Glenn Beck: Refounding America...

mhaze said:
So you see, the allegations were answered with a legal method. Please continue practicing your intellectual dishonesty. I'll let you know when you pass kindegarden level. Then next we found you slithering around a bit:
Third set of goalpost shiftings?​
Click to expand...


The legal actions involved do not address the, rather silly, accusations. I think it's odd that you think they do.​
 
The long and short of it is that the man is a degenerate, obviously brain-damaged from his early drug and alcohol abuse, devoid of a conscience and out of contact with reality.

Hard not to believe anything negative you hear about him, in light of what we know to be a fact.
 
mhaze said:
Oh my. A short memory. As we first discussed:

< snip :cuckooclo >

And finally, we find you struggling with the concepts of disputing domain name legalities, which only sets new records of the utter cluelessness of the intellectually depraved.

You are indeed the Black Knight.

Oh. By the way - here is the master of the method you practice amateurishly. But I encourage you to practice often and well.
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
Lenin
Russian Communist politician & revolutionary (1870 - 1924)​
Click to expand...

Your argument style is similar to that of a five year old trying to play checkers with chess pieces. You're the one who brought up the trademark litigation, which is completely unrelated to and has no bearing on whether Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. In fact, your insistence that this piece of unrelated litigation somehow addresses a possible rape and murder of a girl in 1990 by Glenn Beck shows how little you actually have to contribute to the public discourse on the controversy. Your ad hominem attacks simply underscore that lack of contribution on your part.

As for your implying that I'm telling a lie, you're again making up allegations out of whole cloth. I have in no way stated that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. In fact, I highly doubt that he would have done such a thing. However, it is also a fact that Glenn Beck has utterly refused to address the allegations that do exist that he has, indeed, raped and murdered a girl in 1990. He could clear up the issue with a simple statement on his radio or television show, clarifying that he didn't actually rape and murder a girl in 1990. He could even take care of two allegations at the same time by also pointing out that he doesn't beat his wife, which I equally doubt he does, but am dismayed by his refusal to answer the question about whether Glenn Beck continues to beat his wife.

So, now you're adding lying about what I'm actually saying to the evasions and personal attacks when the issues are brought up. Even though we probably agree on the question of whether Glenn Beck raped and killed a girl in 1990, and despite our likely having the same answer to the question on whether Glenn Beck continues to beat his wife, you seem to insist on trying to make the argument about unrelated and nonsensical things.
 
I am also concerned that in fighting this Beck has chosen an international body over a US court of law. All signs point to his lawyers arguing under international precedents, rather than first amendment precedents enshrined in the American tradition of freedom of speech.

Is Beck a fellow traveller with the internationalists who want desperately to tie down American sovereignty?

Sure, he talks a good game. But when the chips are down he's not throwing his lot in with America.

Who is Glenn Beck?
 
Last edited:
quixotecoyote said:
Well of course he isn't actually accusing Beck of anything, he's just noting the prevalent rumor that Beck raped a young girl in 1990 and the rumor that he recently stopped beating his wife.
Click to expand...

Random correction - these two sites are separately owned. :) (link removed as I haven't posted enough to be able to post links since the forum software changed.
 
elbe said:
The legal actions involved do not address the, rather silly, accusations. I think it's odd that you think they do.
Click to expand...
Actually, they do. What part of that might be hard to understand?
 
GreNME said:
.... whether Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990....a possible rape and murder of a girl in 1990 by Glenn Beck.... that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. .... that he has, indeed, raped and murdered a girl in 1990. ....rape and murder a girl in 1990. .... beat his wife,....Glenn Beck continues to beat his wife.....whether Glenn Beck raped and killed a girl in 1990....whether Glenn Beck continues to beat his wife, you seem to insist on trying to make the argument about unrelated and nonsensical things.
Click to expand...
Edited for breach of rule 12. Do not insult other posters.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mhaze said:
Edited by Cuddles: 
Edited for consistency.
Click to expand...

There's really no need to continue with the personal attacks or misquoting what I write. I've already said that I probably agree with your opinion on whether or not Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990. That you seem to insult me for agreeing with you on the question of whether Glenn Beck continues to beat his wife just makes your posts seem that much more unreasonable. All things considered, it seems the only disagreement we have is whether or not Glenn Beck should or has addressed the rumors in question. You seem to think for some reason that trademark litigation has something to do with allegations of rape and murder, while I think it would be worthwhile for the rumors about whether Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990 to be addressed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good lord.. that shtick is getting old, fast.

Is there any statement I can make to put an end to it?
 
Last edited:
No, but Glenn Beck could put an end to it by addressing the allegations that he raped and murdered a young woman in 1990. I'm sorry it's causing you discomfort that he hasn't done so. It is quite unfortunate.
 
Actually I can't stand the guy, and if that rumor about him making fun of someones miscarriage is true, then I'd definitely write the son of a bitch off for good. I don't take that kind of thing lightly at all. That would be so far over the line... I personally would find it to be unforgivable.

And still, I think this meme is about half as clever as others seem to think it is. We get it already...
 
Last edited:
I was joking, should have used a smiley. Or perhaps made the appropriate joke. Pray tell, what response would you have preferred?

;)
 
mhaze said:
Actually, they do. What part of that might be hard to understand?
Click to expand...

The part where they clearly don't.

In what way does Glenn Beck suing for infringment of the use of his name address the allegations that he raped and murdered a girl in 1990?

A simple A -> B please.
 
Whiplash said:
I was joking, should have used a smiley. Or perhaps made the appropriate joke. Pray tell, what response would you have preferred?

;)
Click to expand...

How about, "If that meme was a cancer, you'd have less balls than Lance Armstrong by now."

:boxedin:
 
Darth Rotor said:
I see, the accuser need not provide proof of a crime, the charged must provide disproof.

Are you sure that's the position you want to take? (Or are you being funny and I missed it?)

DR
Click to expand...

Now I forgot what I was raging about. If it wasn't about Obama not clearing up the whole birth certificate controversy then it was probably about Beck not addressing the rumors of his raping and murdering someone back in 1990.
 
mhaze said:
Apparently Beck's attorneys are handling the matter.

Case Details for WIPO Case D2009-1182

WIPO Case Summary

WIPO Case NumberD2009-1182
Domain name(s)glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com
ComplainantMercury Radio Arts, Inc. and Glenn Beck
RespondentIsaac Eiland-Hall
PanelistAbbott, Frederick M.
DecisionCase active
Click to expand...

If it's going as an uDRP procedure, he's gonna have a hard time doing it as a trademark issue. Paypal tried it with paypalsucks.com and got nowhere. Usually there needs to be an intent to profit from the trademark, and/or the site needs to be set up as if to confuse visitors into thinking they're on the actual trademark's site - either by layout or by domain.

Also, some of the documents from the response are hilarious:

We are not here because the domain name could cause confusion. We
do not have a declaration from the president of the international
association of imbeciles that his members are blankly staring at the
Respondent’s website wondering “where did all the race baiting content
go?” We are here because Mr. Beck wants Respondent’s website shut
down. He wants it shut down because Respondent’s website makes a
poignant and accurate satirical critique of Mr. Beck by parodying Beck’s
very rhetorical style. Beck’s skin is too thin to take the criticism, so he
wants the site down. Beck is represented by a learned and respected
legal team. Accordingly, it is beyond doubt that his counsel advised him
that under the First Amendment to the United States’ Constitution, no
action in a U.S. Court would be successful. See, e.g., Hustler Magazine,
Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988). Accordingly, Beck is attempting to use
this transnational body to circumvent and subvert the Respondent’s
constitutional rights.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom