Return to Transcripts main page

Glenn Beck

Liberty in Peril: What You Need to Know

Aired October 24, 2007 - 19:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GLENN BECK, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, a special GLENN BECK edition, "Liberty in Peril". If America is one nation under God, why are some lawmakers trying to push him out of the picture? Is it too politically incorrect to say that we`re a Christian nation?

And as God gets pushed out, more and more people want out. Why a growing number of states have secession movements, and what motivates people to want to cut all ties with the U.S.

Plus, the Senate considers the DREAM Act. It`s a back door amnesty for illegals, and it flies in the face of everything we, the people, have told them we want.

Tonight, our liberty is in peril. What you`re not hearing, and what you need to know begins now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BECK: Well, hello, America.

First I have to start with the news of the day. Look at the devastation that these raging wildfires have caused in the state of California and the people that have lived there. Nearly half a million acres have been burned. Close to 1,200 homes lost at last count.

We will have complete coverage for -- for you on this story, and the angles that I just don`t think anybody else is politically incorrect enough to cover, on tomorrow`s program.

But tonight, while our sister network is showing you "Planet in Peril", and what I`ve seen, actually, I was surprised. It didn`t hack me off. I thought tonight we should think a little more locally. Our country, our sovereignty, our "Liberty in Peril".

The truth is you need the truth. I don`t claim to have the answers. But I can tell you that I`m very, very concerned about what we are facing as a nation.

America is more than just a bunch of acreage and land stitched together by roads and rivers. It is a way of life. It is a way of life that is in danger if we don`t stand up for ourselves.

On this show we spend a ton of time talking about the foreign threats, and there are plenty of those. But we can`t ignore the fact that we are being torn apart from the inside, as well. Do you remember what you felt like on 9/11? Do you remember sitting in -- probably in your living room or in a bar someplace, looking up at the TV and trying to figure out what the heck just happened to us?

If you were like me on 9/11, you thought to yourself, "My gosh, I didn`t realize how fragile we really are."

Well, in many ways we are even more fragile today. The last few years have taken a great toll on this nation.

The one thing all of our enemies recognize is you cannot beat the United States; you have to allow the United States to beat itself. And we are doing it to ourselves. I fear the barbarians are not at the gate. They are inside the gates.

Tonight, I want to find out and show you where they exist, where they are, why in many cases we`ve let them in the front door ourselves. We`re going to start by looking in depth at what`s really going on, on our borders, including the news that broke today about the DREAM Act.

We`re going to talk about the global effort to slowly infringe and eventually disintegrate your Second Amendment rights, the rights to bear arms.

We`ll also talk about how our sovereignty is slowly slipping away and how it`s happening, who is responsible, and how it`s sitting right there in the Senate and nobody`s talking about it.

We`ll also talk about how a country with a population that is about 80 percent Christian is making it harder and harder every day to even utter the name "God" in the public square.

And at the end of this hour I`m going to lay out what I think our choices are as a nation going forward. If we don`t choose soon and correctly, the name of our show tonight, "Liberty in Peril", will become more and more apparent to everybody.

We begin tonight with the border. Mike Cutler, he`s a former INS special agent and now with the Center for Immigration Studies. Mike...

MIKE CUTLER, FORMER INS SPECIAL AGENT: Thanks for having me.

BECK: You bet.

Disenfranchised doesn`t even begin to explain it for a lot of people when they got up yesterday or this morning and they heard that the Senate was going to vote yet again on the DREAM Act.

And this is -- correct me if I`m wrong. As I see this, we said no to broad immigration reform, and so what they`ve done is just broken it up into pieces and are slowly passing it one by one.

CUTLER: Well, they`re trying to pass it one by one. You know, I came to refer to the so-called comprehensive immigration reform that was proposed by Kennedy and the others on the Hill, I called it the Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act that apparently enough members of the Senate had the same concerns I did, the bill would have required that 100,000 undocumented aliens each and every day would have been given official identity documents, even though we can`t substantiate not only their names but even their nationality.

So that bill died, and then just like Freddie Krueger, they`re bringing it back, but they`re bringing it back in sections. The DREAM Act is one of them.

BECK: Here`s -- here`s the thing, Mike. I mean, jeez, I think we`re more successful in Iraq than we are with the Senate. Why do I have to be so vigilant every -- I`m fighting my own government. They are trying to -- they are trying to put these things through against our will in the cover of darkness.

