Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Congressman Stirs Debate Over Oath of Office; Saddam Hussein Executed

Aired January 02, 2007 - 19:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

GLENN BECK, HOST: Something that you didn`t think was possible. Yes, a brand-new episode of the Glenn Beck program tonight.
Also, the first Muslim congressman will take his oath of office on a Koran.

And "The Real Story" behind all the news that kind of got buried over the holidays. That and much more, next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Tonight`s episode of Glenn Beck contains all new material and will not be another rerun of Glenn`s interview with Danny Bonaduce. Viewer discretion is still advised and highly recommended.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: It was relentless, wasn`t it, with the reruns?

Great to be back. Our first show in 2007. Hope you had a wonderful Christmas and New Year`s and Hanukkah and Kwanzaa or whatever else you celebrated -- or didn`t celebrate. Your choice.

Coming up in the show tonight, we`ll have more on the execution of Saddam Hussein by a guy who was actually in the room.

Plus, some of the stories that got buried over the holidays. They thought we weren`t paying attention. Oh, but I was.

But first up, the Democratic Congress gets sworn in this week, and I am convinced -- no, I know it -- other television shows tonight will be talking about Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic agenda and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and I couldn`t care less. I`m going to actually wait until they do something or don`t do something before I tell you what it was all about.

But there is one story that revolves around politics and the incoming Congress that I think is extremely relevant tonight. It is Keith Ellison. He is the first Muslim congressman, and he wants to take the oath of office with his hand on the Koran -- kind of. The Koran, not the Bible.

Now, if you`re a regular watcher of this program, you know I believe that radical Islam, not mainstream Islam, is our biggest enemy and could lead to our destruction. Having said that, here is the point tonight.

Keith Ellison, being sworn in on the Koran, is not only OK, it is quintessentially American. While radical Islam may be in danger, peaceful Islam presents our greatest hope for victory. We must, as citizens, be able to separate our fears from the facts. Here`s how I got there.

Last week, Keith Ellison was in Dearborn, Michigan, and he announced to his supporters that he would be using the Koran for his oath. The audience, when he said this, erupted in cheers of "Allah Akbar."

That is a phrase that just sends chills down my spine. It seems frightening on the surface because, well, you hear it when people are slitting other people`s throats. But actually, "Allah Akbar" just means "God is great."

Now, there are those nut jobs who use it right before they blow something up, but that doesn`t mean that it or the Koran is evil. It`s the exact same thing when crazy people quote the Bible right before they shoot an abortion doctor.

And the Bible and the Koran are not evil, but the people who twist the words of their sacred texts for their own sick agendas are. It is vital that we understand the difference.

Now, on our broader note, I want to put the whole "should the Koran be used in a swearing-in ceremony" question into context. This issue is exactly why we have freedom of religion in America.

No matter what anybody in the ACLU wants to tell you, freedom of religion is not about "let`s get the baby Jesus out of the town square." The whole concept of freedom of religion, the concept upon which our country was founded on, was designed so that you weren`t forced to belong to the Church of England. You`re free to practice whatever religion you wanted to practice.

It`s the same thing now. You don`t have to be a Christian to be an elected official. You can be a Muslim, a Jew, an atheist. If Tom Cruise somehow or another found himself elected to public office, which is a stretch, and he wanted to swear on a copy of "Dianetics", I personally think it would be hysterical, but I`d also strongly support his right to do so.

In a historical context, Teddy Roosevelt didn`t use a Bible when he was sworn in. Neither did John Quincy Adams, believe it or not. When he took the oath of office for president, he actually used a law book.

So, why are so many people upset today that Ellison is using a Koran? The answer, I believe, is fear. What we are afraid of, what we don`t understand causes that fear, and we are afraid of it every step of the way.

What we need to understand is that, while some Muslims are evil and want to destroy us, the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful people, and they represent our greatest hope for victory.

So, here`s what I know tonight. There is hatemongering on both sides of this issue. There are people among us who just want to stir up fear and mistrust of all Muslims, and there are those Muslims who want to elicit the same feelings about us non-Muslims.

If we want to avoid our ultimate destruction as people, then these people on both sides of this issue need to shut the pie holes and be relegated to the lunatic fringes of our society where they belong.

Here`s what I don`t know. I don`t know exactly -- AND I`ve done some thinking on this today. I don`t know exactly how my words will be taken out of context by people on both sides of the argument -- oh, but they will be -- and used against me somehow or another.

