Return to Transcripts main page
Glenn Beck
Is John Mark Karr Guilty?; What`s the Future for Security?
Aired August 18, 2006 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: This portion of Glenn Beck is brought to you by John Mark Karr P.R. Public relations for fans of prepubescent relations. Just claim blame for the crime and go from back alley to front page in no time. John Mark Karr P.R., P.R. for the perverted.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GLENN BECK, HOST: All right, I know what you were thinking here. You`re thinking this JonBenet story is incredible. But it`s just not weird enough for my taste, right? Well, buckle up, brother, because here we go.
Last night, I told you that after John Mark Karr confessed, I really felt guilty for mentally convicting JonBenet`s parents all these years. Today, I get up and I start reading the paper and I realize, "Geez, I think I feel guilty again today, but this time for another reason." I think I may have rushed to exoneration here. I don`t believe this guy at all.
My turning point last night, I got home and I watched the press conference, if you will, this video, I mean, this, this is a freak show, isn`t it? I mean, this looks more like an appearance by a rock star than, you know -- or maybe appearance by a chess champion than the press conference with a murderer.
And he`s also walking around unrestrained. I mean, is there anybody outside, you know, of the sex district in Thailand that has a pair of handcuffs we can throw on this guy?
But more importantly, this is the video that turned me. His answers and his reactions tell the story. Watch this video.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you an innocent man?
JOHN MARK KARR, MURDER SUSPECT: No.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you the tell us your connection to the Ramsey family?
KARR: No comment on that.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How did -- how did you get into the basement?
KARR: No comment on that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: I mean, that, that says it all. It was that second answer, that "no comment." I don`t think he even knows.
You`ll confess to killing her, but you feel uncomfortable saying how you know the Ramseys from Tuesday night pinochle? He doesn`t seem credible. Despite the reports that, you know, he knows details that weren`t made public.
And you know what that tells me? I haven`t learned a damn thing from this case. Now, I`m making another rash judgment in a murder investigation based on nothing but 17 seconds of video. It`s the same thing I did with the Ramseys. Somebody stop me.
Most importantly, guilty or innocent, this guy creeps me out. Now, legally, that may not be enough to throw away the key on the guy, but let me lay out a case for you.
Here`s John Mark Karr`s freak resume. Cops say he frequents Bangkok`s sex bars. He lived in a beautiful 0.3-star hotel that charges by the hour for easy access to these sex clubs.
He married a 14-year-old. His wife says she was scared of him. It wasn`t because he was violent, just pushy.
His second marriage just as weird, but this time, you know, he decided to go for the older woman. She was all of 16 this time.
Plus, he named one of his kids Seven Exodus. Isn`t that enough to put him on trial? I mean, seriously?
He was also arrested for child porn in 2001. He fired multiple times -- he was fired multiple times as a teacher, one time for being, quote, "too affectionate," end quote, with children.
I am guessing that this resume was posted -- I don`t know, I mean it belongs on Monster.com, honestly.
But to turn the weirdness factor up just one more notch here, reports say that he was apparently obsessed with celebrities, especially Sonny and Cher. I mean, of all the celebrities to be obsessed with, you pick Sonny and Cher? I can see it coming now. He`s going to confess very soon that he was posing as a tree on a ski slope some place.
Look, here`s the deal. My gut tells me this guy wants to rap himself in that JonBenet case. I told you that last night, and I`m telling you, that`s what`s happening.
But if Karr is lying about this confession, why? Why? I mean, need I remind you how unpleasant jail is for child molesters? I mean, how bad does your life have to suck that you think spending eternity in that situation is an improvement?
What has this world come to, you know, if you can`t trust a man who married a 14-year-old arrested for child porn, moved to Thailand, confessed to drugging, having sex and murdering a 5-year-old, who can you trust, America?
So, here is what I know tonight. I believe this guy should be locked up. I don`t, you know, exactly know for what, yet, and I don`t know how we do it, but I do know for how long. Eternity.
I`m no constitutional scholar, but I am a thinker. I also know that if he didn`t do it and he gets out, he`s going to be humiliated and I think that puts everybody in danger of being the victim in his sick mission to prove he is a real child killer and not some non-child-killing poser.
What I don`t know in this PC world of ours where we all are, "Hey, let`s just understand the molester" is how long it will take for people to start making excuses for this guy. I mean, you know it`s coming. Has it happened yet?
