Glenn Beck’s attempt to rape and murder 1st Amendment in 2009- fails
November 10, 2009 8 Comments
Court decides Beck can’t ‘rape and kill’ domain name
The alleged victim of a rape and murder in 1990 can now breathe a sigh of relief knowing those seeking justice on her behalf will not be silenced by the likes of Glenn Beck any time soon. That’s because the FoxNews show host, and rumored suspect, Glenn Beck lost his lawsuit against Isaac Eiland-Hall over the domain name of his site – glennbeckrapedand murderedayounggirlin1990.com. This decision has made it safe again to ask the question at the heart of the controversy- Did Glenn Beck rape and kill a woman in 1990? And, if he didn’t why hasn’t he denied the allegations?
Due to Beck’s silence on the issue, concerned Americans are no closer to answering the question today than when the story broke back in the beginning of September. The site in question was created almost immediately after news of Beck’s possible involvement in the 1990 rape became public. The site has become the headquarters for concerned citizens devoted to discovering the truth behind the vicious rumor that Glenn Beck raped and killed a woman in 1990. Although Beck has not publicly addressed the allegations, he clearly wants these rumors to go away as evidenced by his botched attempted cover up, which was debunked right here on UnreasonablySafe.com.
The decision is a significant win for not only vaginal rights advocates, but also for freedom of speech lovers too. Because had the ruling gone in Beck’s favor, it would’ve surely discouraged the public from investigating more unsolved 1990 Glenn Beck rape and murder cases. Although, the court remained silent on the actual rumor itself, its ruling clearly leaves the door wide open for further questioning of Beck’s supposed innocence. Some have even suggested that based on Swiss customs, the court’s silence actually means that it is interested in hearing Beck’s side of the story and he should promptly confirm or deny the allegations in a very detailed affidavit. Others were less sympathetic, one anonymous observer of the Beck case said, “regardless whether WIPO is in Switzerland or not- the fact is we let him walk out of that courtroom without handcuffs. I mean and we had him in our midst and we let him walk right out the front door- we should have busted him for rape and murder and asked questions last. It’s likely that the poor woman in 1990 would have wanted it that way- because I’m pretty sure he didn’t ask for permission before he raped her and killed her.”
Surprisingly, Beck’s supporters have joined his detractors in openly criticizing him and his lawsuit for being deceptively hypocritical. Many cite his characterization of the freedom of speech as, “our most precious right” and people’s ability to speak out as “the supposed watchdog of our Republic.” Beck seems to think the First Amendment only applies when he’s the one hurling offensive insults and allegations, and not when he becomes the target of allegations. Because, while Beck was claiming his freedom of speech protected his brand of incendiary rhetoric from White House criticism of FoxNews, he was simultaneously trying to prevent others from exercising their right to speak out against him.
Despite embarrassing Beck in court, Eiland-Hall decided to give him control of the site and basically told Beck- ‘I won, you can have the stupid domain because thanks to you I more than proved my point and I don’t need it anymore.’ Eiland-Hall’s gesture of giving Beck the domain might seem unjustifiably polite, it was actually a sneakily shrewd move because it officially put the ball in Beck’s court. Beck was now faced with two options-maintain the site open, or take it down. While leaving the site open won’t make the allegations go away anytime soon- it makes him look like he’s got nothing to hide. On the other hand, if he immediately shuts it down he looks like he’s got something to hide and would surely raise even more suspicions.
Now, ask yourself what would you do, if it was alleged that you had raped and killed a girl in 1990 and wanted the story to go away as quickly as possible? If you answered: deny the allegations and leave the site up- you’re right!! Well, apparently Beck didn’t think so, as he did the exact opposite and immediately took down the site without releasing a statement. Time will show that Beck’s move to shut down the site will only cause the water to get murkier and deeper in the pool of suspicion Beck finds himself wading. Why has he spent anywhere between $500K – 1.4 million to try and break the will of the brave who dare to ask whether he raped and murdered a woman in 1990? Why did he refuse to deny the allegations at the beginning when doing so would have been free? Why do all his actions tend to make him look more and more like he has a terrible secret he’s hiding?
While fears of being raped and murdered by Glenn Beck in 1990 will probably always haunt us, thanks to Eiland-Hall and the First Amendment at least we no longer have reason to fear that Beck will come after us for having the courage to ask people like Beck about their murky past. So it is without any fear that I ask the question on everyone’s mind- Whether Glenn Beck allegedly raped and murdered a girl in 1990? And, if he didn’t why doesn’t he just deny the allegations?
ORIGINAL ARTICLE- Did Glenn Beck rape a woman in 1990? Answered!! Well sort of…
FOLLOW UP – UPDATE!!! Beck’s attempt to disprove the rape rumors DEBUNKED here
BECK STRIKES AGAIN!!! Beck raped a metaphor and killed a frog on live TV for no reason
Also check out….