Facts...?

Greg...?

You're kidding - right?

Poo slinger couldn't even spell FACT if you spotted him the F, A & C.

Ask yourself this question... Would CNN ever broadcast a US Miltary propaganda film if they were presented with it?

Rooster... Do you really think it's fair to make a comment along the lines of "Butts-up, Brits" [punctuation added] purely on the basis of a BBC report?

How would you like to be judged by the actions of the ACLU?

In that I believe he was suggesting that the British should raise their butts for the oncoming of Islam, I think you'll find that the punctuation is more than acceptable.

The BBC does some outstanding work. Their naturalist programmes are second to none, and they have some decent comedy, too. Just don't rely on them for on-the-edge news - they're obliged to be passive in that respect. Shouldn't be, but there you go...

Joe pubic:

Rooster was not suggesting that the British raise their asses any higher. He was describing their present position. If you had the reading comprehension skills of an American 8 year old you would have realized this. Who's the retard? For a country that spawned the language, you losers sure have trouble speaking it.

I judge you by the man on the street, who allowed your formerly great country to become the PC shit-hole that it is. Muslims have colonized your little islands and what do you do? Bend over at every opportunnity. This comes as no surprise. After all, PC speech codes are strictly enforced, lowlifes get welfare for life, and 50 year old men are allowed to butt-ram 16 year old boys legally in your depraved country. Mad mullahs preach death to Britain on public street corners, and Anglo women are gang raped by islamopithecines on a regular basis.

None of those things are allowed in my country. The only double standard I see, is that England has retained its traditional partnership with America without earning it. If it weren't for the British military, I would write off your entire doomed country. You lot have already written it off. The fact that you find the BBC's anti-American, pro-jihadi stance uncontroversial is proof positive.

Rooster - yes, the government is apologetic. Yes, the BBC is a lost cause - largely because the apologetic government screws them over every time they raise their head above the parapet. Do either reflect the average Brit on the street?

Maybe, maybe not. From what I've seen, I'll go for no - and I truely hope it's not just wishful-thinking on my part. If it offers you any hope at all - I've only met one person in the last two months who still holds the same placatory ideals that used to be de rigeur. As a nation, it seems that we're pretty much fed up with PC bullshit. An element of pride is returning to our shores, and the Cross of St George will fly again.

You wanna play that game? Ok. Compare that to Nixon sabotaging peace talks in Vietnam just to get elected, or Reagan/Bush doing the same with regard to Carter's attempts to get hostages released in Iran.

And while we're at it... JFK's actions in raising the Cuban Missile Crisis to a <em>crisis</em> level should not be viewed as heroic. Indeed, those missiles did not place the U.S. mainland at any higher risk of nuclear attack than would Soviet submarines parked off the east and west coasts, which the administration had to know would be coming on line in the very near future (in fact, there were Soviet subs with strategic nukes involved during the blockade of Cuba).

(10/15/2006)

Thirty five years ago John Kerry slandered an
entire generation of men who fought in Vietnam branding them as a "war
criminals." Today, much of the same thing is being said about our young men and
women in Iraq.

Now, a lawsuit filed in Philadelphia’s Court of
Common Pleas will test the very foundation of Kerry’s anti-war persona for the
first time. It isn’t dubious medals or Kerry’s
disputed service record in Vietnam that is being called into question. This
time Kerry may finally be forced to answer for the events that launched his
public career, one that made him an anti-war hero for many American liberals
and a turncoat for millions of Vietnam veterans.

The lawsuit (Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation,
et al. v. Kenneth Campbell, et al.) challenges the basis, the factual accuracy
of then-Lt. (j.g.) Kerry’s acrimonious testimony before the U.S. Senate
Foreign Relations Committee in 1971. It
was there Kerry’s public career was catapulted with his now ubiquitous
portrayal of American soldiers as murderers, rapists and torturers "who ravaged
the countryside of South Vietnam . . . [and] razed villages in a fashion
reminiscent of Genghis Khan."

