9/11 Truth Activist Sues Glenn Beck and Fox News for Defamation

Originally posted by Rams59lb
Again you admitte you haven't heard or seen his latest remarks regarding 9/11 truthers which was two nights ago while working for Fox.

Umm....do you actually read what others post?
In my previous post I said that I did actually watch the show. Please try and keep up. I hope you are not intentionally being disingenuous in order to help you make a lame point.

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by Rams59lb
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

quote]
No, actually, it called defamation.

Thank you for validating my Thread! Defamation is what the story is about. Any ways, he has a right to an opinion but not to report it on National TV as fact. He says "I don't know if this is true or not but" and then continues to make the statement as fact. I'm done

reply to post by Rams59lb


So, I'd ask then what exactly, EXACTLY did he say?

Edit to add: You know what, don't try to answer that, it'll just get argumentative and no one needs that. It is curious that you left off the rest of my quote when you said that I validated your thread. It was not my intention to validate your thread, just to add fact. You left the real fact off, so I will repeat it.

From page 1: "No, actually, it called defamation. Slander is written and is criminal, defamation is civil. Also, they have to prove that he KNEW what he was saying was false. I highly doubt because of his consistent history with his OPINION, that they will get very far."

This case really doesn't have merit.



[edit on 12/6/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


Here is the link to the thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

No offence but I am done trying. Sometimes you just have to walk around a wall when it is too thick.

No such thing as bad publicity where TV personalities are involved. As I said to the OP yesterday, I don't appreciate nor respect the sweeping generalizations that Beck was espousing on 10 June.

That said.......... defamation? c'mon, that's silly. Class action, possibly, but defamation is against an individual's character, not a group. Very difficult to prove defamation, as it ties closely into First Amendment issues.

It's okay, I suppose to accuse polical pundits, our current President, or past President of horrific unproven things, but a TV personality oooooooo that's MUCH different.

What I find kind of interesting also is some of the remarks I see on various websites in regard to Beck's big mouth. I mean........ yes, I thought what he said was foolish and intentionally sensationalized. That's Beck........ but.......... string him up? burn him? Lot of very violent talk that would perhaps not be sanctioned if someone were talking about THEIR particular icon/hero.

Just something to think about. thanks for the thread Rams.

cheers

reply to post by Rams59lb


Ah... we crossed threads when I was editing mine. See mine above yours.

reply to post by argentus


I totally agree. And I'll go one further. All of the people slinging name calling, etc. towards Beck should probably consider that HE has more of a case for defamation than they do.

Again, I say... You might not agree with his opinion but he has the RIGHT to express that opinion.

reply to post by WhatTheory

baseless claims

FYI people make claims about me, a truther, in public constantly, on TV constantly, in the mainstream media constantly. This man is trying to get people to answer for it.

What exactly has he lied about?

There's a difference between opinion and blatant misrepresentation, that's why the ability for slander and libel suits exist.

Edit: excess of clarity :p

[edit on 12-6-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

Maybe the so-called "truthers" can hire the lawyer who sued Captain Crunch because "Crunch Berries" are not real berries?

How can you prove defamation to a group when they have no credibility in the first place?

reply to post by argentus


I agree with your opinion, all my threads are for awarness purposes, for discusion and to have inteligent debate. I will admit that "Beck" is simply being "Beck" and as I have said in my previous threads "I have enjoyed both his Raido and TV show for a few years now but this last stunt besides the "FEMA" debackle really got to me lol. It's one thing making it clear that "this is my opinion" compared to broadcasting it as fact. Nancy Grace makes her living at that and would wish GB wouldn't.

All will be well, call the black Holocopters back to base now lol.

reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage


Exactly...rapinsbatisalltherage...gasp,has it right.Beck is a prime candidate for libel unless he can prove otherwise,which he can't..still the way the courts work he will get away with it without the case going far.Sad but true.

reply to post by Rams59lb


Well said Rams. You're on your own with black helicopters; my level of ordinance is along the lines of a very fine coconut trebuchet.

i]reply to post by Solomons


He still enjoys the presumption of innocence, same as everyone else tried in U.S. courts. I imagine the burdeon of proof IF this suit is even filed at all, will be upon the plaintiff(s).