I also don`t know how exactly to keep him behind bars. Sure, misleading the cops will get him into trouble, but I don`t want this guy walking the streets ever.
Dr. Robert Berger, he`s a forensic psychiatrist.
Dr. Berger, you think this guy is a danger regardless of his guilt in this crime?
ROBERT BERGER, FORENSIC PSYCHIATRIST: Yes, I mean, obviously, I didn`t examine him.
BECK: Right.
BERGER: But based on people I did examine who have similar profiles, yes, he`s dangerous to the welfare and safety of the community to a certain degree. Perhaps not the level of violence he`s confessed to, but certainly, to harming children from a psychological perspective and that`s sometimes equally as damaging to them.
BECK: Would you feel comfortable with him living next to your family?
BERGER: No. And this is a man who has actually apparently been a tutor to young children overseas.
BECK: Right.
BERGER: And just posing as an individual who can take care of children, represents a hazard as far as I feel, and a risk to the public.
BECK: OK. He apparently knew some gruesome details that police say only the killer knew, but he`s also got some other things wrong. I mean, how do you explain that, if he didn`t do it?
BERGER: Apparently, he had been obsessed with JonBenet Ramsey and others in the past. To the point that he studied almost every detail that was available, every book that was written, everything that was posted on the Internet. And the Internet is a large source of information now.
And, of course, these comments from law enforcement are preliminary.
BECK: OK.
BERGER: We don`t know whether they`re matched up against the real information from the medical examiner or not.
BECK: Well, you were involved in another case of a 12-year-old girl, Polly Klaas, and he had the death certificate of Polly with him or had a copy of it. What does that tell you about the guy?
BERGER: It tells me that this is a man who becomes so immersed in his fantasy that it overcomes what his external reality is. And he assimilates more and more information that reinforces his fantasy more and more.
Then you take some type of psychosocial stressor, something that happens in his world, where his some reality is unpleasant. And he becomes more and more immersed in his fantasy.
BECK: Oh, wait, wait, wait.
BERGER: And I think that he becomes -- he believes that he`s part of this.
BECK: Oh, wait, oh, no, I think it just happened. Wait a minute. I think it`s just...
BERGER: It`s not an excuse, no.
BECK: It just happened on my show.
BERGER: No, I`m not offering an abuse excuse, not at all.
BECK: You`re not saying that?
BERGER: No.
BECK: Because I mean, I -- I`ve got to tell you, I mean, it sounded to me a little like you were saying, "Hey, his reality is shattered. He doesn`t know what`s real and what`s not anymore."
BERGER: No, explanation is very different than excuse. And we can explain anyone`s conduct if we know enough about them. But that doesn`t excuse it.
BECK: What does this tell you? There`s two -- let me give you these two e-mails. He said, the first one was in the "Rocky Mountain News" today. It`s an excerpt of several of the e-mails and you should read the whole thing. It`s frightening.
He said to the documentary filmmaker, "Go and stand in front of her house and read this to her." And it was "JonBenet, my love, my life. I love you and I shall forever. I pray that you can hear my voice calling to you from my darkness, this darkness that how separates us." What`s that?
BERGER: That creeps you out, doesn`t it?
BECK: Oh, oh...
BERGER: Scary. I mean, clearly, he has some sort of eroto-manic obsession at minimum. He`s just so clearly immersed in this individual, and it`s frightening. But it also tells you how -- how odd he is that he doesn`t appreciate or understand that somebody else is going to think that that`s pretty peculiar.
BECK: Yes.
BERGER: And he thinks that somebody`s just going to go out there and read his poem for him.
BECK: Right.
BERGER: And that`s somewhat scary.
BECK: Doctor, I appreciate your time. I`ve got to -- I have to tell you, what I fear is that we`re giving him exactly what he wants, a media circus. Thank you very much.
Whether John Mark Karr is guilty or just plain nuts, or both, remains to be seen, but what I do know is when all is said at done, this guy has just gotten a free flight back to the U.S. out of the deal. And I do have a hunch I know what airline he will be flying.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Are you convinced you were the second gunman in the Kennedy assassination? Are voices in your head telling you Tupac, Biggie and Jimmy Hoffa all died thanks to your murderous tendencies? Then fly free on Extradition Airlines.