Kerry said then his accusations were based on the
so-called "testimony" of "150 honorably discharged" Vietnam veterans who, like
himself, claimed to have committed or witnessed "war crimes, not isolated
incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of
officers at all levels of command."

Many if not all were members of the Vietnam
Veterans Against the War (VVAW), an organization led by Kerry and financed by
Jane Fonda during the early 1970s. Now,
a number of those "witnesses" will be required to testify, under oath for the
first time ever, about what they really did and saw in Vietnam.

What these VVAW witnesses say could have
implications reaching beyond Kerry’s veracity and reputation. Their lasting portrait of the American
soldier as a blood-thirsty butcher, a baby killer, is also at stake. And that
picture remains entrenched among their kind, "proof" that those serving in the U.S.
military, even today, truly are a "horde of barbarians" capable of unspeakable
brutalities. That is the underlying
theme, the constant drumbeat from the mainstream media and others as they try
to undermine the American military today.

For the anti-war, anti-American protesters, the American soldiers are the "terrorists,"
and the enemies are the victims of a barbaric U.S. military which tortures and
murders defenseless civilians.

That false premise, one of the most vicious and
enduring smears spawned by Kerry 35 years ago, will also be put to the test
once Kerry’s true "Band of Brothers" are put under oath in a Philadelphia
courtroom.

The
background to this lawsuit is long and complex, but even a condensed version is
rich in irony and poetic justice.

It had it roots in 2004 with the documentary Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal. Many may recall the film, although it is
probably best known for not being seen, suppressed after Sinclair Broadcasting
Company courageously announced it was going to air the documentary in its
entirety. Thanks to Kerry and his
liberal colleagues in the Senate and their enablers in the mainstream media,
Sinclair was browbeaten into withdrawing the film, its broadcast license
threatened by a Kerry campaign manager in 2004.

Stolen
Honor focused on Kerry’s venomous diatribe before the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee in April 1971 when he accused Vietnam veterans of "war
crimes" on a genocidal scale. (A full transcript is available at
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Testimony. ) It examined the impact Kerry’s widely
reported statements had on hundreds of Americans who were being held prisoners of
war by the North Vietnamese communists. The film’s producer, Carlton Sherwood,
a Pulitzer Prize and Peabody Award-winning investigative reporter, interviewed
former POWs for the documentary.

I was among those whom Sherwood, a decorated
Marine combat veteran himself, asked to participate in Stolen Honor. I was a POW
for nearly six years, held in North Vietnam prison camps, including the
notorious Hanoi Hilton, a place of unimaginable horrors -- torture, beatings,
starvation and mind-numbing isolation. When
Kerry branded us "war criminals," he handed our captors all the justification
they needed to carry out their threats to execute us. Thanks to Kerry, Jane Fonda and their
comrades in the anti-war movement, our captivity was prolonged by years. The communists in Hanoi and Moscow couldn’t
have had a better press agent to spread their anti-American propaganda.

To guarantee Stolen
Honor would never be seen by anyone – not even theatre-goers – the producer
was slapped with a libel and defamation lawsuit. That lawsuit was filed by Kenneth Campbell, a University of
Delaware professor, Kerry campaign aide, and long-time anti-war disciple of the
Massachusetts Senator. Campbell co-founded
the Philadelphia chapter of Vietnam Veterans Against the War and, in 1971, he
was one of Kerry’s key war crimes "witnesses," one of several on whom Kerry claims he based his Senate testimony.

Campbell was and still is regarded by some as one of the VVAW’s most articulate
and published "experts" on U.S. atrocities in Vietnam. He
has "testified" before Congress, in Europe, and elsewhere that while in Vietnam
he deliberately killed "dozens and dozens" of innocent civilians as a Marine
artillery forward observer. He has
written extensively about his and others’ atrocities in Vietnam and he even
teaches a course on the Vietnam War that showcases his war crime accusations. Campbell,
like Kerry, met with enemy delegations -- Vietcong and North Vietnam Communist
officials -- in Paris in 1971 while he was still a U.S. uniformed reservist. He was also flown to Moscow that same year to
meet with other Communist leaders, all expenses paid by the Soviets.