David Hawkings, he is the managing editor of "Congressional Quarterly".

David, I just talked about Adams and Roosevelt. There is another representative that was just sworn in on the torah, if I`m not mistaken.

DAVID HAWKINGS, MANAGING EDITOR, "CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY": I believe that`s correct. She wasn`t actually sworn in, and this is a point to make here, which is that these are photo-ops that we`re talking about. No member of Congress actually is holds -- puts his or her hand on any kind of religious text when they actually take the oath of office.

So with Debbie Wasserman Shultz, when she had her hand on a bound version of the torah, it was far photo-op, to have her -- to take her oath symbolically with the speaker of the House after she`d actually been sworn in. And that`s what we`re talking about in Mr. Ellison`s case, as well.

BECK: So you know, let me back up then and start there, because this is the most ridiculous story of all time if it`s a photo-op. There is no - - there is no controversy here, is there? It`s a photo of somebody standing with a book.

HAWKINGS: Well, photos have political importance. But you`re right. The Constitution actually makes it clear that no member of Congress can be required to use any religious text and, in fact, religious texts are actually excluded under the Constitution from the congressional swearing in.

So, this is all about wanting your picture made for your constituents, for your family scrapbook, holding the prayer book of your choice.

BECK: OK. Representative Virgil Goode, I don`t know anything about him, and maybe you can fill me in on him. He has a couple of quotes here. Let me give you one of them.

"If American citizens don`t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration, there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran."

First of all, I don`t know if this guy knows that Keith Ellison`s family came over here in, like, 1740.

HAWKINGS: Right.

BECK: So, it`s not an immigration issue. Is this guy, is he a bigot or is he just stupid or what is his story?

HAWKINGS: Well, I don`t think -- I don`t think most members of Congress become members of Congress unless they`re smart in some -- in some respects.

I think one thing we know about Virgil Goode is he has always been an ardent opponent of relaxing our immigration laws. He was one of the first and most vocal proponents of legislation, which has gone nowhere in the Congress so far, to make English the official language of our country, a federal law to make English the official language.

So he is -- in that sense, these sentiments are sort of a part of the pattern of his, but there`s never before been to my knowledge something he`s done that has had him stood accused of being bigoted.

BECK: OK. But wouldn`t this one be -- I mean, when you are looking - - when you`re saying that this is only going to allow more Muslims to come in, I for one don`t have a problem with Muslims. I have a problem with the way Muslims have entered Europe, where they`re not assimilating.

But if you want to come in and assimilate and become American, I don`t care what -- I mean, I don`t care what religion you are. Isn`t it a bigoted statement to say, look out, those Jews will come in or those Christians will come in or those Muslims will come in?

HAWKINGS: I think it is easy to understand from where I stand in a newsroom, where I`m not going to call a member of Congress bigoted, but it`s easy for me to understand how many people have seen it as bigoted, yes.

BECK: OK. Let me give you a quote from Keith Ellison. He says, "On January 4, no matter the faith, the gender, the culture of the Congressperson, all of us will swear to uphold one Constitution, the Constitution of the United States."

We had on my radio program today, a guy called in and said, you know, why doesn`t the majority speak -- the majority voice speak anymore in America? It`s somebody who I don`t think that really understands the Constitution.

But in his case, he is -- he is representing the majority of his district, is he not? I mean, Keith Ellison was elected by a Muslim, a very strong Somali Muslim community.

HAWKINGS: Well, there is -- there are some Muslims in the Twin Cities. He is -- you`ve probably already said this, but it should be noted he`s the first Muslim ever elected to Congress.

BECK: Yes.

HAWKINGS: He converted in college. It`s an overwhelmingly Democratic district, that much we know for sure. And he`s the Democrat, and so I think it`s probably his Democratic Party affiliation more than anything else that got him elected to Congress.

BECK: OK. David, thank you very much. Appreciate your time.

HAWKINGS: Thanks a lot.

BECK: You bet.

Coming up, the controversy over Saddam Hussein`s execution with a guy who was actually there and witnessed it. Will the gruesome images help or hurt the U.S.`s effort in Iraq? That`s coming up next.

And Britney Spears celebrates the new year by passing out. We`ll talk about her latest binge and why Paris Hilton is calling her an animal. That`s saying something, coming from Paris Hilton. That`s on today`s "Buzz".

