Murdoch’s mouthpiece: It’s not what Beck exposes, it’s the issues he deflects and who he discredits that counts
Posted: July 10th, 2010 by Militant Libertarian
Well, one prudent thing to do would be to contact the previous employer.
Can you imagine FOX News, as it called CNN to get a character reference for Glenn Beck? What do you suppose CNN would report?
Well, they would likely tell FOX that Glenn was good at following orders, toeing the “station line” and reporting what he was asked to do. For CNN, that would be the “liberal line”. Did he do a good job? Would CNN tell FOX he was great for CNN? Or, would they say, well Glenn became too “Republican” for our liking, and so we realized he had to go. Kind of like Lou Dobbs?
Well, Dobbs would have been a bit of a different issue we might all agree. Dobbs was looking at the North American Union and was disgusted by what he saw. He could not contain his disgust, and his position made his staying at CNN impossible. His position made going to FOX impossible too.
How about MSNBC? No good either, sorry Lou!
Dobbs had nowhere to go because exposing the dark side about the North American Union was faux pas broadcasting. It didn’t matter if it were on FOX (conservative) or CNN (liberal), the issue of exposing the NAU was off-limits. Any news anchor that voiced his own opinion on the subject was undesirable. And, why is that? Most of us know the answer, but there remains many of us that need to learn.
As mentioned over and over, it is significant that Beck, for CNN interviewed Ron Paul on the Presidential campaign trail in 2008. It is significant that Beck mentioned his own understanding that the NAU would lead to a World Government, and he asked Paul if he agreed. Of course Ron Paul did. Was it Beck’s personal opinion and concern as it was for Lou Dobbs?
While Dobbs put his career on the line to stand up for principle, the comparison to Beck is important. To my knowledge, like water off the backside of a duck, Beck shelved the thought and discussion because it no longer served the purpose his employer required. It looked more like a “call out” of Paul to make him look radical than a pure seeking of truth and concern for the ravages of what the North American Union would do to the United States, Mexico, and Canada. Dobbs knew what it meant, and he stood up to it. Beck? He was likely doing what he was told to fulfill the political agenda his employer needed him to carry out.
So, when FOX checked Beck’s employment history, did CNN tell FOX he does what he is asked to do? Does Beck toe the station line?
The nature of the show and FOX itself would have us believe they are the counter to all crappy news sources. Nobody tells you the “truth” like FOX!
Now, onto the point.
Who owns Fox News? Rupert Murdoch.
Not long ago, when Beck was explaining his wonderful ability to bring the truth, he mentioned Rupert Murdoch as the man that allowed him to tell us all what is going on.
It’s interesting that Beck bashes communism so freely. Interesting because his boss has long strived to get his news into China:
Mr. Murdoch has flattered Communist Party leaders and done business with their children. His Fox News network helped China’s leading state broadcaster develop a news Web site. He joined hands with the Communist Youth League, a power base in the ruling party, in a risky television venture, his China managers and advisers say.
Okay, forget Murdoch’s ties to communist China, how about Bilderberg.
Not long ago, you might recall Beck defended the Bilderberg Group. You don’t need the Bilderberg Group to explain anything Beck told us. Why would he deflect concern or investigation from the Bilderbergers? Could it be because (and I know this is not a shock to most of us) Rupert Murdoch is a Bilderbergertoo?
Glenn Beck is the mouthpiece for Rupert Murdoch and it is not likely he is doing anything any different from what he did for CNN – he is following the station’s agenda, and Murdoch’s will.
So, if Murdoch is a Bilderberger, is it a surprise Beck would deflect concern about Bilderberg?
And, check out Murdoch himself admit that the news is used to “further the agenda”, and “disclosing certain things can shape the agenda in a limited way”. What agenda?