Campbell’s lawsuit put a unique spin on the
definition of defamation: He claimed
that Stolen Honor damaged the public
reputations of himself, Kerry and others by questioning whether they truly were
the baby-killers they claimed to be!

Ignored and censored by the mainstream news
networks, Stolen Honor eventually
aired on some small local cable outlets. The documentary managed to penetrate Kerry’s blacklisting in rural
northern Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and several other places. But, Campbell’s lawsuit against Sherwood
continued in 2005, when he even added POWs who appeared in the film to the
litigation!

The POWs and the wives of POWs who participated
in Stolen Honor refused to abandon the
facts conveyed in the film. For some of us, it was the first time since our
release by the Communists in 1973 that we were able to have our voices publicly
heard, to tell our stories about the consequences of Kerry’s treachery. In 2005, we formed a nonprofit organization,
the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation (VVLF), to gather records, documents and
other materials to form a fact-based, educational repository for students and
scholars of Vietnam history and to tell the true story of the American soldiers
in Vietnam. The VVLF’s mission is "to
set the record straight, factually, about Vietnam and those who fought there."

For our efforts, we
were promptly sued by Campbell and another long-time anti-war Kerry follower
and VVAW member, Dr. Jon Bjornson. It
was clear that Kerry not only wanted to punish us for Stolen Honor; he intended to use surrogates to sue us into
permanent silence and financial ruin.

But in lawsuits, even
defendants have an opportunity to question the accuser under oath in pre-trial
depositions -- even when a lawsuit is filed solely to harass, intimidate and
silence and when the legal system is abused for political vengeance, as these
lawsuits clearly were.

Our chance came earlier
this year when Kenneth Campbell was deposed. Among the first thing he disclosed
was that this was the first time he had actually been put under oath in over 35
years of "testifying" about Vietnam "war crimes." Neither he nor any of his fellow "war criminals" – Kerry included
– had ever been sworn in at any hearings, not before the Senate, the House of
Representatives, or anywhere.

All of the so-called "testimony" the old
mainstream media trumpeted for nearly four decades -- graphic, sickening and
grisly "testimony" about savage atrocities committed by Vietnam veterans,
"testimony" to which Congress and the media gave so much weight and credibility
-- wasn’t "testimony" at all! Just
propagandist speeches told without limitation or fear of consequences, least of
all penalties for perjury. As for the
"war crimes" Campbell claimed for years he committed and personally witnessed,
he now conceded he didn’t actually see innocent civilians killed by his
artillery barrages. In fact, if anyone
had been killed or wounded, he admitted, they may not have been civilians at
all! Concerning other atrocities
Campbell identified in his lawsuits -- things like Marines massacring an entire
village, killing surrendering enemy soldiers -- those incidents, too, failed to
stand up under questioning. Some were
things he said he had heard or assumed happened; others, he acknowledged, were
simply "rumors."

That Campbell alleged
personal knowledge of horrible atrocities in his complaints and then gave
wholly different stories of hearsay and assumption at his deposition is
detailed in the recently filed Philadelphia lawsuit, which repeatedly alleges
that Campbell lied about supposed war crimes in 1971 and lied again when he
claimed in 2004 that his war crime stories were true.

While hard evidence may
have been in short supply during his sworn testimony, Campbell did offer the
names of "witnesses" who would confirm his stories. Not surprisingly, the first two were Kerry State Veterans Campaign
Coordinators and long-time VVAW organizers in Florida and Massachusetts.

Subpoenas were served
on both men but, before either could be deposed, one checked himself into a hospital
for elective back surgery and the other had himself arrested and committed to a
mental institution. At last press
reports, he was released from the psychiatric hospital and fled the country to
Vietnam via Hawaii.

Both men clearly knew
what was coming, as did Campbell. For
the first time in nearly four decades they would be forced to answer for their
alleged "war crimes," their slanderous accusations against their fellow
soldiers finally examined, under oath.