How easy is it? Just pick a great unsolved crime. Then simply report your crime to the local authorities and then leave the flying to us, Extradition Airlines. We love to fly homicidal maniacs, and it shows.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`re now free to confess your crime.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: The thing with the security at the airports, come on, man! Why is it we`re never ahead of them? Why is it we got a guy -- we got guys with Gatorade and we`re like, "Wait a minute. He`s got explosive stuff in bottles. We should ban bottles."
The next time I`m in an airport, I need the duct tape to wrap my head up so it doesn`t explode when I see the sign "Don`t bring fireworks on the plane." I get it! I`d like a sign that says, "Don`t bring this on because that`s what they`re probably working on next." Can we get ahead of these guys?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: You know, I`ve been saying it for the last month. I personally believe our biggest threat right now is Iran, but I mean, they`re all -- I mean, our threats are all around us. I really believe Iran is going to step to the -- to the table and play a very dangerous card soon.
With that being said, the recent events have shown us, "Hey, let`s not forget about our old friend al Qaeda." Officials say there is a major al Qaeda link among those arrested in London last week.
We really did destroy the al Qaeda that existed on 9/11. Unfortunately for us, they`ve grown and mutated into something a little special extra creepy. It`s the new and improved al Qaeda: bigger, badder and wider in scope. And we just may be helping them out, as well.
Right before I came in the studio today, I see this clip. I have to play this for you. Look at this clip from our incredible crack security team.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What I`m going to share with you in a minute is actual screen shots. It was until 15 minutes ago classified material, and we decided to declassify it because of the intense interest.
What you have here is a pair of photographs of a shoe with explosives in it and a shoe without explosives in it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Stop. Stop, I can`t take it. I can`t take it. "This is classified, but there`s a lot of interest." Why are we now showing that we can detect bombs in shoes? We`re either bluffing or we`re stupid.
Al Qaeda now has gone global. We need to recognize that. It`s a huge threat.
Lawrence Wright, the author of "Looming Tower: An In-Depth Look at al Qaeda."
Lawrence, what do you suppose the future holds for us? Are they -- did we -- did we thwart them here, or is this just one of many things they`re working on?
LAWRENCE WRIGHT, AUTHOR, "LOOMING TOWER": Well, Glenn, you know, the British alone are investigating as many as 70 different plots. So I think that there are many, many such efforts going on, not just in Britain but all over Europe, in the Middle East, and who knows, perhaps in our own country.
BECK: Now, you say that they are more dangerous than they were on 9/11. That`s just because they are -- they`re not tied down like they were during 9/11, and they are -- their reach is just enormous?
WRIGHT: Well, what`s happened since 9/11, Glenn, is that al Qaeda, the mother ship, has been pretty much contained, although certainly not entirely. It`s still active and still able to produce videos and give directions.
But the organization has mutated, and it`s not just smaller groups like we saw in England. All over the world there are groups that are connected loosely, tied through the Internet, seemingly now getting training in Pakistan again, which is a very dangerous development.
If you add to that the returning veterans from Iraq, who can bring an enormous amount of expertise to these homegrown groups, we could be looking at a lot of trouble for a long time.
BECK: I`m trying to figure out -- I can`t figure out for the life of me Pakistan. I mean, they`re an ally. Musharraf seems to be the bravest guy in the world. But everything stems -- I mean comes right out of Pakistan. Are they friend or foe, or what is the deal with Pakistan?
WRIGHT: I don`t think that friend or foe are good terms to use in the greater Middle East. We`re always trying to pin our alliances in one direction or another, and the truth is that they`re always shifting, and everybody`s always looking out for their interests.
Pakistan is a very rocky nation. And it has a difficulty -- I mean, Musharraf has had several assassination attempts against him by al Qaeda. He would certainly like to eliminate al Qaeda. But he has quite a lot of internal resistance, even in his own army. So it`s a real difficult balancing act.
BECK: The No. 1 question that I hear from people on the -- on my radio show and when I meet people in the streets and stuff if you`re talking about this stuff is how close do you think we are?
I mean, there`s this -- Bernard Lewis says we should look to August 22 as a significant date. He`s not predicting anything`s going to happen, but he warns that we`re coming up to our five-year anniversary of 9/11. Are they tied to dates? Do you sense something big right around the corner, or...
WRIGHT: Well, it could have been that this attempt that was recently busted up by the British might have been that.
