“Christian” “Science” Monitor freaks out over Glenn Beck’s NRA speech

Glenn Beck plays CSM “correspondent” Husna Haq like the fool she is.

In the first sentence, Glenn is called a Republican. You can’t listen to Beck an hour and not realize he isn’t a Republican and has completely given up on them.

Beck’s Bloomberg Salute was bait aimed right at Media Matters and all the media dimwits who slept through history class and didn’t learn from the prior trap Beck set for Media Matters. He is depicting Bloomberg giving the fascist salute, which is entirely appropriate. The Italian fascist salute predates Hitler’s rise to power. There is no Nazi symbolism in the image. Bloomberg is not portrayed with a mustache, there is no swastika, no SS insignia, no German military uniform adornments.

As Beck pointed out his trap to ABC news and demanded an apology, it’s actually just a propaganda image of Vladimir Lenin with Bloomberg’s head pasted on it. Lenin died in 1924. The Nazi Party wasn’t started by Hitler until 1925.

Maybe Husna Haq will get around to learning that Nazi stands for Nationl Socialist. A good Nazi surrenders their identity to the collective motherland.

Curious that the “Christian” “Science” Monitor publishes the thoughts of a Muslim American woman who is “offended” that Beck made Bloomberg look like a Nazi in her eyes. We live in strange times.

Another of Beck’s traps was he read Rudyard Kiplings poem “the Gods of the Copybook Headings” and just sat back and waited to be called a madman rambling incoherently, then he explained the poem in detail and it’s historical context.

This entry was posted in American Politics, Glenn Beck. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to “Christian” “Science” Monitor freaks out over Glenn Beck’s NRA speech

  1. CC1s121LrBGT says:

    It is interesting. Many Muslims and Arabs supported the Nazis. I am not a historian, but suspect it is because England and France occupied most of the Muslim and Arab lands… enemies of oppressors, at least at first, can appear to be friends.

    • foyle says:

      In most Islamic countries Mein Kampf is a perennial best seller. The fraudelent ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ (about the ‘vast’ Jewish conspiracy that alledgely runs the world) is also a favorite in Islamic nations.

      • CC1s121LrBGT says:

        I’ve never read Mein Kampf, but have always intended to read it. One reason I never seem to get around to it is because I feel it is less important to understand what inspired the author than it is to understand what inspired a nation to follow him.

      • Art Stone says:

        I read a few chapters of it a long time ago, because the fastest way to get me to read a book is to tell me I shouldn’t. My main memory / impression was that he was not a stupid house painter. The writing was coherent and used word choices and historical references that showed he was well read and not an idiot… But a socialist to the core of his being.

        The end of world war one left Germany with an unpayable debt, mostly to France, and the long disputed Alsace Lorraine which was an unresolved disputed area from the prior Franco Prussian war and was where Germany had developed much of its heavy industry and natural resources

        That laid the foundation for a nationalist appealing to Germans that he had a plan to restore Germany’s power and influence be creating a country where workers could work toward their common vision of a restored Germany, where women would send their children off to state run child care and government ran all health care. He viewed communists as useful idiots, but ultimately tools of the Russians and not aligned with his ambitions for Germany. The socialist nationalist ambitions were gestating as Margaret Sanger and the eugenics movement were organizing society to apply the social Darwin and “family planning” to choose what humans will reproduce, invoking “science”

        • Nidster says:

          It appears many posting here are up-to-speed regarding the Nazi-Islamist connections and collaborations. Even after WWII it is notable that 2 surrender ceremonies were undertaken, and it should be even more notable that the National Socialist Workers party never surrendered, or disbanded.

          Once one considers all the German scientist who were parceled out to the Allied powers plus the various and nefarious SS who fled a sinking ship via the infamous ‘rat lines’, with the help of the Vatican by the way, can understand the apparent tolerant relations between those in power in America with all things Muslim. Oh yes, has anyone noticed that good, hard working, honest Americans are detested by those in power in America?