It was just a matter of
days before all the lawsuits were withdrawn, nearly two years of costly
litigation abruptly ended, Campbell’s libel claims ground to dust under the
weight of his own testimony.

Like their leader, John Kerry, his surrogates
wanted no part of having to defend these despicable allegations, or for being held accountable for the great harm
they and he continue to inflict on our men and women in uniform. They fled the moment the light of truth
shined their way.

My fellow
POWs and I who were the target of these lawsuits are not willing to quit or
surrender. Kerry and his cowardly
followers may have achieved their purpose of keeping the American people from
seeing Stolen Honor in 2004, but we
refuse to allow the truth about Vietnam to remain untold.

Forced to
spend huge sums to defend ourselves from these frivolous lawsuits, we have
filed a countersuit against these Kerry surrogates and intend to reveal the
truth about the lawsuits and their sponsors. We believe that we can prove that the purpose of nearly two years
of litigation was to cover up for Kerry’s treachery, to drain us financially
and spiritually, and to prevent us from setting the record straight.

At stake is ultimately nothing
less than the integrity of the American military in Vietnam, the honor of the
men who served their country, the nobility of those who gave their lives, and
the truth of America’s history in Vietnam. Until or unless we do correct the
existing record, the American military may never be free of the myths and
smears of Vietnam, its honor and integrity cleansed as it fights to defend
freedom at home and around the world.

Our mission
is hardly over. We hope you will join us in fighting this battle . . . for our
soldiers, then and now.

Col. George E. "Bud" Day, USAF (Ret.,) was a
POW in North Vietnam for five years, seven months and 13 days. He served in three wars (WWII, Korea, and Vietnam)
and earned the Medal of Honor. He is the Air Force’s most decorated living
veteran. He is the Director and
President of the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation, Inc., an organization
created to better educate and inform the public about the Vietnam War, its
events, its history, and the men and women who sacrificed to serve their
country.

Dog Chapman gets charges set aside. For now, while judge requests more info.

Kennedy killed Mary Jo Kopechne and Clinton screwed with the fat girl.

Gee, I didn't know internet had been restored in New Orleans. Or San Quentin. Or wherever the hell the blood-thirsty murderer resides!

Yermama: White people have all the money and cows have none. This satistical fact proves that white people hate cows. So they must live in unheated barns without  electricity. It's obvious that they have the worst educational opportunities because none can read or write. And get this fact. Cows do not live as long as white people. Proof that the medical system gives better care to white people over poor cows. Sickening, just sickening. Where is the outrage?

Naturally, the above post is a spoof. You see lefturd commies can do nothing but cheat, lie and deseave.

Yermama: Not angry at anything but traitorous assholes like you. Telling the truth doesn't make me angry. When you find something I say is untruthful let me know. I will correct it. Your infatuation with dicks tells me who you are. Probably a black queer. Or perhaps a wannabe black queer. In any case it's obvious that you wouldn't fit in with normal white people.

Shitty little website? You can't leave it because here we don't ban asshole commies like you.  So you will never leave because only a socialist lefturd blog would welcome your anti-American bullshit. You can't get in any arguements with your own lonely, little nerd lookalikes. You're a sick freak. Concerned about dicks because the thing that would lay you would come from the ghetto.

Don't know what to do with me? What a friggin joke. Here we have the absolute bottom of society saying he doesn't know what to do with his betters. I'll tell you what you do. You say yas sir boss.

The Brits should take a lesson from South Africa, as we should.

Here is an open letter to us from South Africa. We best read it and learn...fast.

<a href="We">We'>http://ezinearticles.com/?A-Warning-For-America-From-South-Africa&id=255170#">We can\'t say we have not been warned!</a>

Papa Ray

Yermom: I see you another one of these anti-racist types. What are you scared of?