Yes, they are tied to dates. They are -- they like anniversaries. Even, for instance, going back to the embassy bombings in 1998. That was a date tied to the date in August when the American troops arrived in Saudi Arabia. There is a certain resonance. They like to commemorate things.
And -- but that doesn`t mean that they might not strike at any time. Nine eleven itself was kind of an arbitrary date picked by Mohammed Atta, the ring leader here in the U.S., because of a convergence of factors. Availability of flights and so on.
So I think if we`re just looking for special days, we might be blind to the danger on ordinary days.
BECK: Lawrence, I appreciate it. Thank you very much for your work, sir.
WRIGHT: Thank you, Glenn.
BECK: You bet.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: My name is Glenn Beck. Thanks so much for viewing the show. In case you don`t know, I do a radio show, and talk radio is really changing. It`s just not -- you know, it`s not for your grandparents anymore, at least not the way I do it. And another guy who`s really changing the face of talk radio on our affiliate in St. Louis on 97.1 FM, Dave Glover in the afternoon.
Hi, Dave.
DAVE GLOVER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: How are you doing, buddy?
BECK: Very good. What`s happening in St. Louis?
GLOVER: Like usual: sex, man. Sex, sex, sex.
BECK: Really?
GLOVER: Actually, we were talking today on the show about, you know, there`s this new case where a sex club was busted in a high school. High schoolers and some teachers...
BECK: What is -- what`s a sex club? For those people who are not cool enough. I mean I know, but...
GLOVER: No, it`s -- evidently it`s like what it sounds like. The kids got together and they made a club where you can meet others of your age, say 12, 14, and get together for anonymous sex, and then you talk about it. You know, that kind of thing.
BECK: That`s a club that wouldn`t have let me in. They would been carding me.
GLOVER: One of these days.
BECK: I`m sorry. I need to see your club admittance papers.
GLOVER: You and I need to have a dork-off one of these days.
BECK: I know.
GLOVER: To see who would win.
BECK: That was disturbing the way that was phrased. But...
GLOVER: You know, Glenn, I remember when I was 13, 14 years old, just beginning my career. That was back in the days, thank God, when girls wore sweaters over sweaters, and put sweaters...
BECK: Yes.
GLOVER: They could have been wearing an Egyptian sarcophagus. It wouldn`t have mattered to me. I was still...
BECK: Yes.
GLOVER: And with the explicit lyrics, a study just came out that said kids who listen to sexually explicit lyrics are having more sex, having earlier sex. Once again, Pat Boone music had me ready to go. So I feel bad for these kids.
BECK: You know, I`ve got to tell you. I have from -- does anybody know -- I think it`s Kenny Chesney on tomorrow`s radio program. And one of the questions that I want to talk to him about is the difference between country music and popular music.
Popular music, I`ve got to tell you, I mean, I hate to sound like my grandfather: "Music these days, you don`t even understand it." But it is really -- there is a difference between -- if you look at country music and the pop music of the day, it is so vile that I don`t know how -- do you want your kids -- how old are your kids, Dave?
GLOVER: I have an 11-year-old and an 18-month-old, and here`s the deal, man. It`s capitalism at work. Capitalism at its best. People have found a product that they can sell, which is explicit lyrics, explicit videos, and movies to kids.
Well, the big thing with that is that the kids shouldn`t be making those entertainment choices. It all, to me, comes down to parenting.
BECK: Yes. You know, I don`t -- I don`t understand how people think that you can put trash into your head, you know, where you can -- you can have your kids watch anything.
And I hear this all the time from parents who are yelling at me constantly: "Who are you, blah, blah, blah?" I know I`m not the best parent in the world. I`m just saying that how is it that you really think that your 8-year-old cannot be affected and can understand story lines on television? I mean, it`s -- I mean...
GLOVER: You know what it is. It`s because it makes the parenting easier.
BECK: That`s exactly right.
GLOVER: And here`s another one. Here`s the last thing to talk about today. A new study, actual study, came out that proves beyond medical questionability that women who are married after four years want sex less than their husbands.
BECK: No! How much did we spend on that survey?
GLOVER: Lots.
BECK: Here, I`ll give you this one for free. No kidding!
GLOVER: What`s going on in scientist school when they graduate and cancer, AIDS, no?