Plus, Sandy Berger, the former national security adviser to President Clinton, the guy who, you remember, removed the classified documents from the National Archives in his underpants? "The Real Story": the security risk was worse than you remember. Why is no one paying attention? Don`t miss it, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Keith Ellison being sworn into Congress on the Koran, not the Bible. For a lot of the people, do you really think it makes a difference? A lot of the people in Washington are scumbags. You might as well put a porno magazine underneath their hand. It doesn`t matter.

Actually, a porno magazine might actually make them take their oath a little more seriously: "Wait a minute. I have to swear in on `Jugs`? Do I lose my subscription if I screw it up?"

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: I`m just saying.

Now, you may have ended 2006 a little tipsy and started 2007 hung over, but you`re in better shape than Saddam Hussein.

After months of courtroom grandstanding, Saddam was finally led to the gallows and treated to an ending even less surprising, believe it or not, than the one in the new "Rocky" movie.

We all knew that Saddam would end up paying the ultimate price, but what has surprised some is the reaction to Saddam`s execution within Iraq. Demonstrators have defied curfews. They took to the streets. Masked gunmen fired into the air. Women dressed in black were chanting pro-Saddam Hussein slogans, called for revenge as they gathered around this three- story mural of Saddam called "the martyr," which I`d like to know where do all these countries get these giant paintings of their leaders? That`s a different story.

Seems that Saddam`s execution has done little more than highlight the real sectarian issues facing Iraq. As the Iraqi civil war rages, you`ve got to ask yourself, was this execution a chance just for the Shiites to lynch their least favorite Sunni, or was it justice?

Joining me now is John Burns. He`s the Baghdad bureau chief of "The New York Times".

John, let`s start there. Was this -- was this just a lynching, a state-run lynching, or -- or is this justice?

JOHN BURNS, "NEW YORK TIMES": I think we have to be a little bit careful here. There certainly was a serious trial. You can argue about points of due process, but probably the fairest -- certainly the longest trial of its kind ever conducted in the Middle East.

But there was a rush to justice in those last hours when constitutional and legal inhibitions to a rapid carrying out of that verdict were, frankly, ignored.

Mr. Hussein was hauled from his cell in the small hours of the morning, put on a helicopter, flown to this execution chamber which had been used by him, actually, to execute many, many thousands of his victims. And then he was subjected, as you saw to this taunting abuse.

It certainly was not something that Americans could stomach, if they can stomach the death penalty. It was a degrading and a shameful thing. And it certainly has deeply, deeply outraged not just Iraqi Sunnis but American military commanders and American officials who -- whose purpose here is to try and sustain this Maliki government that carried out this execution.

BECK: I will tell you, first of all, I`m a conservative, but I`m against the death penalty, but if there`s anybody who deserved the death penalty, it was this guy.

What I found shameful in this or puzzling was the fact that they broke some of their own new laws to get this done. You`re not supposed to do it around a religious holiday. You`re supposed to have certain times, et cetera. I think they broke like two or three laws.

Why did they do that? What was the motivation to rush and get this done so quickly?

BURNS: Well, one answer I could give you to that was, if we understood that, if we understood why that was, if we understood the Iraqi psyche, the bludgeoned psyche of the Iraqis after 24 years of the brutality of Saddam Hussein, the United States and the United Kingdom would probably not have invaded this country in the first place.

That is to say, the attempt to construct a democracy here, a civil society on these ruins may well have been doomed from the start.

But here you have an elected government, a government elected, as you know, by 12 million Iraqis who went to the polls, behaving -- I`m sorry to say it -- in the end in a thoroughly thuggish fashion, which is simply not consistent with anything that America set out to build here.

BECK: Yes. It was -- it was a shameful scene. They were -- describe a little bit of what the scene was like. They were actually shouting at him, and I believe his last words were "al-Sadr, please," or something like that. It was -- it was a dismissal of one of the guards.

BURNS: Well, there were shouts of, "Go to hell." One official, a very senior official of the al-Maliki government demanded that he express his remorse at the last instance.

Then there were these shouts of "Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada," the name of a Shiite cleric who`s got himself into the industrial murder business himself, running a militia, a Shiite militia.

Saddam in the last moments -- this was in the last 10 seconds before the trap door opened -- Saddam repeats the name in a mocking fashion. He actually executed the -- the grandfather of this chap, Muqtada.