The destruction of this wonderful nation. Not scared under the silly belief that kissing minority asses will prevent them from attacking me.

lol Reagan gives arms to ***Iran*** while circumventing the laws of congress in order to save some south american shithole from the republican communist bogeyman and he is a hero. Good thing that his VP didn’t go on to arm osama bin ladin or we would be really fucked! oh wait…

As your only reader I have to point out that your title “Iran Contra; A Failed Dem Policy” not only incorrectly uses the semi-colon, but also goes on to imply that the Iran Contra arms deal was a Dem policy when in fact that was Reagan and McFarlane’s secret deal”. You are probably trying to reference the Boland Amendments which comprised the legislation prohibiting the very acts that the president illegaly chose to engage in.

Typical republican propaganda. Factually innacurate Reagan dick sucking.

I’ll end this visit by saying “OOOOOOH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO communists at our backdoor! Venezuela is coming in their pickup truck army to kill us with communism!!”

I agree 100% with you fellow PATRIOT!!! Here is the plan. Let’s secretly give Iran MORE weapons in exchange for something that will somehow help us kill those commie bastards in Venezuela. If we don’t Venezuela will ATTACK US AT ANY MOMENT using a flotilla of dinghys, john boats, and old bath tubs.

Hey Anonymous  

Here is your sincere expression of their faith and culture

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olZ60wtrAtY

The maker of this video asked the question, “If you are a muslim and feel insulted, please answer this question: What have you done today to stop terror?”

The world is waiting for the answer.

Three phrases should be among the most common in our daily usage. They are: Thank you, I am grateful and I appreciate.

October 05, 2006

October 04, 2006

YouTube's New Logo?

Posted by: Ragnar at 03:42 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 3 words, total size 1 kb.

1 No characters for "Death to America" there...

Posted by: Dale Gribble at October 04, 2006 03:58 PM (HSkSw)

2 Dale Gribble huh!

Posted by: Rev. Fred Phelps at October 04, 2006 04:17 PM (xJ3Xm)

3 Hate to say it. But if you thought of it. Good on ya. But if you merely copied from someone else you're still a prick.

Posted by: Rev. Fred Phelps at October 04, 2006 04:54 PM (xJ3Xm)

4 I was thinking of something llike...........Ewe tube!

Posted by: jesusland joe at October 04, 2006 06:02 PM (rUyw4)

5 They fear Muslim anger like just about everyone else these days. I will not submit.

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at October 04, 2006 06:43 PM (CtVG6)

6 Rev. Phelps -
 
I'm a prick in any event, but it's an original.

Posted by: The All-Seeing Pirate Ragnar at October 04, 2006 06:47 PM (UAAY0)

7 Didn't know you had it in you.

Posted by: Bluto's muslim buggerer at October 04, 2006 09:41 PM (xJ3Xm)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

YouTube Suspending Anti-Jihad Accounts

The YouTube Jihad continues. Michelle's video account has been suspended. We just received notice from YouTube that the account for Sout al Kuffar is in also in jeopardy of being suspended:

Just so there is no mistake, this action is a direct result of the fact that we lampooned media coverage of the Lebanon-Israeli conflict with our videos "All Your Fakes" and "Rocket Ride."

"Rocket Ride" is now gone from YouTube. I'll upload it somewhere else and post the link later. "All Your Fakes" is still up. If you missed it the first time, you may want to watch it while you still can:

Posted by: Ragnar at 02:45 PM | Comments (58) | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I question the timing... oh, and big oil money is behind this.
 
Actually, i'm guessing there is big oil money behind this, but it originates in the hell hole known as the "middle East".
 
Is there way to get a list of YouTube investors?

Posted by: Editor at October 04, 2006 02:51 PM (adpJH)

2 You know, Forbes magazine just did a piece about YouTube's founders.  Maybe Michelle should use her contacts at FoxNews to alert Malcom Forbes about how YouTube censors Conservative speech.

Posted by: Northern Cross at October 04, 2006 03:07 PM (mtrrA)

3

Jesus not Rocket Ride. My goodness they must not have like my linking all those jihadi videos they have at paduanjawa.blogspot.com.  That is why they are taking it out on you.