CUTLER: Well, our government has become our adversary, hasn`t it, Glenn? I mean, look, we have Border Patrol agents securing the Iraqi border while our border is wide open. They send BORTAC, the Border Patrol tactical unit, to Iraq because our military understands that a nation`s security begins at its borders.

As I said when I`ve been before Congress a nation without secure borders can no more stand than can a house without walls. Our borders were anything but secure. But it`s not just the borders. Even within the interior of the United States 40 percent of the illegals enter the United States from ports of entry, as do the terrorists.

We know Richard Reid was the shoe bomber. He was able to get on board an airplane without first getting a visa, because he was a British national. Now the government is poised to expand the visa waiver program from 27 countries to 39 countries. Huge mistake.

BECK: OK. I want to -- I want to get into the visa here thing.

CUTLER: Sure.

BECK: In just a second. But I want to go back to what you said, that our government is our enemy in some -- in some ways. And I think a lot of Americans feel that way. But coupled with that, Americans are made to feel like law-abiding citizens are the bad guys.

CUTLER: Right.

BECK: And the bad guys are now the good guys. Because the bad guys keep seemingly getting more privilege, or bonuses for being bad. When it comes to the border, we now have something where, if you`re a victim, you can get a visa.

One guy was held at the border by Army National Reserve, held at gunpoint. He now is eligible to get a visa, because he was a victim.

CUTLER: It`s remarkable, isn`t it? And they want to expand a number of aliens that`ll come into the country as so-called refugees. Who`s going to screen the tens of thousands there?

But this thing with the victims of crime is unbelievable. And by the way, the most likely reason that somebody does fall victim to a criminal in this country, if you`re an alien, is probably somebody from your home country that we didn`t prevent from entering our country and victimizing you.

But this guy belongs in jail. He ran the border with a bunch of other people who are here illegally from Mexico.

BECK: OK.

CUTLER: A member of the National Guard held them at gunpoint because he saw them trespassing on his land, and this guy becomes a victim in the parlance of...

BECK: All right. And Mike, we`re going to have to come -- maybe we`ll have you back tomorrow to talk about this visa and discover America. America, blood`s going to shoot out of your eyes.

Now I want to turn to Ames Holbrook. He is a former deportation officer, author of the book called, unsurprisingly, "The Deporter".

Everything, it seems, Mike, is upside-down. The bad guys are -- are border guards. They`re in jail. The bad guys are the Minutemen. You had an incredible time trying to just do your job as a deporter.

How is it our government expects to recruit new border guards when it`s clear you`re being sold out by the top?

AMES HOLBROOK, AUTHOR, "THE DEPORTER": Well, look, Glenn, not only recruiting is going to take a hit, but look at the other side. Look at how this emboldens the criminals. And make no mistake: this is the emergency that`s facing our country. Mike Cutler referred to it. You have also.

Right now we are importing criminals. Foreign governments are planting and maintaining their most dangerous criminals on our soil to kill and rape and otherwise cause chaos in our country.

BECK: How do you mean planting? That`s pretty strong language.

HOLBROOK: I`m saying they`re getting them over here, I`m saying just like Castro did, we know -- I`m not going to get into all the different examples. But they infuse our refugee pipelines. They get their criminals in here to establish footholds, and then they don`t take them back. So...

BECK: And this is -- this is what -- this is what you had a problem with. And I`m not sure I agree with your solution here. Because you`re saying the foreign governments are not taking their people back and everybody`s -- everybody`s picking and choosing which laws toe enforce.

And so you decided to pick and choose around laws, and you kind of skirted around to get people deported.

HOLBROOK: Well, I did exactly that, Glenn. And I`m going to tell you, with these countries planting their criminals here, they`re maintaining dangerous criminals who will harm Americans. I`m talking kill, rape, cause chaos in our country.

If they were wearing military uniforms, we would call this an act of war, and we would take action against the responsible governments. Well, the damage is the same. They may not be wearing uniforms, but we`re getting hurt. So we should take action.

BECK: Here`s the problem. And this is where I think we`re -- this is where disenfranchise -- this is where our politicians don`t understand how much to the edge Americans are.

We feel like we`re being painted the bad guys. We feel as though they`re betraying us and...

HOLBROOK: Well, they are.

BECK: ... you`re putting -- you`re putting people, the government is, putting people in bad positions where they have to make a choice, like you made the choice on which laws do I apply.

We have it in New York, where the governor says we`re going to do this law, we`re going to give driver`s license to illegal aliens. And now the clerks have to decide whether they`re going to follow that state law. How do we win in this?