BECK: Honey, I just -- I needed to go do a survey. I was surveying married women. Dave, thanks a lot.
GLOVER: Thanks, buddy.
BECK: Bye.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: All right. Welcome to "The Real Story." This is where every night I bring you a couple of stories that the media, I think, has just missed the mark on.
First up tonight is the continued fallout from the Mike Wallace interview with President Tom from Iran. After the interview, you remember, Wallace said, "President Tom seemed like a reasonable man and, gosh darn it, he`s smart as hell."
But the real story today is that President Nut Job, as I like to call him, is, well, actually a nut job. If you remember earlier this year, when the riots were taking place all over Europe and the Middle East after the newspapers published the cartoons depicting Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban, in the midst of all of these riots, the Iranian newspaper, which I`m sure is definitely not controlled by the government at all, they decided to have a Holocaust cartoon contest -- that sounds funny -- where the artists could make fun of the whole Holocaust being just a giant myth. The point was apparently to show us Westerners how we`d react when confronted with something that shocks us to the core.
Well, this past Monday, 204 of those cartoons went on display at a museum in Tehran. And shock us they have. We are seeing an enormous backlash on these cartoons in cities all across the world. In fact, let me show you the riots that are taking place now in the streets of Paris which -- no? OK. It doesn`t look like riots in Paris. But let`s go to the live shot, please, of London. There it is. You can see -- OK, nothing really happening there.
You know why? There are no riots! There are no backlash! Nothing is happening. Why? Because we`re not crazy; we`re reasonable. And that, President Nut Job, is the difference between the civilized world and you.
And speaking of crazy, the headline in the "New York Times" this morning proclaimed, "Democrats Asserting Bush has Diminished U.S. Safety." The article talks about how the Democrats are now going on the offensive to say that they can keep us even more safe than the Republicans.
And to prove it, they`ve just launched an ad on their Web site showing an overseas terrorist attack -- yes -- and a video of Osama bin Laden, clearly implying that -- this is going to make blood shoot out of my eyes - - the Republicans are causing the apocalypse. All this, of course, comes on top of last week`s claims by the Republicans that Ned Lamont, the Democrat running against Joe Lieberman, doesn`t understand security and will never be able to keep us safe.
Now, here`s the real story on this one: It`s an election year. And for some reason, the strategists, and the consultants, and the advisers think that all the American people are so impressionable that we`ll just vote for whoever tells us they`ll protect us best. Yes, I`m a zombie.
I`ve got news for you: Both parties in Washington, stop playing political games with our security! I am so sick of the back and forth yelling at each other about our national security without actually ever getting anything done that I`d like to call the bunch in Washington a bunch of 2-year-olds, except that would be an insult to 2-year-olds.
You want to do something? You want my vote? Then that`s what you do: something. I don`t care about the R or the D after your name. You know what? In fact, Washington, come close, right up to the TV set. Listen up, because I`ve got a secret for you. It`s how you can win every election from now until eternity. OK? Here it is: Shut up and get something done, will you?
And while we`re at the subject of getting something done, here`s one. The border immigration debate that, oh, you guys in Washington are just sitting there with no progress, "We care about this." Yes, right. Let me give you at home another side of this story, the real story on just what a mess our border is.
Let me take you back to February 2005. Two U.S. border agents are in pursuit of a suspected Mexican drug smuggler. The smuggler ditches his van near a canal and begins to flee on foot. One of the agents hears a gunshot and sees the other agent down.
Just then, he sees the suspect through the dust ahead of him. The suspect turns around, and the agent sees what he thinks is a gun. The agent fires; the suspect flees. Two agents return back to the road, search the van. Inside the van, 700 pounds of pot. Two weeks later, a Department of Homeland Security investigator tracks down the suspect in Mexico.
This would be a happy ending, if it wasn`t that the guy was tracking him down not to arrest him, but instead to offer the drug smuggler full immunity in exchange for testifying against the border agents who shot at him. Turns out the smuggler had been hit by the bullet. Yes, yes, so they needed to treat him here in America and give him all kinds of medical money for it.
Now the agents have been convicted on charges of assault with serious bodily injury, assault with a deadly weapon, discharge of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, and civil rights violations. The minimum sentence these guys can get is 10 years. The recommendation? Twenty years.