"Slander is written"

Actually, "slander" is verbal

www.thefreedictionary.com...

"libel" is written

www.thefreedictionary.com...

The least you can do is use a dictionary before you state something which is inaccurate, not once, but twice.

Glenn Beck is just another mainstream media flunky who can be compared to a third rate actor reading some fictitious script from a teleprompter. Just ignore him and he'll go away, like a slug with nothing to feed on.

i think we identified what member ...what theory..... thinks of this lawsuit ....that is their opinion......lets continue to stay on topic as best we can

Fox news should change their title to fox report and opinons.....there for nobody would assume the news= reality besides when taken to court not like they defend the accuracy of their claims just that it is "entertainment"

and while fox is at it .....MSNBC....and CNN need to follow

Glen beck should go back to DRINKING he contributes more to society when he is falling down drunk then when he paints deceptive asssociations wth a disgusting lack of critical thinking.......the most dangerous thing is that is the extent to which most people give these issues....they take opinions at face value if it is convenient

nobody wants to come home after a long day and conduct a research report and double check the motives for opinions being parroted on the tv....they sit down have a beer and looke to get "filled in"...they assume that someone on a tv "news" channel is somewhat intelligent and then they listen to him babble.....when enough of his babble is repeated it begins to sink in to the viewers opinion......

when thinking all the corruption and lies in the world ..sometimes i think it would be better if mother nature just hit the reset button.....that way things may have a chance of starting over ande people would possibly be able to enjoy a better more caring world....but then i remind myself that .....that road would be even full of more death and violence then we have now........times like that .....i understand how and why a member "disgusted by humanity" may choose such a user name

[edit on 12-6-2009 by cpdaman]

I agree I don't mind opinion and free speech as long as it is presented as OPINION not NEWS!

O'Reilly, Hannity, Savage et al have a great deal of responsibility for fomenting hatred and violence and bear responsibility for igniting insanity. How do they sleep at night...I don't know I guess it's the money...buys lots of sleeping pills, hillbilly heroin and hookers.

These "opinion makers" are culpable for the Holocaust shooter.

I have been around the "truth movement" for years and have yet to meet one single white supremacist or terrorist not a single one. Most I have met want to know what really happened that day and hold the criminals responsible.

TPTB are getting scared again or are preparing another operation and want to marginalize dissent.

seems a open and shut case to me. kick em where it hurts, the wallet. Maybe they will put a leash on their wild dog beck

No matter if you like GB or hate him, why don't some of the same people who are seeking the truth, sue some of the talking heads on CNBC, and MSNBC for the outright lies they spew daily. Wait---that's because it's their opinion. The same opinion that GB has. These groups need to grow up. It's a dog eat dog world, and they're wearing Alpo underwear.

I wouldn't want to curtail anyone's free speech , however when Beck attempts to slander someone like this and gets away with it I get a bit miffed. I will not go into how I feel about the man.

When he looses his job at Fox and The Black Helicopter "TOOL" Co. won't even hire him I will be satisfied.

T.R.

Originally posted by Rams59lb
reply to post by WhatTheory

 

I know that the other Members of ATS are rolling there eye's at me laughing for even trying to explain this to you but I am reaching down deep into my very patient bag so that maybe you will look up the video with his statement or you can just find my other thread to see it on ATS.

Have a great day and thanks for commenting anyways

ahaha. It's not so often that I laugh on this site... you nailed it hard. The passive-aggressive attitude of some people (here anti-truthers) is sometimes aggravating, although the same surely can be said for the other side.
Thanks for cutting through with a little humour.

TheTilde

The case will unfortunately fail.

Reason being the courts ruled the news does not have to report the truth in another case, it's posted somewhere on here.

So it's dead in the water. So if he can call the "911-Truthers" "terrorists" and "racists" over and over again can we say the same about him considering he is being racist with those statements alone? All it takes is one colored person to sue him for calling him a white supremacist when he obviously isn't even white. Not sure if that's deformation of character, racism or just plain being a moron.