The sleazy, verbal assault
Glenn Beck waged against the Saudi student,
Abdulrahman Ali Alharib, who was injured in the Boston bombing last year and
cleared by the FBI for any involvement in the tragedy, was documented
here,
here,
here and
here. On March 28th, Abdulrahman took this deceitful propagandist
to court for
defamation of character.
It's about time.
Update, 726/2014: The Daily Kos is
reporting Beck's defense in this trial.
Alharbi sued Beck for defamation in federal court in late March. And
now, in a batch of little-noticed motions, Beck has lashed back, saying
Alharbi is trying to “punish” and impede Beck’s First Amendment rights.
Beck argues the bombings made Alharbi a “limited purpose” and
“involuntary” public figure who must prove not just that Beck made false
accusations, but that Beck did it with “actual malice.”
The author adds, "
Alharbi became an 'involuntary' public figure in large part because
Glenn Beck insisted on making him one; once Glenn Beck made him one, you
have to prove that Glenn Beck acted with malice when he supposed that the English student was a 'proven terrorist' and the 'money man' behind the horrific act."
Malice? When was Glenn Beck not intending to do harm, to President Obama (
mentioning "impeachment" for the first time) and by the lies told about him, to Alharbi during that period? At least Beck is not trying to claim that he told the truth about Alharbi. That would be easy to disprove in court.
Hopefully, Alharbi has a good lawyer.
Update, 12/02/2014: Mediaite is reporting that the judge in this lawsuit, Judge Patty Saris, is allowing the lawsuit to move forward after Beck's lawyers asked to have the suit thrown out. She wrote that Beck “made numerous bogus claims about Alharbi on his
radio show, even after he was cleared by the FBI.” She shot down the idea Rahman Ali Alharbi
attempted to “thrust himself into a controversy;” so he does not fall
into various categories of what constitutes a public figure.
She concludes:
As a private figure, Alharbi is not required to allege actual malice in
order to make out a claim for defamation. Instead, the level of fault
required on the defendants’ part is
merely negligence… The facts alleged in Alharbi’s complaint easily
permit an inference that the defendants were negligent as to the
truthfulness of their reports after the authorities cleared his name.
The Court need not determine whether the allegations create a plausible
claim of actual malice.
The judge's full opinion can be read
here (pdf) on the Politico website.
For a Mormon criticism of Mr. Beck, see "
Rough Stone Soaring"
get involved!
Post a comment
All non-spam comments approved
Free speech is practiced here
------------------------------------------------------
Please get involved for 10 minutes
http://sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com