HOLBROOK: Well, I`ll tell you what. I mean, there are solutions. And if I were running the agency and my government were making me liberate criminals, dangerous criminals, then I would liberate these criminals in the communities where the families of Congress and the president live. And that would get answers real quick.

Because our president and Congress can make these countries take their criminals back. We should not take no for an answer. We can cut off aid and trade, stop issuing visas, and if all that fails, military action. One way or another, we`ve got to stop it.

BECK: America, you haven`t even begun to hear the disenfranchisement in this country. Wait until the rest of the program.

Thanks, Ames.

HOLBROOK: Thanks.

BECK: Coming up, presidential candidates are not talking about it. The federal government is trying to restrict it. I`m talking about the right to bear arms. Where is the dialogue on one of our nation`s most important rights? Wayne LaPierre joins us in just a second.

And a reminder, tonight`s show is brought to you by the Sleep Number Bed by Select Comfort. Find your sleep number today at a Select Comfort store.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, as the California wildfires continue to rage, destroying hundreds and thousands of acres and land, forcing nearly a million people from their homes, a stunning report suggests almost the unthinkable. Terror. I`ll explain on tomorrow`s program.

As the wildfires are raging through California, this is a true national tragedy, a disaster on the scale we haven`t seen since Hurricane Katrina. It brings us back to our "Liberty in Peril".

According to the National Rifle Association, one of the first actions taken by the leadership, if you can call them that, in New Orleans after the aftermath of Katrina was to collect people`s guns. These were not Saturday night specials being carried by criminals. These were legal guns owned by law-abiding citizens.

Tragically, in hindsight we now see that personal protection was wildly necessary in Katrina`s wake in New Orleans.

So while nobody is collecting the guns, nor do I think they`re going to, in Malibu or San Diego, we have to ask the question: when faced with a national disaster on a grand scale, how safe is your Second-Amendment right to keep and bear arms?

Wayne LaPierre is the executive vice president for the National Rifle Association.

Wayne, it is great to have you here. Just a full disclosure here: I am a lifetime member. I think I`m a lifetime member. I know I`m a member. If I haven`t been -- become one yet, I will be soon.

Tell me the story, Wayne, in Katrina. How did this come about? How did it happen? What -- how did they do it?

WAYNE LAPIERRE, NRA: Yes, it was unbelievable, Glenn. It was the largest seizure of firearms since British general gates seized firearms from the colonists up in Boston in 1775.

What happened is after that hurricane, when there was no police protection at all, complete breakdown, the mayor and the police chief went on TV at their press conference and said we`re going to confiscate all firearms in the city.

BECK: Why was there no media attention on this?

LAPIERRE; The media buried this story because we`ve been saying for years, you`d better stand up for your freedoms, and your freedom`s only as good as you standing up for it.

And the other side kept saying, "Oh, no one would ever take your firearm. The NRA is just crying wolf."

What happened in New Orleans is they went into law-abiding people`s homes all over that city, that they took their firearms, often at gunpoint. And the rank and file law enforcement guys were horrified at what they were ordered to do. They left those people completely defenseless against the bad guys.

BECK: Oh, yes. OK. Wayne, let -- come with me on the Crazytown train for just a second. I hope I am completely wrong on this. But there is a part of me that says we are one big event away from somebody in office saying we`ve got to take them all the way, especially if they`re people that we have elected that don`t like guns in the first place.

We are also the possibility of -- and you`ll see later on in the show. There are people who are talking secession. There are Timothy McVeighs out there that could also be an event that would cause the government to say, time to take the guns from the people. Is that crazy to think that?

LAPIERRE: No, I mean, there`s a lot of -- some politicians in the United States have this myth. Dianne Feinstein said, "If I could go door to door and pick them all up, I would."

The United Nations has a policy where they believe only the government should have firearms. They believe individuals should not be entitled to self-defense.

BECK: So if we go in and we sign these treaties that we`re talking about -- I mean, that are sitting in Congress right now, we sign these international treaties and we start to see that our Supreme Court says that these treaties can overturn our own Constitution, we lose our Second Amendment to the U.N.?

LAPIERRE: Yes. The Constitution trumps any U.N. treaty. But the issue is you`ve got to have the Supreme Court say very clearly that the Second Amendment`s an individual right. And so, I mean, we need to be very vigilant in this area.

I mean, the U.N. philosophy of give the government the guns hasn`t worked out very well, if you look at the last century. Look at the killing fields of Uganda, Rwanda, the old Soviet Union, China; Iraq gassing the Kurds, Iran...

BECK: Germany.

