[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Umm, have you watched Fareed Zakaria’s GPS show? He has been called a conservative, a liberal, and a centrist, for a reason. Read the ‘Views’ section of Fareed Zakaria on Wiki.
The man knows shit about foreign policy.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree with you more.
[/quote]
For an old man, you are pathetic.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I keep waiting for all of those important factual errors to come rolling in from all the Beck haters on the myriad of topics that Beck has covered over the past two years. But I guess Andy and company can’t quite rise to the occasion. Surely there must be a more important error than this off the cuff comment that he made recently. If the man is an idiot and only a showman then certainly he must be wrong.
Remember when Obama said there were 57 states? Ah, it was just a slip of the tongue. Remember what Joe Biden said on mic about the health care plan, “this is a big fucking deal”. Or how about this pearl “You cannot go into a 7-Eleven unless you have a slight Indian accent.” But let’s judge these guys based on their over all record of truth telling.
If one talks for a living whether elected to do so or paid big bucks there will be some errors. I maintain that Glenn Beck is spot on with the important topics that he’s talked about over the past two years.
One last offer, if any of you Beck haters want to up the ante I’m waiting. [/quote]
Of course Beck has made great points on many issues, Fareed knows that as well. Why would Fareed base his GPS show off how how factual Beck’s comments would be, what are you talking about? I don’t think you are grasping the reason of why Fareed decided to put Beck’s comments on his show, that is otherwise pretty focused on foreign policy issues and doesn’t usually resort to this back-and-forth bickering… HE IS MUSLIM. He felt offended, and decided to put a counter-argument on his show. It’s pretty simple, man.
Like I said earlier in this thread, it’s for that reason for why I thought it was stupid for Fareed to put his remarks on the show.
I just watched it and was disappointed. Beck doesn’t get owned at all. and the CNN guy is flat out wrong about a lot of things culminating in nothing more than a feeble strawman argument at the end where he starts attributing things to beck he never said.
He forgets to mention the networks of people that train, encourage, brainwash, fund, est. should also be included in a terrorist count.
Beck is backed up by the actual definition of the word, not just some single online definition. It’s the CNN guy who’s trying to twist the meaning of the word.
There is evidence that there is a significant population of Muslims in the US that do support a violent jihad against the government even though as much as can be suppressed by the PC police is. BUT even if there wasn’t and the CNN guy was correct in claiming no evidence exists, it would make people like him who claim the number is very small just as incorrect. So either he’s wrong or he’s wrong.
And no-where does beck equate anger with terrorism. He pulls some off the wall pole out of his ass and attributes it to beck. 3rd grader style arguing.
I was really looking forward to Beck getting handled, but this just wasn’t it.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Umm, have you watched Fareed Zakaria’s GPS show? He has been called a conservative, a liberal, and a centrist, for a reason. Read the ‘Views’ section of Fareed Zakaria on Wiki.
The man knows shit about foreign policy.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree with you more.
[/quote]
For an old man, you are pathetic.[/quote]
He likes to waste peoples time, don’t give him the satisfaction.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Umm, have you watched Fareed Zakaria’s GPS show? He has been called a conservative, a liberal, and a centrist, for a reason. Read the ‘Views’ section of Fareed Zakaria on Wiki.
The man knows shit about foreign policy.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree with you more.
[/quote]
For an old man, you are pathetic.[/quote]
You have time for an ad hominem attack but no time to post all of Becks lies on important topics? You want pathetic? Look in the mirror sparky.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I keep waiting for all of those important factual errors to come rolling in from all the Beck haters on the myriad of topics that Beck has covered over the past two years. But I guess Andy and company can’t quite rise to the occasion. Surely there must be a more important error than this off the cuff comment that he made recently. If the man is an idiot and only a showman then certainly he must be wrong.
Remember when Obama said there were 57 states? Ah, it was just a slip of the tongue. Remember what Joe Biden said on mic about the health care plan, “this is a big fucking deal”. Or how about this pearl “You cannot go into a 7-Eleven unless you have a slight Indian accent.” But let’s judge these guys based on their over all record of truth telling.
If one talks for a living whether elected to do so or paid big bucks there will be some errors. I maintain that Glenn Beck is spot on with the important topics that he’s talked about over the past two years.
One last offer, if any of you Beck haters want to up the ante I’m waiting. [/quote]
Of course Beck has made great points on many issues, Fareed knows that as well. Why would Fareed base his GPS show off how how factual Beck’s comments would be, what are you talking about? I don’t think you are grasping the reason of why Fareed decided to put Beck’s comments on his show, that is otherwise pretty focused on foreign policy issues and doesn’t usually resort to this back-and-forth bickering… HE IS MUSLIM. He felt offended, and decided to put a counter-argument on his show. It’s pretty simple, man.