          So, is it any wonder that a Muslim, hiding behind a Christian label, is never criticized by the MSM? Who’s really in control?

          “SS referred to above a.k.a. die Schwarze Sonne, the Black Sun, the Black Awakening.”

  2. As a “journalist,” Ms. Haq is a hack.

    Speaking of “journalists,” when I started out as a broadcast news reporter, my experienced mentors were fairly dismissive of anyone who labelled himself or herself a “journalist” rather than a reporter.

    • CC1s121LrBGT says:

      That’s fascinating. I have never worked in the business, but my understanding as a consumer of their products is that they are not the same. The local newspapers are full of “reporters” that just go out and quote local politicians and public officials.

      The journalist to me was someone that could provide critical analysis – point out that the official had said the opposite in the past, point out possible motives for the statements and other connections between the speaker and what the speaker was speaking about, etc.

      The local newspaper here is full of reporters. “He said”, “she said” stories. I don’t think they can think for themselves. If mentioning that Paul McCartney was in the Beatles, they would need to have a “he said / she said” before they would publish a statement like that. 😉

      • Art Stone says:

        I have mentioned before but not recently that one of my markers when reporters cross over the line to being advocates is when their writing predicts the future. “Clark Street will be closed tomorrow starting at noon until around 4 PM for a parade” is a factual news item – “a large crowd is expected tomorrow at the annual gay rights parade to express support for a bill in Springfield to legalize gay marriage. Radio talk show host Karel will be speaking at Millennium Park at 6 PM for a fund raiser for the Human Rights Campaign ” is not reporting, it is advocacy of a cause – imputing motives in participants in a future event who are pursuing a political agenda….

        • CC1s121LrBGT says:

          I’d say that the statement, “Clark Street will be closed tomorrow starting at noon until around 4 PM for a parade” predicts the future and is not yet a factual item.

          I do get your point about advocacy, however saying “Radio talk show host Karel will be speaking at Millennium Park at 6 PM for a fund raiser for the Human Rights Campaign ” while also in the future, “Radio talk show host Karel IS SCHEDULED TO SPEAK at Millennium Park at 6 PM for a fund raiser for the Human Rights Campaign ” is not so much advocacy as it is stating a fact, and a reason for the fund raiser.

          Stating “a large crowd is expected tomorrow at the annual gay rights parade to express support for a bill in Springfield to legalize gay marriage. ” to me is the advocacy statement because it appears to be setting expectations without any justification. Had it said “police are planning for a crowd of X people at the annual gay rights parade to express support for a bill in Springfield to legalize gay marriage. ” it would be more factual… and probably not approved by Homeland Security. 😉

          • Art Stone says:

            Okay, “the City of Chicago announced today that Clark Street will be closed tomorrow”. It’s news because it will be happening with certainty, and if you plan to drive down the street tomorrow this is important information. It isn’t encouraging you to attend, it isn’t saying that it is a politically motivated event, it isn’t predicting any outcome beyond that it will be over at 4 PM.

            I’m not shocked that we have a difference of opinion. I’m in no way saying that a radio station should or shouldn’t present information any way they like. But if they present advocacy but call it news, I am less inclined to believe them in the future.

          • CC1s121LrBGT says:

            I agree that “the City of Chicago announced today that Clark Street will be closed tomorrow” is news and factual.

            “Come out and attend the fundraiser or rally on Clark Street” is not news. It may for a good cause – curing a disease or ending poverty – but how much if it really goes for curing the disease versus overhead, etc. 😉

            Not sure we have a difference of opinion, it is a nuance. Certainly not something that will be featured on the new CNN back from the dead Crossfire program.

        • CC1s121LrBGT says:

          Here is a current discussion on the mainsteam press and the boundary between news and advocacy:

          http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/05/08/report-cbs-news-bosses-irked-by-correspondents-thorough-benghazi-reporting-n1591242

Leave a Reply