LAPIERRE: I mean -- Germany. I mean, this idea that the government gets all the guns has not worked out well for the people. And the difference is here in the U.S. our sovereign is the individual.

BECK: OK.

LAPIERRE: With the U.N. theirs is the government.

BECK: I know. It`s we, the people, here, at least it`s supposed to be.

LAPIERRE: Exactly.

BECK: I went to my firing range. It`s a forested field in Connecticut. And I`m firing -- I`m talking to the guys there this weekend. And they said, "Did you hear what Schwarzenegger did?"

And I hadn`t -- I hadn`t heard it. I hadn`t paid attention to it. It is actually now going to imprint a number on the casing, which it`s my understanding that, A, it can`t be done. I think this sounds to me like, again, a member of the Kennedy family trying to get gun manufacturers just not -- just to say, "You know what? I`m not going to make any guns for California."

And the bad guys would just file the numbering system on as the hammer would strike that casing, right?

LAPIERRE: It is a ridiculous idea. The technology`s not going to be -- is not there to do it. It would take police resources off the street. They`re trying to impose a cradle-to-grave regulatory system that doesn`t work on the law-abiding. And it can be as easily evaded as any criminal`s common sense.

BECK: All you have to use is a revolver.

LAPIERRE: Yes. A revolver evades it. You can file it off. You can throw it in a lake. You can -- I mean, criminals change license plates all the time. This is a joke, and we need to stop it in every other state.

BECK: Wayne, thank you very much.

LAPIERRE: Thanks, Glenn.

BECK: Coming up, we are a nation founded on faith, right? Why does it seem like we are embarrassed to admit it?

Last time I checked the Pledge of Allegiance said one nation under God. So why are so many people trying to chase God out of our country? I will explain as we continue "Liberty in Peril" next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: I don`t know about you, but I as an American, I`m tired a lot of the time. Our country is being ripped apart, and it seems at times as though it`s being ripped apart in every direction.

If you`re a Christian, you`ve been hearing people for a long time: "Shut up, take baby Jesus out of the public square."

It seems ironic that God plays such a divisive role in our country when our Pledge of Allegiance says we`re "one nation under God", our currency says "in God we trust". In court you have to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God.

Why is there a growing movement to divide us, to drive a wedge between God and our country?

Don`t get me wrong. I am a member of a once-persecuted religion in this country. I definitely want to keep the state out of my church. However, you can`t deny that our Founding Fathers firmly believed that our liberty was endowed upon us by our creator, and they`re not talking about George Washington.

Colby May is the director of the Washington office of the American Center for Law and Justice.

Colby, I just want -- I want to take three quick stories. First of all, California court reporter and a group of them barred from reading -- having a Bible study at lunch. How is this possibly not a violation of our individual rights?

COLBY MAY, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON OFFICE, AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE: Well, it is. And in fact, what`s really troubling about it is that this is a voluntary -- you come and participate if you want to during a lunch break at the courthouse in San Diego.

And the idea that others can gather, as is the policy there, and do what they like during their lunch-hour break, but somehow we can`t permit this activity to take place, really is troubling.

BECK: OK. So let me just -- let me just hit this next one. Utah local government fighting to maintain display of monument showing the Ten Commandments. Same kind of thing.

MAY: Same kind of thing. You`ve got Pleasant Valley, Utah, which has had a monument of the Ten Commandments up for more than 50 years, given to it by the Fraternal Order of Eagles in the 1950s, and now they`re being challenged being able to keep that monument up.

BECK: OK. Here`s what I don`t understand. How is it that we can say baby Jesus has got to get out of this town square, Ten Commandments have to be out of the town square, you can`t meet for a voluntary Bible study in a public building, while Thomas Jefferson in his letters wrote praises that people were using the courthouse because they couldn`t afford churches. Like four different congregations were using the courthouse in his hometown. And that was cool.

And at the same time they`re driving Christians and Jews out, we`re building foot baths for Muslims in airports and in universities, and nobody seems to care. And I don`t have a problem with the foot bath thing, but for the love of Pete, why is it this way for other religions and Christianity you`re toast?

COLBY: Well, there has been a really concerted effort, I think, since the end of the Second World War by some left-leaning groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, who basically believe that any vestige of the American history which reflects that we were a country founded by religious refugees...

BECK: Oh, jeez.

COLBY: ... and therefore they rely upon things beyond us for their very survival, that that has to be sought out. It has to be rooted out of any sort of public demonstration or public display of it. But we obviously oppose that vigorously.