BECK: Right.

BURNS: And repeats the name, says, "Muqtada," and then he says, "Is this the men -- is this the way that real men behave?" And then he begins to incite something from the Koran, a poem -- "There is no God but God, and Mohammed is his messenger. And there are more shouts of "Go to hell," and then the trap door opens.

But that was just the end of a sequence that was really utterly miserable, that had lasted -- I mean, I can tell from the cell phone camera recordings, had lasted for minutes. We know from witnesses who were present that it actually began the moment he entered the execution chamber.

And who could have imagined, who could -- had Hollywood scripted this, that this mass murderer, who thoroughly deserved his end -- let`s be -- let`s be honest about it -- this mass murderer emerges from all this as the one who showed some dignity and some courage?

And his executioners, the Shiites acting in the name of his victims, who were very -- who were mainly Shiites, behaving like bullying thugs? I mean, you couldn`t invent it, could you?

BECK: Yes. John, thank you very much, and thanks for all your reporting that you`ve done in Baghdad on this issue.

Be right back in just a second.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: All right. Every day you can hear my radio program on stations all across the country, including 540 WFLA in Orlando. By the way, if you can`t find an affiliate in your area, you can listen online. Sign up on my web site at GlennBeck.com. That`s also where you can get a free newsletter from us.

Dave Glover, he is with our affiliate in St. Louis, KFTK.

Hey, David.

DAVE GLOVER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Hey, buddy. Happy New Year`s.

BECK: Happy New Year`s. Did you see -- did you see "Dick Clark`s Rocking New Year`s Eve"?

GLOVER: I did not get to see it this year. I did see it last year. I think that was his first year after the stroke.

BECK: Yes.

GLOVER: And you know, equal parts brave and sad to me.

BECK: Yes. It was -- he was on again this year. And I guess he was better than he was last year, but it just -- it was so tragically sad, you know? And he was behind in the countdown. And we got to the New Year`s Eve and I swear to you, my family, we were watching TV. We were all about in tears watching this.

GLOVER: It`s almost like a great athlete that stays too long in his career. I thought last year was incredibly brave for him and having people like you and your family who have suffered from strokes, I thought it was perfectly appropriate. This year, didn`t get to see it, but from what you`re saying, maybe one year too long.

BECK: Yes. You know what would be great? Is if they just -- if they put a deal where he was together and saying -- and you know, he could record it and say the New Year`s and give us a good new year`s message, where he was really focused. And what`s sad is you can tell he`s all there. His body`s just not working the same way anymore.

GLOVER: Yes.

BECK: And it`s just tragically sad. And you know, I mean, I don`t -- I don`t even understand it. We sit there and then we watch it. We went upstairs, and I looked at my wife. And I said this is the dumbest tradition of all time. We`re watching people in New York`s Times Square sitting in pens, peeing on each other.

GLOVER: Sure, yes.

BECK: And watching the ball drop. I don`t get it.

GLOVER: Yes. I can do that at home or in Haiti for 20 bucks.

BECK: Yes. So Britney Spears, she brought in the new year`s. I don`t know if she was wearing underpants this time.

GLOVER: Yes, I`m sure you were as shocked as I was to get up and read the paper on New Year`s Day and find out that Britney Spears had passed out dead drunk in the VIP section of a bar. Didn`t see that one coming.

BECK: Yes.

GLOVER: If there`s anything -- any substance at all to be squeezed from this, it`s that the benefit of the doubt is really based on your past performance. She says, "Oh, I was just really tired from the kids, wasn`t even drinking." I might believe that if she hadn`t spent the last three months with Paris Hilton, showing the cash and prizes to anyone with a Polaroid, you know?

BECK: You know what? Let me tell you something. Paris Hilton has now come out and said that she`s -- and I`m quoting Paris Hilton -- that Britney Spears is an animal. That`s saying something. Paris Hilton is calling you an animal.

GLOVER: That`s like having Keith Richards do an intervention for you. You know?

BECK: "Listen, dude, you`ve got a problem." It is really bad.

Now, there is also another poll out that says that Donald Trump is -- what is it...

GLOVER: The most annoying. The most annoying man with money. But you know what? Three weeks ago I would have been on the bandwagon saying, yes, that guy -- after the Rosie O`Donnell thing, though, he could be out beating baby seals with puppies. He`s a hero to me. I don`t care.