Like I said earlier in this thread, it’s for that reason for why I thought it was stupid for Fareed to put his remarks on the show.[/quote]
One more post and one more missed opportunity to lay out your case for how bad Beck is.
[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Umm, have you watched Fareed Zakaria’s GPS show? He has been called a conservative, a liberal, and a centrist, for a reason. Read the ‘Views’ section of Fareed Zakaria on Wiki.
The man knows shit about foreign policy.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree with you more.
[/quote]
For an old man, you are pathetic.[/quote]
He likes to waste peoples time, don’t give him the satisfaction. [/quote]
You have the time to attack me, but no time to post your long list of Beck’s important factual errors. Awe… 
I guess you must be full of shit 
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I just watched it and was disappointed. Beck doesn’t get owned at all. and the CNN guy is flat out wrong about a lot of things culminating in nothing more than a feeble strawman argument at the end where he starts attributing things to beck he never said.
He forgets to mention the networks of people that train, encourage, brainwash, fund, est. should also be included in a terrorist count.
Beck is backed up by the actual definition of the word, not just some single online definition. It’s the CNN guy who’s trying to twist the meaning of the word.
There is evidence that there is a significant population of Muslims in the US that do support a violent jihad against the government even though as much as can be suppressed by the PC police is. BUT even if there wasn’t and the CNN guy was correct in claiming no evidence exists, it would make people like him who claim the number is very small just as incorrect. So either he’s wrong or he’s wrong.
And no-where does beck equate anger with terrorism. He pulls some off the wall pole out of his ass and attributes it to beck. 3rd grader style arguing.
I was really looking forward to Beck getting handled, but this just wasn’t it.[/quote]
Weird… it’s like you have an on/off switch for your critical thinking skills.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Umm, have you watched Fareed Zakaria’s GPS show? He has been called a conservative, a liberal, and a centrist, for a reason. Read the ‘Views’ section of Fareed Zakaria on Wiki.
The man knows shit about foreign policy.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree with you more.
[/quote]
For an old man, you are pathetic.[/quote]
He likes to waste peoples time, don’t give him the satisfaction. [/quote]
You have the time to attack me, but no time to post your long list of Beck’s important factual errors. Awe…
I guess you must be full of shit :)[/quote]
First of all, I think you’z a troll.
What I’ve already written is that I believe most of Beck’s quotes and facts are accurate. I even believe he’s at least reasonably intelligent and perhaps very much so.
I’ve also told you is that he is extremely adept at manipulating facts as opposed to examining them. I already mentioned the Racist Unions comment he made that when put in context doesn’t amount to anything. Of course to Beck it means that we should believe Unions in America have racist tendencies and we should reject them. Where does that fit into his take on socialism again?
I have only watched two Beck episodes, and the Unions ep was one of them. On another I listened to him claiming that communism was taking hold in America and he showed a picture of a Stalin bust in a public garden as proof. Of course the bust was really part of a holocaust memorial so it wasn’t exactly a good example, but to Beck the fact was certainly usable in his agenda.
The last thing I watched him do was claim on O’Reily’s show that the only place he saw “birthers” anymore was hanging around in parking lots (the implication being negative). Of course a simple google of “Obama Birth Certificate” at the time brought me right to a full investigation of the certificate on Beck’s website claiming it was fake… He’s a manipulative asshole and he plays his game to more than one party at a time.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I keep waiting for all of those important factual errors to come rolling in from all the Beck haters on the myriad of topics that Beck has covered over the past two years. But I guess Andy and company can’t quite rise to the occasion. Surely there must be a more important error than this off the cuff comment that he made recently. If the man is an idiot and only a showman then certainly he must be wrong.
Remember when Obama said there were 57 states? Ah, it was just a slip of the tongue. Remember what Joe Biden said on mic about the health care plan, “this is a big fucking deal”. Or how about this pearl “You cannot go into a 7-Eleven unless you have a slight Indian accent.” But let’s judge these guys based on their over all record of truth telling.
If one talks for a living whether elected to do so or paid big bucks there will be some errors. I maintain that Glenn Beck is spot on with the important topics that he’s talked about over the past two years.
One last offer, if any of you Beck haters want to up the ante I’m waiting. [/quote]
Of course Beck has made great points on many issues, Fareed knows that as well. Why would Fareed base his GPS show off how how factual Beck’s comments would be, what are you talking about? I don’t think you are grasping the reason of why Fareed decided to put Beck’s comments on his show, that is otherwise pretty focused on foreign policy issues and doesn’t usually resort to this back-and-forth bickering… HE IS MUSLIM. He felt offended, and decided to put a counter-argument on his show. It’s pretty simple, man.