Posted by: Howie at October 04, 2006 03:31 PM (YdcZ0)

4 No, kill YouTube. All of Michelle's readers, all of us in the conservative community ought to complain about every piece of video on that site - no matter how innocuous, no matter what its subject matter.

There is nothing particularly special about YouTube that any competent web developer with gobs of server space can't create.

The owner's craven disregard for their own TOCs (witness: the jihadi murder videos) uncovered earlier this year proves that they don't deserve our custom.

This has to end now.

Posted by: Nora Charles at October 04, 2006 03:55 PM (8ZPYI)

5 YouTube dumped a 50 video collection of marine videos/IraqA-Stan  that i know of.  I just sent this to the collector thanks.
 
he wrote them and was given the usual pc anti-American lies while they let all the agit-prop from our enemies sail right thru.

Posted by: Rubin at October 04, 2006 03:55 PM (mrN3O)

6 No, kill YouTube. All of Michelle's readers, all of us in the conservative community ought to complain about every piece of video on that site - no matter how innocuous, no matter what its subject matter.

There is nothing particularly special about YouTube that any competent web developer with gobs of server space can't create.

The owner's craven disregard for their own TOCs (witness: the jihadi murder videos) uncovered earlier this year proves that they don't deserve our custom.

This has to end now.

Posted by: Nora Charles at October 04, 2006 03:56 PM (8ZPYI)

7 I just went to YouTube, did a search on "Olberman" and flagged all his videos with "racist or ethnically insensitive content."
I highly recommend it.

Posted by: CLARK at October 04, 2006 04:08 PM (KWgfz)

8 Don't complain. Compete. Put them out of business. This is a good opportunity for a bold entrepreneur.

Posted by: French Trader at October 04, 2006 04:10 PM (B3hMb)

9 Right behind you Clark!

Posted by: QC at October 04, 2006 04:11 PM (PX+vn)

10 I notice that the Hezbollah propaganda videos were removed today from Youtube... Were they flagged inapropriate?

Posted by: ttsail at October 04, 2006 04:17 PM (CJF/r)

11 Yallah Ya Nasrallah was also flagged as inappropriate for under 18s on YT. Too bad. It was the overnight anthem of optimism for the Freeworld in the recent Lebanon War. Here's a way to see it w/o registration: http://islamthreat.blogspot.com/2006/07/yallah-ya-nasrallah.html

Posted by: AndreSzara at October 04, 2006 04:24 PM (IwZYX)

12 Fmeh...no big deal. YT probably got a 'desist or get beheaded' notice from some upstart jihadi brigade so they decided to make a prudent choice. More dhimmitude from the appeasers, nothing new here.

Posted by: Bishop at October 04, 2006 04:28 PM (1Pmck)

13 The conservative community now needs its own video hosting service.

Posted by: Ernie Oporto at October 04, 2006 04:42 PM (/lpvu)

14 One question though, for me who is a YT newbie; are you able to download the vids to your comp? If so, how?

Posted by: Bishop at October 04, 2006 04:47 PM (1Pmck)

15 No, as far as I can tell you can't download youtube vids without a special program.

Posted by: Rusty at October 04, 2006 05:41 PM (JQjhA)

16 One question though, for me who is a YT newbie; are you able to download the vids to your comp? If so, how?

Plug YouTube video links into this page. It'll return a URL that you can download. To play the files under Windows, you'll need either MPlayer or ffdshow and the FLV Splitter (these two will let you play FLV files in Windows Media Player).

For Linux or Mac OS X, you'll want to use MPlayer.

Posted by: salfter at October 04, 2006 06:53 PM (+Epz5)

17 One question though, for me who is a YT newbie; are you able to download the vids to your comp? If so, how?

Plug YouTube video links into this page. It'll return a URL that you can download with whatever you want (Firefox, wget, etc.). To play the files under Windows, you'll need either MPlayer or ffdshow and the FLV Splitter (these two will let you play FLV files in Windows Media Player). For Linux or Mac OS X, you'll want to use MPlayer.