BECK: I have to tell you, that`s one of the unfortunate things about the holidays. Most people missed the Rosie O`Donnell-Donald Trump tiff where they were throwing -- they were throwing each other -- they were throwing mud at each other. It was great stuff.

GLOVER: I just loved it.

BECK: Dave, thanks a lot.

GLOVER: Thank you.

BECK: We`ll be back in a moment with "The Real Story". Don`t miss it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: All right. Welcome to the "Real Story." This is where we try to cut through the media spin and bias to find out why a story is actually important to you.

But I thought we`d start the new year out with one of my favorite "Real Story" topics, and that is polls, polls and surveys. Nothing is easier for the media to spin than good, old-fashioned poll results.

Today`s poll is about the American public`s prediction for 2007. And all of the headlines that I`ve seen declared all of them to be gloom and doom. The American people see only doom in front of them.

The real story is: Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, if anything, the poll proves that Americans are probably too optimistic. Here`s what I mean.

Let`s start with the doom, and there`s lots of it: 61 percent of the people think that it is somewhat or very likely that the U.S. will be hit by a terrorist attack this year. And 64 percent of us think that terrorists will attack somewhere in the world with nuclear or biological weapons before 2008.

Ninety-three percent believe that gas prices will go up -- uh, you think so? -- and 74 percent think global warming will get worse. OK, pretty gloomy, right?

But here`s one question that didn`t make the headlines. Researchers asked people what the likelihood of a cure for cancer being found this year. What`s the likelihood of that? I don`t know, 2 percent, 3 percent? No.

Good news, everybody. According to your fellow Americans, there is a 35 percent chance that a couple of pills will cure your brain cancer by this time next year. Unfortunately, not going to be able to really celebrate for very long, because the public also thinks the odds are 50-50 that the bird flu hits the U.S. this year. Easy come, easy go, I guess.

And my favorite prediction of all from the polls is this one: one in four Americans, a full 25 percent, believe that it is somewhat or very likely that Jesus Christ himself will return to Earth this year, 25 percent. Now, this is just a guess -- it wasn`t in the poll -- but I`m betting that close to 100 percent of those people watch this program.

Next, believe it or not, a lot of really important things, aside from all those people that died, happened over the holiday while we weren`t paying attention. But the real story tonight is that some of those things happened specifically because we weren`t paying attention. So let me catch you up on the important ones.

First, Iran surprisingly didn`t take any time off for Hanukkah. Made lots of news. It all started with the U.S. catching -- try this on for size -- the elite Iranian Revolutionary Guard troops in Iraq, finding smoking-gun evidence that they`ve been involved in the attack on coalition troops and Iraqi citizens.

Oh, it`s just a little act of war by a foreign country. Who cares? It`s Christmas. More turkey?

Then, the U.N. Security Council, which has stalled on sanctions against Iran for months, waited until two days before Christmas to finally pass sanctions. President Tom responded by first writing a secret letter to the Pope, then by saying the U.S. is a nobody who will soon be humiliated by Iran.

Oh, oh, and, then, President Tom`s adviser publicly declared that Hitler -- try this on for size -- Hitler was actually a Jew whose true intention was to establish a Jewish state. Wait. Don`t laugh. Think about that for a second. Now you can laugh.

Then, just a few days before Christmas, rape charges were finally dropped in the Duke lacrosse team case. The prosecutor probably waited until Christmas to announce it, because he hoped that people wouldn`t be paying any attention to it. Unfortunately for him, at least one group of people was paying attention: the North Carolina Bar. Now he`s facing ethics charges and possible disbarment. Good.

Then, just a few days later, an oil pipeline burst in the Gulf of Mexico, spilling over 40,000 gallons of oil into the water. I`ll bet the pipeline owners were pretty happy that it happened on Christmas Eve, because even when officials called the spill significant, nobody, especially in the media, seemed to care about it. In case you do, divers finally plugged the leak Sunday morning.

And then there was John Edwards declaring his candidacy for president in 2008, the day after Gerald Ford`s death. Good timing, John. I can only hope if you actually find yourself elected to president, your decisions will be better than that one.

But my favorite story of the holidays is the one that easily wins my holiday diversion award this year. It is the latest on Sandy Berger. Do you remember Sandy Berger? He was the national security adviser under President Clinton. He was caught stealing five copies of a highly classified document from the National Archives a few years ago. He stuffed them in his underpants.