Like I said earlier in this thread, it’s for that reason for why I thought it was stupid for Fareed to put his remarks on the show.[/quote]
One more post and one more missed opportunity to lay out your case for how bad Beck is.
[/quote]
I don’t have any such case and I don’t understand why you think I do.
[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
First of all, I think you’z a troll.[/quote]
And I think you’re a closed minded idiot. Now that we have that out of the way do you have anything else?
Then you must have dozens of example of this alleged behavior - So post them.
Wow, you watched two full episodes and yet you know that he manipulates facts? You are an amazing person. Now post all of his “manipulations” or shut up.
So what you’re really saying is that you don’t really watch Glenn Beck, but since you don’t like him you are able to MANIPULATE what you’ve seen as being negative. Over the past two plus years he’s spouted thousands of facts. But, having watched him twice you feel that you can make a good judgement. I see…you don’t really have any facts to speak of.
Just as I thought you’re full of shit.
Thanks for playing.
[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I just watched it and was disappointed. Beck doesn’t get owned at all. and the CNN guy is flat out wrong about a lot of things culminating in nothing more than a feeble strawman argument at the end where he starts attributing things to beck he never said.
He forgets to mention the networks of people that train, encourage, brainwash, fund, est. should also be included in a terrorist count.
Beck is backed up by the actual definition of the word, not just some single online definition. It’s the CNN guy who’s trying to twist the meaning of the word.
There is evidence that there is a significant population of Muslims in the US that do support a violent jihad against the government even though as much as can be suppressed by the PC police is. BUT even if there wasn’t and the CNN guy was correct in claiming no evidence exists, it would make people like him who claim the number is very small just as incorrect. So either he’s wrong or he’s wrong.
And no-where does beck equate anger with terrorism. He pulls some off the wall pole out of his ass and attributes it to beck. 3rd grader style arguing.
I was really looking forward to Beck getting handled, but this just wasn’t it.[/quote]
Weird… it’s like you have an on/off switch for your critical thinking skills.
[/quote]
How so? Are they on or off now?
Beck makes a lot of retarded claims, but I just don’t see this as one of them. It’s just a claim Beck made that this CNN guy has issues with for personal reasons.
Go after him for how often he compares people to nazis or something.
[quote]PB Andy wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Ithiel wrote:
I mean, Zakaria is a highly educated, highly intelligent, and highly liberal blowhard who can’t find anything of significance to jump on Beck about so he chose this
[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more.[/quote]
Umm, have you watched Fareed Zakaria’s GPS show? He has been called a conservative, a liberal, and a centrist, for a reason. Read the ‘Views’ section of Fareed Zakaria on Wiki.
The man knows shit about foreign policy than any of us could ever know.[/quote]
I have watched his show and read his columns. He is as dishonest as any of these media ghouls.
He picked this fight with a prominent member of the media (who can also be dishonest) in order to bring attention to himself.
The fact still remains that the Muslim world hates us and supports terrorism against the West in significant numbers. Much higher than 1%. Multiple polls confirm this.
Hell, in Afghanistan most people don’t know about 9/11 and the reasons for invading so of course they hate our guts.
This cannot be denied by honest people.
I don’t often follow polls, so I’m surprised to see some people here saying that there are “multiple polls” that show that what Zakaria said was incorrect. If you have access, could you please post the polls/polling information? I would much like to see it. Thank you in advance.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I just watched it and was disappointed. Beck doesn’t get owned at all. and the CNN guy is flat out wrong about a lot of things culminating in nothing more than a feeble strawman argument at the end where he starts attributing things to beck he never said.
He forgets to mention the networks of people that train, encourage, brainwash, fund, est. should also be included in a terrorist count.
Beck is backed up by the actual definition of the word, not just some single online definition. It’s the CNN guy who’s trying to twist the meaning of the word.
There is evidence that there is a significant population of Muslims in the US that do support a violent jihad against the government even though as much as can be suppressed by the PC police is. BUT even if there wasn’t and the CNN guy was correct in claiming no evidence exists, it would make people like him who claim the number is very small just as incorrect. So either he’s wrong or he’s wrong.
And no-where does beck equate anger with terrorism. He pulls some off the wall pole out of his ass and attributes it to beck. 3rd grader style arguing.
I was really looking forward to Beck getting handled, but this just wasn’t it.[/quote]
Weird… it’s like you have an on/off switch for your critical thinking skills.
