Glenn Beck’s attempt to rape and murder 1st Amendment in 2009- fails

Court decides Beck can’t ‘rape and kill’ domain name

Roman Polanski and Glenn Beck = rapists

The master and his apprentice.

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.”  Heart candy

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. Read more of this post

Beck tosses innocent frog into boiling pot of water on air – for fun

Not to rain on Beck’s crazy parade, but his little ‘experiment‘ was soo 90′s, as in 1690′s – it was called the Salem Witch Trials

Yes, you just witnessed a man kill a frog by tossing it into a pot of boiling water on live TV for no apparent reason, other than to prove to his critics, once and for all, that he’s a homicidal lunatic who can’t be trusted near amphibians. Beck was simply doing what he does best, which is to formulate some ridiculous argument/opinion based solely on a myth, only this time he tossed a live frog into a pot of boiling water.

The frog, who is survived by four tadpoles, was said to be a kind soul who had a zeal for life and truly enjoyed living. Friends of the frog claim he was a progressive environmentalist and a big supporter of green jobs. At his eulogy earlier today, his teary-eyed brother said “Ribbet!! My little bro didn’t die in vein- in fact, I couldn’t imagine a better way my brother would’ve wanted to go than by (sniffling) – exposing Beck for the crazy lying killer that he is.”

Frog-gate has already spawned another Beck book.

Frog-gate has already spawned another Beck book. Can you say stocking stuffer?! "Frogs: Boil Them Alive" is scheduled to hit shelves in earlier December - just in time for Christmas!

Sources close to the family say they were especially outraged by Beck’s dismissive comment- “forget about the frog,” he said immediately after realizing he had committed murder. The frog’s family plan on filing a wrongful death suit in the hopes of raising awareness of Beck’s murderous ways. Upon hearing of the family’s plans to sue him, Beck issued what can only be described as a heartless response. The douchey FoxNews show host actually had the audacity to claim the frog was a prop. So it’s not enough to end an innocent frog’s life- no, no- he felt compelled to add insult to injury by dismissing the frog as fake.

For argument’s sake, let’s assume for a moment that the frog was in fact a prop. Why would Beck rest his whole premise on showing viewers how they have to “jump out of the pot” in response to Obama’s policies- only to use a prop frog he knows can’t jump out of the pot. Does he secretly want viewers to stay in the pot of boiling water and die like the frog? I don’t get it. Read more of this post

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.