BECK: Colby, I have to say, the ACLJ does great work. And please, if you`ve never heard of it, look into it.

We`re fighting for a battle for our lives, for our sovereignty, on the land, and on the high seas, and in the air, and nobody seems to know it. Our sovereignty is being threatened, and it is time you know about it. Some answers, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Well, there are at least five people dead now in those California wildfires, and thousands of homes have burned to the ground. We will have the questions and the answers that you`re not going to hear anywhere else because everybody else is going to be asking weaselly questions and looking for the politically correct answers. That`s on tomorrow`s program.

First, happy United Nations day. Yes, it is the one day of the year we can all celebrate the U.N. by sitting back, kicking back, doing nothing, watching the world go to Hell, just like the real United Nations. Actually, some in Washington have a different idea how to celebrate, which I believe puts our liberty in peril.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led by Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, thought it would be fun to rubber-stamp passage of LOST. This is the Law of the Sea Treaty that you`re not hearing an awful lot about in the mainstream media. Fortunately, Republican Senator David Vitter exercised his right to have the committee defer consideration. And you fall to your knees and thank God for this guy today.

The sea treaty is as ill-conceived as the idea of the United Nations itself. Basically, it says that the resources of the seabed beyond any country`s international waters belong to, quote, "the common heritage of mankind and are not to be owned by anybody." Bull crap: Somebody always owns everything. And in this case, it would be owned by the U.N.

The pact creates an International Seabed Authority, which could issue licenses, collect taxes, and create an all-powerful ruling body called the enterprise that should shake you to the core of your bones. I`ll explain in a second.

Now, the U.N. is bad enough. But do we really have to answer to yet another international collection of do-nothings? Worse yet, if participation in LOST -- if we participate in it, it could force the U.S. to compromise sensitive information in the name of environmental regulation.

The bottom line is this: We need our leaders in Washington to band together against this incredibly bad idea. And they`re on the fence. If impartial third-party organizations like the United Nations actually did some good, like helping stop terrorism or preventing Iran from getting a nuke, that would be one thing. But I still wouldn`t support it, because in the end, the United Nations and other international organizations do not answer to we, the people.

Frank Gaffney is president of the Center for Security Policy and was an assistant secretary in the Reagan administration. Frank, you had an ad out today, "Do you want a U.N. on steroids?" And I`m looking at this ad -- first of all, tell me about the enterprise. This scares the crap out of me.

FRANK GAFFNEY, JR., FOUNDER, CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY: Well, I would feel remiss if I didn`t start by wishing you a happy U.N. day, too.

BECK: I`ve got my tree all decorated at home.

GAFFNEY: It`s right up there with the great pumpkin day.

BECK: Yes.

GAFFNEY: It seems to me we`ve got to celebrate. We shouldn`t celebrate by ratifying this treaty. The enterprise is a little different than I think the way you think of it. It is the mechanism that this socialist, redistributionist treaty envisioned would use the part of the seabed that, say, an American company would help identify as a promising place to look for oil or for minerals of some kind, and then would be using our technology, our know-how, our information to go exploit it for the benefit of all mankind. That`s the problem with the enterprise. I think you`re thinking about the larger effort, the International Seabed Authority...

BECK: No, no, no, hang on...

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: No, hang on just a second. Wait, wait, wait. The enterprise, as I understand it, could demand that American companies turn over sensitive technology. They can demand money from American companies. True or false?

GAFFNEY: I think it`s mostly true.

BECK: OK.

GAFFNEY: The enterprise works for the International Seabed Authority. Let`s just give an example. You`ve got a place in the ocean where you think there`s oil. You want to go drill there. Oil companies in America have said, "Hey, great idea. Give me a permit." The problem is the price of that permit, Glenn, is you`re going to have to give the International Seabed Authority, which in turn will give it to the enterprise, the information about that place. You`d actually have to come up with two places. They`ll pick which one you get to exploit. The enterprise gets to exploit the other with your technology.

BECK: Oh, beautiful.

GAFFNEY: If this sounds like, again, a sort of socialism throwback to...

BECK: Oh, yeah.

GAFFNEY: ... you know, the 1970s, that`s exactly what this treaty is. And why we would want to do it in the 1990s, to say nothing of the 21st century, is crazy.

BECK: OK. Now, the Navy is for this. Bush is for this. The Navy thinks they`re going to be all -- you know, have a lot of things cleared up in international waters. However, as I understand it, again, this would allow an international body, if we sent our aircraft carriers over, and we said we were going to go over to Iran or whatever, and the international body disagreed with us, they could actually say, "You`re in violation," and they could stop us. True or false?