[/quote]
How so? Are they on or off now?
Beck makes a lot of retarded claims, but I just don’t see this as one of them. It’s just a claim Beck made that this CNN guy has issues with for personal reasons.
Go after him for how often he compares people to nazis or something.[/quote]
Unless I missed something, off.
Beck’s claim is outrageous, and I thought the rebuttal was solid.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I don’t often follow polls, so I’m surprised to see some people here saying that there are “multiple polls” that show that what Zakaria said was incorrect. If you have access, could you please post the polls/polling information? I would much like to see it. Thank you in advance. [/quote]
This^
So far, the only player in this thing with useable statistics is Zakaria.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I don’t often follow polls, so I’m surprised to see some people here saying that there are “multiple polls” that show that what Zakaria said was incorrect. If you have access, could you please post the polls/polling information? I would much like to see it. Thank you in advance. [/quote]
I wasn’t speaking about polls.
The FBI estimated that about 10% of US mosques preach violent jihad. Making the assumption that most of the people who attend a mosque support it’s teachings, that puts the number in the US at about 10%.
They also estimated that 1/4 of US Muslims ages 18 to 29 believe suicide bombings are at least sometimes justified.
And that’s in the US. It’s pretty safe to assume those numbers are much higher overseas. Beck was not off base. If anything, he probably underestimated.
Why on earth doesn’t the main stream news report that though?
[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I just watched it and was disappointed. Beck doesn’t get owned at all. and the CNN guy is flat out wrong about a lot of things culminating in nothing more than a feeble strawman argument at the end where he starts attributing things to beck he never said.
He forgets to mention the networks of people that train, encourage, brainwash, fund, est. should also be included in a terrorist count.
Beck is backed up by the actual definition of the word, not just some single online definition. It’s the CNN guy who’s trying to twist the meaning of the word.
There is evidence that there is a significant population of Muslims in the US that do support a violent jihad against the government even though as much as can be suppressed by the PC police is. BUT even if there wasn’t and the CNN guy was correct in claiming no evidence exists, it would make people like him who claim the number is very small just as incorrect. So either he’s wrong or he’s wrong.
And no-where does beck equate anger with terrorism. He pulls some off the wall pole out of his ass and attributes it to beck. 3rd grader style arguing.
I was really looking forward to Beck getting handled, but this just wasn’t it.[/quote]
Weird… it’s like you have an on/off switch for your critical thinking skills.
[/quote]
How so? Are they on or off now?
Beck makes a lot of retarded claims, but I just don’t see this as one of them. It’s just a claim Beck made that this CNN guy has issues with for personal reasons.
Go after him for how often he compares people to nazis or something.[/quote]
Unless I missed something, off.
Beck’s claim is outrageous, and I thought the rebuttal was solid.
[/quote]
No, the rebuttal was poor. I showed point by point why. You can try to counter me if you want.
Plus becks claim wasn’t even close to outrageous.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:
Thanks for playing.
[/quote]
Dude, if you aren’t a troll than you’re confused. You ask me to post his errors, you ignore them when I do, you say I’m full of shit and you ask me to post more… It doesn’t take a genius to see what’s wrong with this picture.
Beating you in this argument won’t make me right, just as being more stubborn than me doesn’t validate your opinions. I’m not going to play your game because frankly it’s childish, and that’s coming from someone half your age. Act like an adult or go play with the other children.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I don’t often follow polls, so I’m surprised to see some people here saying that there are “multiple polls” that show that what Zakaria said was incorrect. If you have access, could you please post the polls/polling information? I would much like to see it. Thank you in advance. [/quote]
I wasn’t speaking about polls.
The FBI estimated that about 10% of US mosques preach violent jihad. Making the assumption that most of the people who attend a mosque support it’s teachings, that puts the number in the US at about 10%.
They also estimated that 1/4 of US Muslims ages 18 to 29 believe suicide bombings are at least sometimes justified.
And that’s in the US. It’s pretty safe to assume those numbers are much higher overseas. Beck was not off base. If anything, he probably underestimated.
Why on earth doesn’t the main stream news report that though?
That’s funny.
I remember that story. It originated in Newsmax. There were a couple of problems with it:
The source was an anonymous FBI agent, not any official statement or report.
That being said, the source did not refer to violence. He made a specific statement about “jihad,” which can take many, non-violent forms.
As to the extrapolations you make in your post above:
You are jumping to conclusions.
Look. I’m not a fan of religion… especially Islam. I find it to be one of the most perverse. But, let’s be realistic about what we are dealing with. Beck is a hysteria monger at best.