But as if all of this just wasn`t a happy enough package for you under the Christmas tree, listen to this: The assistant U.S. attorney told the jury that the Border Patrol agents are not even allowed to pursue fleeing suspects. And they also better not exceed the speed limit unless they get the supervisor`s approval first. And I`m not kidding.
What are we doing down on the border? Don`t sit there in Washington and tell me you`re serious about national security and protecting the border when you`re handcuffing the people on the front line every step of the way. This is a war on the border. You know, and like any war, except Vietnam, you give our soldiers the tools and the weapons they need to win it.
Ignacio Ramos and his attorney, Stephen Peters, join us now telephonically. That means "on the phone." Stephen...
STEPHEN PETERS, ATTORNEY FOR BORDER AGENT: Yes.
BECK: ... what happened with the judge? How did the jury actually come to this sentence or this conclusion?
PETERS: Well, I think government prosecutors can be very persuasive when they want to be. And they convinced the jury that the drug smuggler was telling the truth when he said he didn`t have a gun and that Mr. Ramos was lying when he said he thought he saw a gun.
BECK: Well, wait a minute. Hang on just a second. The guy`s a drug smuggler. He was running away from officers. I mean, don`t they have a right to say, "Hey, stop it"? If the guy happens to see a gun, whether he had one or not, what difference does it make?
PETERS: Well, it matters if Mr. Ramos thought that he had a gun, and if he did, then he would have been justified in shooting.
BECK: Right.
PETERS: The government didn`t believe Mr. Ramos; they chose to believe the drug smuggler.
BECK: Did the jury know this guy had 800 or 700 pounds of pot in the van?
PETERS: Well, the jury found that out. The government went to some effort to prevent the jury from finding out about it, but the judge let it in.
BECK: I understand this guy was just nabbed again for trying to smuggle more drugs.
PETERS: That I know nothing about.
BECK: Ignacio, how do you get up in the morning and think, "This is America"? How do you do that?
IGNACIO RAMOS, CONVICTED BORDER PATROL AGENT: It`s been very hard, and I felt abandoned for a very long time. It`s been hard to live with.
BECK: You`re facing the possibility of 20 years in prison. I know that, you know, you don`t -- I don`t even want to ask any question that might hurt you in the sentence process. So let me ask you this: The guys that you know that were working with you on the border, how apt are they to actually do anything to stop anybody on the border after they see you getting 20 years?
RAMOS: I couldn`t tell you. I just know it probably can`t be easy for them right now.
BECK: Steve, is it true? I have heard that the reason why we even found out about any of this is because the drug smuggler`s sister had a contact inside Border Patrol...
PETERS: The drug smuggler`s mother was a very close friend of a relative of another Border Patrol agent in Arizona. And the Border Patrol agent in Arizona contacted higher-ups in the Border Patrol and got this started.
BECK: And said what? "My son is a drug smuggler, and your people were shooting at him, and they`re not supposed to"? Is that what happened, basically?
PETERS: The drug smuggler was injured pretty badly. And, you know, the initial report that was given to the government was kind of twisted and didn`t exactly tell all the facts. And I think that what happened was that the government didn`t do a very good job initially of investigating the case.
BECK: All right. I`ve got to tell you, if the guy was hurt badly, I`d say, "One for the good guys." Stephen and Ignacio, thank you so much.
By the way, for all you conspiracy freaks out there, remember the day that I`ve been saying, according to the Islamic calendar, it could be the end of the world, August 22nd? Guess what day they`re going to sentence? Yes. Yes, August 22nd.
If you want to get involved, there is a way for you to help. You can call the White House and ask the president to pardon these two border guards or write a letter to the White House.
Up next, new threats on our southern border you cannot miss.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Miss Statutory Rape or "Miss Teen USA," as it`s also known, is the competition that pits the barely legal versus the border-line legal versus the definitely not legal. The winner was -- hold your breath on this one -- 18-year-old Kate Blair from Montana.
Yes, that`s right. That`s your new Miss Teen USA winner. She loves the environment, music, sports, and is legal in almost every county in this great land. There she is, Miss Statutory Rape!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: As a dad, man, I watched that, and I`m thinking to myself, would you ever let your teenage daughter on this? Do you know how many weirdoes are watching? Now, let`s change gears for a second.