GAFFNEY: Well, I suspect that the way it would work in practice is, if we were going to go in there in force, then nobody`s going to stop us. But what worries me is what happens in peacetime, when we`re operating -- you`re absolutely right.

The Navy has persuaded itself, particularly its lawyers, that world order, international law will work to their advantage. I don`t think so. I think what`s going to happen is they`re going to be sued in these various courts, and it`s just one of the reasons why, you know, we ought to be very cherry about rushing into this treaty.

I just came from a tremendously impressive press conference in the Senate just a moment ago, in which the minority leader, I should say, Mitch McConnell, and essentially the entire leadership of the GOP has said, "Sorry, we`re not going to have any part of this treaty." Thank goodness.

BECK: That`s good. Thanks a lot, Frank. By the way, this treaty, it`s not going to go away. I mean, it`s been around since Reagan, and it kept him awake at night.

Now, four years ago, I bet I was a lot like you. I started paying attention to the border crisis, and I thought to myself, "Why is this happening? It doesn`t even make sense. I thought we thought about security." Well, since I couldn`t apply logic and understand what was happening on the border, I started looking for alternative theories, and it took me down lanes I didn`t want to go, quite honestly.

I mean, who`s watching the border? Who would benefit from things staying screwed up? I hate to break it to you, but after two years of denying it and saying this can`t be, it`s the only reason that I have found that explains everything that`s going on in our country with the border.

Our country has been sold out in the name of global profits and votes at the ballot box. This is where the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, comes in. This little agreement, international agreement, cooked up by President Bush, the former president of Mexico, and the prime minister of Canada. Their mission is to blur or completely erase the borders between Canada, U.S., and Mexico to get goods and services freely flowing between all three countries in the dream of one, big happy Mexamericanada. And that would finally become a reality.

Sound great? Not so much. Jerome Corsi is the author of the "New York Times" best-seller "The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger."

Jerome, I want to start with a piece that happened on "LARRY KING LIVE," where everybody, like you, like me, who have been saying, "Wait a minute, I don`t want to believe this, but it looks like it`s happening," we`ve all been called crazy. This is what Vicente Fox said on "LARRY KING LIVE." Roll the tape.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VICENTE FOX, FORMER PRESIDENT OF MEXICO: What we proposed together, President Bush and myself, it`s ALCA, which is a trade union for all of the Americas. And everything was running fluently until Hugo Chavez came, and he decided to isolate himself. He decided to combat the idea and destroy the idea. And they`re unfortunately...

LARRY KING, CNN HOST: It`s going to be like the euro dollar, you mean?

FOX: Well, that would be long, long term. I think the process is to go first step into a trading agreement, and then, further on, a new vision, like we`re trying to do with NAFTA.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: He says in this interview, Jerome, he`s asked, "So it would be like the euro dollar?" "Well, long, long term." I was with one of the country`s leading economists having dinner the other night, and I said, "What point do you start" -- and this guy`s an optimist. "At what point do you start worrying about the dollar?" And he said, "Glenn, about six months ago." He said, "It`s almost like we`re intentionally destroying the dollar."

JEROME CORSI, "THE LATE GREAT USA": I agree, Glenn. I mean, I was ready to send Vicente Fox a signed copy of the book and thank him, because he validated every major thesis in "The Late Great USA." We`re headed exactly down the path Europe went down, starting with trade agreements, beginning with a coal and steel agreement in Europe 50 years ago, then advancing towards the European Common Market, the Treaty of Maastricht, the European Union, and 2002 the euro. We`re now going from NAFTA to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. Our elite are talking about a North American community, and they`ve even named our new currency the amero.

BECK: All right, Jerome, you know what so frustrates me is I believe in our Constitution. I think our Constitution was God-inspired. You want another state? Sew another flag on and have people vote for it. This stuff is happening in the cover of night.

You`ve got the trans -- the NAFTA superhighway that, again, everybody denies, but you`ve got it broken up in chunks being built right now. It will deliver goods from China right to Mexico through America into Canada. You say this stuff is going to eliminate the middle class. How?

CORSI: Well, because even the economists supporting the so-called globalism -- and it`s not free trade. It`s not free trade when China has all the advantages and unfair trade agreements. Just take a look at Alan Blinder. He`s at Princeton University. He supported NAFTA, got Bill Clinton to sign NAFTA. Blinder now in the "Wall Street Journal" in March says we`re going to lose 40 million jobs in the next two decades to China and India with these unfair trade agreements.