Posted by: salfter at October 04, 2006 06:57 PM (+Epz5)

18 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPaO_q6v508
 
World peace brothers!

Posted by: Some Dude at October 04, 2006 07:06 PM (/ftnZ)

19 The best defense is a good offense....

This is just another front in the PR war. If they can flag conservative videos as racially insensitive, then we can do the same. I say we start flagging every pro- Hezbollah, Hamas, and even CAIR video as "racially or ethically insensitive."

Posted by: The Earl at October 04, 2006 07:06 PM (b+3R9)

20 From my own experiences in the trenches, I'd strongly recommend finding out whether there are any Muslim groups or sites specifically dedicated to manipulating youtube. This may be Internet Haganah's territory.

Muslims routinely manipulate the weaknesses of the internet, particularly ones that run on social networking.

Posted by: sultan knish at October 04, 2006 07:19 PM (Xqi30)

21 but all told essentially rendering that system null by reporting large numbers of videos as offensive should break that kind of lazy 'popularity ranking' screening youtube is using

for anyone who wants to really break youtube, begin finding the reams of tv episodes on youtube and begin reporting them to the MPAA

Posted by: sultan knish at October 04, 2006 07:22 PM (Xqi30)

22 Bishop, lifehack
has two solutions. One is to go to videodl to download it, or you can get a GreaseMonkey script to do it. this is a free FLV player that will play them

Posted by: Don Singleton at October 04, 2006 07:26 PM (+Yrlm)

23 I agree with Sultan -- the best way to attack You Tube is for its massive copyright violations. It exists to help people steal intellectual property on a huge scale.

Posted by: Watergate at October 04, 2006 07:31 PM (GNdRY)

24 On YouTube.com right now there is a video of a woman telling people that "Jews Lie" and that "Jews want to take over the crescent".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSNGGOuVisc

I have marked it as inappropriate. How long will it still be there?

Posted by: Buck at October 04, 2006 07:32 PM (xPvFo)

25 I flagged all the Olberman vids I could find and commented where I could. YouTube is a leftist cesspool, riddled with conspiracy kooks, America haters, and jihadist Nazis -- at least in the political section. Half of the comments I read should have been thrown out for the reasons that they're throwing out Hezbollah vids. That place radiates hypocrisy from every page.

Posted by: InRussetShadows at October 04, 2006 07:38 PM (ouHK2)

26 Wow, I'll bet You Tube is worried about you guys. BTW, to one poster, I believe that Malcolm Forbes has been dead for several years now.

Posted by: Kevin at October 04, 2006 07:50 PM (aheCs)

27 I closed my account and told them why. Not that I expect it will do much good but it's one more voice of protest.

Posted by: djl4570 at October 04, 2006 08:17 PM (iJmV2)

28 This is a good opportunity for a bold entrepreneur.

Uh, by that you mean a good opportunity to lose millions of dollars?

Posted by: Pixy Misa at October 04, 2006 08:50 PM (FRalS)

29 Is there an alternative to YouTube?
Please let us know anyone.

Posted by: Paul at October 04, 2006 08:56 PM (VKmRw)

30 I can have a you tube knock off done in about a day. Have lots of bandwidth, if you are interested, let me know..

Posted by: streamersolution at October 04, 2006 09:01 PM (XT7EP)

31 I can have a you tube knock off done in about a day. Have lots of bandwidth, if you are interested, let me know..

Posted by: streamersolution at October 04, 2006 09:02 PM (XT7EP)

32 You realize it's those Zionists behind this. They control the media, oil, banks, etc... C'MON! Stop ignoring the obvious!

Posted by: Michael at October 04, 2006 09:35 PM (WUh80)

33 It gets worse. All of this is coinciding with Ahmed Bedier's (aka CAIR's Florida main man) flooding of YouTube with CAIR taqiyya videos. Once he uploaded tons of films, all of the sudden things got really rough on us anti-jihadis. I'm still holding out, and uploading to iFilm as backup, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

To make matters worse, Bedier is now featuring a video on his YouTube page by user "ummahfilms" of www.ummahfilms.com. This double shot of slick, well funded propaganda (and outright lies) is taking over YT through the tags, pushing out all other videos on the related videos lists, due to the sheer number of Bedier's. But we do win some sometimes. Some of mine pop up as "related videos" to some of Bediers, so if I drop off the planet, will you guys make sure that the right people are investigated? LOL!!