Sometimes you lose your keys, maybe even your wallet, but I`m pretty sure that if you had 700 boxes of videotapes, including the little flick I like to call the first moon landing ever, you might keep an eye on it. Not NASA. No, they`ve admitted to losing tons of original recordings, including their 1969 greatest hit, "One Small Step for Man" by Neil Armstrong. Yes, where did I put that lunar landing tape?
NASA says, quote, they`re "looking for the paperwork to see where the tapes last were." So I`m sure they`re going to turn up any day now.
But just when you thought that losing years of priceless material is enough to make your head explode, our conspiracy theory friends have come up to tell us that this is just more evidence that the moonwalk actually took place on a Hollywood soundstage.
Aron Ranen has a documentary called, "Did We Go?" Did we go? Did we go?
Aron...
ARON RANEN, WWW.MOONHOAX.COM: Well, Glenn, what do you think? Do you think we landed on the moon?
BECK: Yes.
RANEN: Now, how do you prove it? What`s your evidence?
BECK: Well, I will tell you this, Aron -- and I`m really bummed, but Mr. Aldrin is in the hospital, but I talked to him about an hour ago. I called Buzz up in the hospital and I said, "Hey, Buzz, can you be on the show tonight?" And he`s like, "In the hospital, can`t talk long." And I thought, "Conspiracy!"
I asked him, "Did you walk on the moon?" And he said, "Yes." I said, "Have you heard this theory from this guy?" And he said, "Yes, I have." I said, "Does it hack you off? You were on the moon walking around." And he said, "No, you can`t let people like that hack you off. No, I walked on the moon."
So I`m going to trust Buzz, or I could trust you.
RANEN: Well, I mean, let`s say you trusted your television set, really, didn`t you? That`s how most of us believed it.
BECK: No, no, I got it from Buzz. I got it from Buzz.
RANEN: I mean, for instance, let`s think about what you believe on TV. I`m actually nowhere near this bridge. This is a screen...
BECK: Oh, my gosh, is this the magic of television?
(CROSSTALK)
RANEN: Yes.
BECK: Oh, my.
RANEN: So a grainy moon landing? I mean, Glenn, to me it`s incredible that we can keep track of Egyptian pots from 2,000 years ago but we lose tapes made only 40 years ago.
BECK: Wait a minute. There is a very good explanation: It`s the government. You tell me how -- I`ll give you two things on the government. One, tell me the thing that the government has done right. OK, they`re keeping tapes? No, not so much. Second of all, do you really think, with "The New York Times" of the world, that the government could keep this secret for this long?
RANEN: Well, let`s remember, first of all, there was a Cold War going on...
BECK: Right.
RANEN: ... and us landing on the moon sent a real strong message to the Soviet Union that we could plop a nuke bomb right there. OK, I hear what you`re saying.
BECK: No, I mean, come on, man.
RANEN: Hey, listen, watch the film, "Did We Go?" You`ll see where I actually traveled.
BECK: What happened to the missing -- like the Challenger guys? Where are they? Have we rented families to weep?
RANEN: Well, I`m just an expert on the moon landing. And what I can say -- and I know you have a tape there -- is I tracked down Gene Krantz, who`s the director, the flight director of Apollo 11...
(CROSSTALK)
RANEN: He admitted to me the tapes are missing.
BECK: All right, go ahead. Play Gene Krantz please.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GENE KRANTZ, FLIGHT DIRECTOR, APOLLO 11: I haven`t seen anything that indicates the telemetry data is even in existence. And as I said, even if we had it, we don`t have the machines to play it back.
RANEN: But your own research shows the telemetry data is missing?
KRANTZ: That`s right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Wow.
RANEN: It`s missing. How am I going to prove it? You know, I was -- this film, "Did We Go?" at moonhoax.com, was commissioned by the state of Ohio in anniversary of the 30th anniversary, and I couldn`t prove it. I mean, if I can`t get a hold of those telemetry tapes, those original videotapes, how are you going to prove it? Moon rocks fall in Antarctica. I sent a laser beam to the moon.
BECK: Let me do this. You also have another clip that I saw.
RANEN: An interview with Buzz Aldrin.
BECK: And I thought you were a nut job, and then I saw this clip, and I thought, "Huh?"
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RANEN: Where were you on June 20, 1969?
BUZZ ALDRIN, ASTRONAUT: I was on the surface of the moon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Huh?
RANEN: Well, did you see the twitch, the little mouth twitch? I mean...