BECK: All right, Jerome, I know -- we`re out of time. Can I ask you to write a special thing maybe for tomorrow`s newsletter, just on what -- the case that`s being heard in front of the Supreme Court today, it changes everything. Could I ask you to write a few paragraphs on that?

CORSI: I`d be honored to, Glenn. Very definitely honored.

BECK: You can get that at glennbeck.com if you sign up tonight, and Jerome will write something. You`ve got to pay attention to this.

Now, those are just a few of the things putting our liberty in peril. So now that you know, you`ve got a choice. We can either band together and fix it, or we could break it apart. And believe it or not, there is a growing number of people saying it is time we break the country apart. We`ll look at that option, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: We are almost at the end of our journey. For the last 45 minutes tonight, I have told you about the forces tearing at the fabric of our country. So now we have to look at solutions.

I`ll tell you about the option I think we should take here in just a second, but some folks have other plans. If you think that the notion of states wanting to separate from the U.S. to form independent governments ended with the Civil War, not so much. The secessionist movement is stronger than ever.

Twenty-five states, half of this nation, have active secessionist organizations. Thomas Naylor heads the Vermont Second Republic, and Kirkpatrick Sale is the founder and director of Middlebury Institute. Both of you guys support the idea of secession.

Thomas, let me start with you. Breaking the United States up, what does it look like the day after you secede? What does America look like in your dream?

THOMAS NAYLOR, FOUNDER, SECOND VERMONT REPUBLIC: The idea is of possibly dividing the country up into maybe 20 different regions. In the case of Vermont, I would like to see us perhaps join New Hampshire, Maine, and the Atlantic provinces of Canada, create a little country about the size of Denmark, call it New Acadia. But you could imagine half a dozen or so Rocky Mountain states. New York City might be a stand-alone city-state, the same for Chicago, Cook County, L.A., Texas.

BECK: I hate to interrupt, but I want to get a lot of information in here. And, America, if you think this sounds crazy, don`t. Eight percent of Vermonters in a recent survey two years ago said that they thought this was a good idea. Now that number is at 13 percent!

Kirkpatrick, to you, you break the country up, you basically have the Articles of Confederation. You have -- I mean, you have nothing that holds us together anymore. You`re looking seriously at independent countries, 50 or 20 independent countries?

KIRKPATRICK SALE, THE MIDDLEBURY INSTITUTE: As many as evolve, as the citizens wish.

BECK: Right. So you don`t think that the Constitution is worth trying to save? I mean, you...

SALE: The Constitution is being shredded already.

BECK: I understand that.

SALE: Let`s not go with this Constitution.

BECK: OK, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Hang on just a second. Are you telling me that the Constitution of the United States is old and not really worth anything, or that it has been usurped?

SALE: It`s been shredded. And that`s...

BECK: That`s not my question, sir.

SALE: ... one of the reasons that we want to be away from this empire and the instruments of that empire that...

BECK: You don`t even think...

SALE: ... have proven to be corrupt, and inefficient, and, in fact, inept.

BECK: You don`t believe that we should have even fought Hitler and gone into World War II?

SALE: I don`t know. That`s an irrelevant question.

BECK: No, it`s not, sir. Do you think we should have fought World War II against Adolf Hitler?

SALE: I don`t see what that has to do with secession. What...

BECK: How do you protect yourself? How do you protect the people against evil, sir? Would there be a Jew on the planet if the United States of America wouldn`t have stepped in?

SALE: Of course there would have.

BECK: Really?

SALE: Yes. Of course there would have.

BECK: Who would have stopped Hitler?

SALE: Because...

NAYLOR: Yeah, I thought we were here to talk about secession and not World War II.

BECK: We are talking about it -- hang on. Gentlemen, we are talking about...

NAYLOR: This has nothing to do with secession.

BECK: It has nothing to do with secession? This is the kind of...

SALE: If you think that there has to be a very super-powerful state in order to settle the affairs of the world, whatever it decides to do...

BECK: No. No, sir. What a country needs to do...

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: ... where you and I -- where you and I agree, where you and I agree is that the country, the Constitution -- well, I don`t agree with you. It hasn`t been shredded. It has been usurped. And I believe we should go back to the Constitution.

But you believe that it should be shredded. The one thing that our founding fathers were clear on -- excuse me, sir.

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: One thing -- excuse me, sir! The one thing our founding fathers were clear on was that we need a government that protects the people. Well, what I`m asking you, if you break up into 25 states or 25 separate countries, how do you protect the people?