Well, a new report has come now from the Archives` own internal inspector. It came out -- what a surprise -- just the day before Christmas, and it shed a lot more light on exactly what happened that day.

Duncan Currie, he`s from "The Weekly Standard," Duncan, tell America this whole story. It is fascinating to me. He not only stuffed them in his socks and his underpants and everything else, but then, when he left the Archives, he hid them under a construction trailer?

DUNCAN CURRIE, "THE WEEKLY STANDARD": Yes. Well, it`s unclear whether he actually -- I believe the report makes some allusion to him carrying them out in a suitcase or briefcase, or perhaps in his socks. That part of the story is still murky, as far as I can tell.

BECK: Not really essential to the story anyway, but...

CURRIE: But what`s fascinating is the National Archives` own inspector general set up something of a sting operation to monitor him, monitor Mr. Berger, after some staffers had become suspicious that he might perhaps be taking materials out based on previous visits.

And during his October 2, 2003, visit, he apparently took four copies of the same document, the after-action report on the 2000 millennium bombings, and ferried them out of the National Archives building, up the street, and then hid them, as you say, underneath a construction trailer, only to come back later to retrieve them, bring them to the offices of his Washington consulting firm, which are nearby, and, using scissors, cut up and discard three of the copies, not the fourth.

So, overall, we know he took five copies of basically the same document. There were slight variations in each copy, and he destroyed three of them. When he was later confronted by the inspector`s office of the National Archives, he ultimately -- he first lied, and then later confessed and gave back two of the copies.

So we`re still left somewhat in the dark as to why he destroyed three but not the other two.

BECK: But here`s the confusing part of this story: Who the hell is protecting this guy? If you and I did this, we wouldn`t get the sentence that he got. He got 100 days of community service. And worse yet, his security clearance was only suspended until 2008.

CURRIE: Well, the maximum penalty for doing what he did is, I believe, one year in prison and a fine of $100,000. His lawyers had initially been bargaining with the prosecutors for a $10,000 fine. The magistrate ultimately upped that to a $50,000 fine. And I believe he also got two years` probation, in addition to the three years without a security clearance.

BECK: But what I`m saying is, you`ve got a guy who was the national security adviser, when we are doing an investigation on what did we know, when did we know it. We`re talking about the biggest issue of at least the last 10 years, maybe the biggest issue that our country has ever faced...

CURRIE: Right.

BECK: ... and we`ve got this guy coming in and taking documents, as he`s preparing for the 9/11 committee, and that`s the punishment you get?

CURRIE: Right. No, I certainly agree that the severity of what he did needs to be considered in the light that he was the Clinton administration`s -- basically, their chief envoy to the 9/11 Commission, and he was responsible for briefing former Clinton administration officials on their testimony before they testified.

Now, this was in September and October of 2003, is when he took these documents, and he took them from the 9/11 Commission reading room at the National Archives. And the document in question, the reason why it was significant, was that this was the report that was mainly drafted at the behest of Richard Clarke, who was President Clinton`s chief counterterrorism adviser.

And this report, based on what many sources have said to the press and what former Attorney General John Ashcroft said in his testimony before the 9/11 Commission in, I believe, April of 2003 or 2004, this document paved the idea that the unraveling of the millennium bombing plot -- this was the plot to blow up LAX in 2000, on the millennium -- was, in fact, not the result of savvy counterterrorism operations, which the Clinton administration had always maintained...

BECK: Right.

CURRIE: ... but rather was really the result of just dumb luck.

BECK: Duncan, I have to tell you, it is amazing. And it is -- by the way, so you know, his security clearance is given back to him in 2008, just in time for possibly the next Clinton administration.

Duncan, thanks. That`s the "Real Story" tonight.

CURRIE: Thanks so much.

BECK: If you`d like to read more about this or if you`ve found a real story of your own you`d like to tell us about, go to glennbeck.com and click on the "Real Story" button.

(NEWSBREAK)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: There was a lot of my Christmas going, "I hate family. I hate family." And that`s what really started me on my search to be someone that really enjoys family, someone -- but what I discovered was -- and it`s not my in-laws` family, really, it -- because I said to my daughters and my wife, after Christmas, and we were just -- we looked at each other and we`re just like, you know, they`re closing the door -- and God bless my family -- but as we closed the door, it was closing the door.

