings--raises serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself. No wonder the 9/11 families were outraged by these revelations and called for a 'new' commission" (Wall Street Journal 11/17/05)

And Rutgers Law School-Newark Dean John Farmer, Senior Counsel and Team Leader to the 9/11 Commission states in his newly released book, The Ground Truth,

"At some level of government,at some point in time, a decision was made not to tell the truth about the national response to the attacks on the morning of 9/11. We owe the truth to the families of the victims of 9/11. We owe it to the American public as well, because only by understanding what has gone wrong in the past can we assure our nation's safety in the future."

In addition to these community leaders' signatures, 40 family members of 9/11 victims signed the 2004 Truth Statement. The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Independent Commission submitted hundreds of questions to the 9/11 Commission as it began its investigation. Although Commissioner Jamie Gorelick told the family members their questions would be used as a "road map" for the investigation, the Family Steering Committee's report, "FSC Questions to the 9/11 Commission with Ratings of its Performance in Providing Answers" found the overwhelming majority of questions were not only left unanswered but were not even addressed in the final 9/11 Commission Report.

I appeal to readers to help ensure that the doubters of the official 9/11 story will not be bullied into silence.

The real issue is to defeat the campaign of media hitmen to punish people who want to know the truth about their country. If you agree, please go to www.911truth.org to read the 2009 Truth Statement and add your name to the voices of those who have signed the 2004 Statement.

Global Research Articles by Peter Dale Scott
Global Research Articles by Michael Berger
Global Research Articles by Janice Matthews

[jesuitsdidit]

You really think the guy in the picture - Glenn Beck rapist - is the same guy as on Fox - i.e. Glenn Beck the Disinfo Agent and Corporate Shill?

At least the rapist in the photo was honest ... Glenn Beck Fox [mind]fucks innocent men and women everyday, without consent ... and without recall ... instead of Rohypnol/Ruffies he uses MSM as his "date rape" drug of choice.

yes i do
why are you diverting ppl?

[jesuitsdidit]

maybe he had 2 do that to get onto the next level of the pyramid
they all have to kill someone, i've heard, as an initiation..

[yozhik]

yes i do
why are you diverting ppl?

diverting ppl?

Oh wait ... according to you, I'm shill #443 ... or some similar shit.

I don't think its him.
Photoshop maybe ... don't know.
Just doesn't look genuine.
Opinion; not stated as fact.

[yozhik]

maybe he had 2 do that to get onto the next level of the pyramid
they all have to kill someone, i've heard, as an initiation..

Heard?
From who?
From where?
When?

Source?
Or just unsubstantiated hearsay?

[size_of_light]

the crying rapist picture kind of looks like him.

it eerily does and that ain't an understatement!! lol

No obvious signs that it's been Photoshopped, to me, either.

EDIT: Just seen the younger/older Beck comparison.

Freaking funny and weird.

Of course there's nothing to say he wasn't arresting for something else entirely back in 1990 and somebody has the mugshot.

My opinion is the younger photo is a genuine one, but am prepared to be shown I'm wrong.