SALE: Each state as an independent country protects itself. That`s not hard. Look at the states of Europe, for example.

BECK: Well, they did a great job.

NAYLOR: Many different kinds of countries, and they each have protection, and they each trade with another. They`re not warring with each other.

BECK: Vermont is only at risk so long as it`s part of the United States.

SALE: Then it might get invaded.

BECK: Thomas, you say that the United States is the Titanic.

NAYLOR: Yes. That the empire`s basically gone down. It`s unsustainable; it`s unfixable. So the question is, do you go down with the Titanic or consider other options? We think secession is...

BECK: Has there ever been anything about this country that you thought, "You know what? This is worth saving; this is a good nation"?

NAYLOR: Of course there was, but I don`t think there`s a whole lot left now. The country`s corrupt to the core. The government is owned, operated and controlled by corporate America. Our foreign policy is controlled by corporate America, the Israeli lobby, and oil. So...

BECK: So how does it work? Do you just go to the government and say -- I mean, because you both say you`re for just splitting off and no bloodshed. You know and I know that`s not going to happen. So do you just go and...

NAYLOR: It certainly happened in Eastern Europe. Six countries split with the communist regimes, and five of the six were non-violent.

(CROSSTALK)

NAYLOR: The Soviet Union dissolved, and that was non-violent.

BECK: So if you just stop paying taxes, do you think the government`s just going to say, "Oh, OK, well, that`s cool, no taxes"?

NAYLOR: But it doesn`t follow that they`re going to invade Vermont. They`re not going to be amused; they`re not going to like it. But the question is, what are they going to do about it?

BECK: All right, gentlemen. Thank you very much.

Now that we have showed you how our liberty is in peril and we`ve shown you one option, before I get to my option on how we solve this, time for a spoonful of sugar, brought to you by Travelers Insurance.

With all of the disenfranchisement in this country, it is important to remember that this country is worth fighting for and there are real American heroes giving their lives every day for this country and our Constitution. On Monday, Navy SEAL Lieutenant Michael Murphy received the Medal of Honor. His family accepted it for him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Lieutenant Murphy valiantly led his men in engaging the large enemy force. The ensuing fierce firefight resulted in numerous enemy casualties, as well as the wounding of all four members of his team. By his selfless leadership, courageous actions, and extraordinary devotion to duty, Lieutenant Murphy reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Tonight`s spoonful of sugar brought to you by Travelers. Your risks can change quickly. Make sure your insurance stays in-synch.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BECK: Our country has seen the kind of trouble we`re facing -- well, actually, I don`t think ever, probably closest was World War II, but that was smaller than what I think we`re facing now.

But back in World War II, there was an artist named Norman Rockwell. He was listening to the radio. He heard the words of the president, FDR, scratchy, coming through his radio. FDR was encouraging Americans, saying that we`ll survive because we`re united under our freedoms. Rockwell listened to that and was so moved he painted possibly his four most famous paintings. They have become known as the Four Freedoms series, paintings that are based on goals famously articulated by FDR. I believe they are just as worth striving for today as they were over 60 years ago.

The first painting was the "Freedom of Speech" painting. There we see a working man at a town meeting, proudly standing up, speaking his mind. He`s surrounded by his fellow citizens. You can tell not all of them agree. But each honored his right to speak his piece, and he spoke it without fear.

"Freedom of Worship" was the next. It was the second in the series. Rockwell said it was the hardest one to paint. It shows men and women, black, white, Christian, Jew alike, all praying to their God in their own way.

And then there`s the "Freedom from Want." It shows the family gathered around a bountiful table, mouths watering at the sight of a glorious turkey, strong families. That is the foundation of our society. And Rockwell beautifully captured that in the depiction of loved ones sharing a meal and celebrating this great nation.

Lastly, we have the "Freedom from Fear," a mother and father tucking their two children in for a night`s sleep. Under the father`s arm was a newspaper with the reports of bombings. I don`t know how many times I have felt like that dad.

This portrait was just as timely then as it is now. I believe what it speaks to is our desire for safety, not so much for ourselves, but for our children. As we think about the state of our nation and the challenges that we truly face, I hope we can remember the faces in these paintings.

Remember, the main thing we have in common is our freedoms. We have more in common than that separate us. Those freedoms were granted to us by God, and we lend them to our government. So while our liberty may be in peril, it will survive if we remember that we shouldn`t waste our faith on parties, Republicans or Democrats, or politicians, but save it for each other, we, the people. We`re always the solution; our founding fathers knew it.

From New York, good night.

END