And I think my response as the door closed on the last relative to leave, "Thank God they`re all finally gone." And I could have -- I could have had a family full of Mother Teresas and that would have been the response. "Thank God she`s finally out of here." "It`s Mother Teresa." "I know. I wanted her gone."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: And then we had New Year`s Eve, and I spent it like I spent the last 10 New Year`s Eve, you know, sitting there in my underpants, you know, eating frosting right out of the can, watching Dick Clark. So what does 2007 have in store for me, for you? Well, I don`t know about you, but, for me, one thing it doesn`t have in store: salad. Another thing: sit-ups. Not part of my future.

Here`s a guy now who`s going to tell us the future for the entire world, the rest of us. His name is Greg Tufaro. He is an astrologer. I can`t wait for the people who are going to write me and say, "Glenn, don`t you know you`re in the league with the devil now, talking to astrologers?"

GREG TUFARO, ASTROLOGER: Oh, please. Who`s going to say that?

BECK: Well, we`ll get mail. You watch. And, yes, I do know I`m in league with the devil now. I`m sorry that you know it.

So, Greg, tell me what`s in store. Let`s go through a couple of people.

TUFARO: Sure.

BECK: President Tom, Ahmadinejad.

TUFARO: Ahmadinejad?

BECK: Yes, did you read the stars...

TUFARO: The scary thing about Ahmadinejad is he is a Scorpio, OK? There are two types of Scorpios in this world. There`s a Scorpio who is like an eagle, who enlightens individuals and brings peace to other people and just enlightenment in general.

But there`s a second side, and that`s the scorpion Scorpio that likes to sting people and get them back for the harms and injustices that they`ve brought to them.

BECK: Right. But he was wearing -- in that picture there, he was wearing a holiday scarf. I don`t know if you saw that. He was wearing a nice holiday scarf.

TUFARO: Well, that`s the thing. I think, look, he`s trying to present a certain image to his people and to the rest of the world a different image. And it`s a little scary. I`d say that -- you know, are these shades of Hitler that we`re experiencing right now? Yes. You look at Hitler`s birth chart, Hitler had Saturn and Leo at the time he was born.

BECK: Oh, I hate that.

TUFARO: Well, I`ll tell you right now the world is experiencing Saturn and Leo. That`s big egos being put to the test. Are they going to be able to lead their people to what their people want? You know, it`s very frightening stuff. It`s scary.

BECK: How about Kim Jong Il?

TUFARO: Kim Jong, well, he`s an Aquarius like yourself, my friend.

BECK: Look out for those guys. They`re trouble.

TUFARO: Well, Aquarians are -- and I`m an Aquarius myself, too...

BECK: See what I mean?

TUFARO: ... we`re the humanitarians of the zodiac. We actually look for one-mind unanimity, consensus between everybody, in terms of getting along.

BECK: Wait. Wait a minute. I don`t think -- are you saying the two of us are in the same league with Kim Jong Il?

TUFARO: This is the thing. They say that Aquarius is the sign of the genius, but, as we all know, sometimes genius borders on insanity. And, ultimately, when you look at Kim Jong Il`s chart, I wasn`t sure of the year. It was 1941 or 1942.

BECK: Sure, yes.

TUFARO: Some scary things there, too.

BECK: Yes. OK. So did you look at any celebrities?

TUFARO: We looked at Mel Gibson a little bit. Mel Gibson`s a Capricorn. He`s turning 50 this year. And basic Capricorns come into their own at 50, so I certainly hope that Mel Gibson, what he`s presented over this past year, isn`t who he`s supposed to be, but I`m not the biggest fan right now.

BECK: OK...

TUFARO: For you, Glenn, I looked at your chart.

BECK: You looked at my chart?

TUFARO: Mr. Beck...

BECK: Yes.

TUFARO: ... you`re an Aquarius. This is what I say. Look to Oprah Winfrey. Oprah Winfrey, she`s finally achieving the things that she hoped for herself and her dreams. She`s opening that school in Africa.

BECK: Yes.

TUFARO: Could be the same thing for you. You should be able this year to get the things of your dreams, things that you`ve been developing for many, many years. They should come to fruition this year. So it should be a good year for you.

BECK: Maybe I should close a school in Columbus, Ohio.