BECK: The what twitch?
RANEN: The mouth twitch, after he said, "I was on the surface of the moon"? You`re the expert. You interview people all the time. Is he lying, Glenn, or is it just -- you know, it`s like Peter Pan. They just want us to believe in the moon landing like Peter Pan. And I just won`t accept that.
BECK: Aron, I do have to tell that I believe you.
RANEN: Thank you, Glenn.
BECK: All right. You bet, Aron. There are a lot of people out there that, for whatever reason, I mean, they dig this conspiracy stuff. I say let`s start cashing in on it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Conspiracy fans, get ready for this special one-time offer. Available for the first time, genuine, 100-percent authenticated fake moon rocks. Be the first on your block to own one of the real fake moon rocks used on the Hollywood soundstage where the moon landing actually took place.
And, if you act now, we`ll throw in this exact scale replica of the second gun used in the Kennedy assassination. If you`re a second-gunman theorist, you`ll love adding this firearm to your collection.
But wait, there`s more! Still wondering why Darrin One was mysteriously replaced by Darrin Two? Of course you are! Now, relive this legendary TV cover-up with these commemorative dinner plates, as well as this set of steak knives.
And, if you call within the next 20 minutes, we`ll throw in, at no extra charge, this Mel Gibson "Conspiracy Theory" action figure. Just wind him up, sit back, and watch him blame the Jews for practically everything. Call now, preferably from a pay phone so the call can`t be traced. You can`t be too careful.
Hey, who are you? Who let you in? Get your hands off me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Last week, Glenn had questions for Miss America.
BECK: We have the fake crown?
JENNIFER BERRY, MISS AMERICA: This is not fake.
ANNOUNCER: What you didn`t see are the questions she had for him.
BERRY: Which word best describes you, sexy, smart, or talented?
ANNOUNCER: Want the answer? Watch Glenn`s podcast, "Ask Glenn." Download it on iTunes or at CNN.com/Glenn.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BECK: Right to hate mail. The first one comes in from Pinky -- yes, Pinky -- in Bakersfield. She writes, "I do not know what made CNN hire this fool named Glenn Beck. Seriously, is CNN trying to ruin journalism? This man isn`t a journalist; he`s a moron. I do not pay to hear someone and their idiot opinion."
Pinky, you ain`t paying for this show, so relax. And by the way, this idiot`s opinion is this idiot`s job. I take the news and tell you what I think about it. I ain`t a journalist. I wear that as a badge of honor, by the way. And if someone gave you the impression that I was, they owe you an apology.
Here, let me prove it. Did you see this video that was out? It was a driver, he`s getting an award. If you look behind him, a fan sneaks up, jumps into the car, and goes for a joyride. Eventually, he stops, and, you know, he gets out, and they just beat the snot out of him. And while they`re dealing with him, his partner jumps into this tow truck and he tries to steal that. Then, they beat the crap out of him, too.
It`s great video. Now, some sources have said that this was serious and that everybody was arrested. Others say this is a prank, man, played on the driver by one of his sponsors for a commercial that they were filming. Journalists would make a call, pound the pavement. You know, they`d find out which one was true.
Me? This just in: It was a prank played on the driver. That settles that.
Bob from Alabama writes, "Glenn, I was going to subscribe to your magazine, `Fusion,` but according to you, you know, we`ll never see the September issue. The world`s going to end 8/22, you know? Do you have the zip code for Heaven?"
Bob, remember, not me saying the end of the world is coming, it`s, you know, crazy people with bombs and they believe that it is. I think it`s worth pointing it out.
But let me ask you this: If the world does end and you have to answer for the life you`ve lived, do you really want to do that without a subscription to "Fusion"? I heard waiting in line in Heaven is really long, and the magazines have been there since the place opened, so I`d order today and be prepared, if I were you.
Before we go, let me just say thanks to our interns, Adam and Ali. They`re leaving us today, and they`ve really been tremendous. And I`m going to write a great letter of recommendation for them, and they like it here. Good judges of -- they don`t? I say good riddance. Really, see you. Beat it, you bums.
We`ll see you tomorrow on the radio show. Don`t forget David Neilaman (ph) is going to be on. We`re going to talk about the oil, and you`ve got to hear the full plan and how you can get involved to get us energy free in 10 years. See you tomorrow.
END