TUFARO: Don`t do that. Why are you closing schools? Education is very important.

BECK: Well, not in Columbus, Ohio. There`s a really bad school there, but that`s a different story.

TUFARO: OK.

BECK: OK. So did you look at -- my family, we were talking this, because I`ve got two daughters.

TUFARO: Sure.

BECK: Let me tell you this. Ten days with my daughters...

TUFARO: Too much?

BECK: You talk about celebrities. Oh, for the celebrity front, oh, yes.

TUFARO: Yes.

BECK: We had in-depth conversations on Nicole Richie.

TUFARO: Oh, well, Nicole Richie is, unfortunately -- to me, a sad story. If you look at the girl, she must have some form of depression. She seems like she`s really destroying herself. And this next year doesn`t look any better for her.

Unless she has people rally around her and really support her and help her, somehow get over what she`s doing to herself, I`m worried about her.

BECK: She was just -- my daughter is telling me -- I don`t know if this is true -- my daughter`s telling me that she just checked into the hospital weighing like 93 pounds.

TUFARO: Ninety-three pounds, and then she`s on the highway, driving in the wrong direction, and saying that she made a mistake? I mean, those are big mistakes to be making over and over and over again. I don`t know who her people are, but, you know, that`s a big problem.

BECK: She`s getting to the point to where she could be Paris Hilton`s dog. I`m just saying. No, I`m just saying that...

TUFARO: This is what I`ll say about her. There are a series of eclipses in Virgo and Pisces. She`s a Virgo. Look towards March. Look towards September.

BECK: Will her moon be in anybody`s house?

TUFARO: I think that her moon is in trouble this year, so I hope that she figures things out.

BECK: Greg, good to be in league with Satan with you.

TUFARO: Oh, thank you, sir. Good to be in the league with you.

BECK: All right. We`ll talk to you again. Back with your e-mail here in a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: All right. Let`s go to the first e-mails of the new year. And we`ll start with John. He writes in, "I, too, must be a rodeo clown, because I just don`t get it. Why does a guy like James Brown, a convicted thief, former drug abuser, tax evader, wife beater, composer of such classic hits such as `Sex Machine,` get the network top story, and then more air time than a dead president?"

Yes, it was really kind of a James Brown love-fest for a while, wasn`t it? As far as the Gerald Ford thing goes, the main thing I guess you take away from Gerald Ford is his pardoning of Nixon. It cost him his re- election. They hammered him in the polls.

But today, if you look at the polls, you see that whole thing as the right thing to have done at the time, which is weird. If nothing else, that should tell every politician in Washington: Don`t govern by the polls. Go by your gut.

Nelimba writes in, "Dear Glenn, I have to say, you`re kind of crazy, and we love you for that. But here is the thing: Ramahanukwanzmas? Where is Hinduism? Why can`t you have us peaceful, loving, non-violent people in your little term? Mr. Beck, I hope to see some changes soon. I know it`s become your term now, but we`d very much like to be a part of it."

Wow, I`m really sorry about this oversight. I`d never thought about that. I guess we`ll have to work in the Hindu festival of lights, which I think is Diwali, right? So maybe we`d go with "Diwamahanukwanzmas"? I don`t know. It`s a work in progress. If Richard Gere is watching, wants to bring in the Buddhism thing, you know, go ahead. Give me a call. Call me.

Now, all we need to hear is from L. Ron Hubbard and, you know, whatever Madonna`s religion is this week, and we`ll work those in, and we`ll be set.

John writes in, "Good lord, Glenn. I know you deserve some time off, and I was prepared for reruns. But, my gosh, I`ve seen that Danny Bonaduce three or four times in a month. I can relate to some of the things he talked about, and it was a good show, but enough is enough. Luckily for me, a `Monk` marathon was on. No more time off for you buddy."

Yes, we did get our mileage out of that episode, didn`t we? Actually, I was thinking that we should start the GBCC, the Glenn Beck Classic Channel. There you`ll be able to get your fill of Danny Bonaduce, John Edward, Al Sharpton, the porn series, "The Extremist Agenda," the old guy who`s a driving instructor, and, of course, me crying about children with various diseases. Call your cable provider now.

You can email me at GlennBeck@CNN.com. And we`ll see you right back here tomorrow with -- yet again -- a new episode. It`s weird! Two of them back-to-back. We`ll see you then, you sick freak.

END