Seriously check it out. http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=bedier

And how dare they take down Rocket Ride! I might do a new video just to rant about that! What was objectionable again? Oh yeah, it's YT. Look in their terms and guess, because they'll never respond.

PG

Posted by: Pim's Ghost at October 04, 2006 10:22 PM (TK5Ak)

34 Finding (or making) an alternative to YouTube should n't be hard. Under no circumstances should we put up with discrimination against traditionalist views.

Posted by: pete at October 04, 2006 11:01 PM (lBFL9)

35 You should ask them why "Juba" is acceptable and this isn't. The press, and I never thought I would say this, seems to be intentionally lying to the public. WTF?

Posted by: mike at October 04, 2006 11:17 PM (KZ/BB)

36 For a cutting-edge collection of resistance leadership videos, you're all welcome to view, post, and comment at www.DemoCast.TV (a branch of www.Joo-Tube.com)

Posted by: DemoCast at October 05, 2006 12:15 AM (unUJ4)

37 www.guba.com

www.gofish.com

There's more then just YouTube out there.

Posted by: Robert at October 05, 2006 12:23 AM (lqr3P)

38 It gets worse. All of this is coinciding with Ahmed Bedier's (aka CAIR's Florida main man) flooding of YouTube with CAIR taqiyya videos. Once he uploaded tons of films, all of the sudden things got really rough on us anti-jihadis.

Y'know, the 'flag as innapropriate' button is there for anyone to click on.

There isn't anything I can see that prevents us from flagging the CAIR videos as 'inappropriate'.

Posted by: rosignol at October 05, 2006 02:10 AM (ofA/v)

39 Michelle is just a stupid slant eye. Crying because she doesn't get her way.

Posted by: Greyrooster at October 05, 2006 06:37 AM (xJ3Xm)

40 Google has a beta video that is now in use--I have no idea how they are regarding censoring.

This is not just the video services. Yahoo is just as bad. There "Yahoo Answers" is suspending and deleting accounts all over the place if your on the anti-jihad side of current events.

Jihadists patrol these places and target you and then report your acct. knowing that YouTube,Answers and other like sites have no way to investagate every complaint and so its is left to computer generated bannings.

The Jihadists or their fans are stalking.

Posted by: Bubbi at October 05, 2006 08:39 AM (sj6On)

41 One problem is also the amount of videos in Arabic, which most of the management of these sites do not speak or have translators for. I'm working on that one, as I know an Arabic speaker who isn't Muslim or even Arab. Those definitely need to be flagged, but unless a translation is provided it's hard to do.

Yes, there are alternatives to YouTube. YT is just one of the most popular at the moment, and I see no reason for it to become a forbidden zone for anti-jihadists. I know it seems whiny, but when they "reject" one of your videos, it really makes your blood boil!

The CAIR videos skirt the rules very carefully. It's not against YouTube rules to lie about what is or isn't in the Quran, and most of them are from news shows in which the hosts are usually disagreeing or questioning the CAIR reps. But not with user "ummahfilms", who is being promoted by CAIR's Bedier. Check him out.

Posted by: Pim's Ghost at October 05, 2006 09:26 AM (TK5Ak)

42 " Michelle is just a stupid slant-eye. Crying because she doesn't get her way. "
 
Right Howie! And what do you do when you don't get your way? I know!  Ban! Ban!  Delete! Delete! Modify! Edit! I'll bet Michelle has bigger balls than you!

Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 05, 2006 11:23 AM (Dd86v)

43 Larry,  That was not me it was Rooster. 

Posted by: Darth Odie at October 05, 2006 11:35 AM (YdcZ0)

44 I think I'll just flag and report every bit of content I find offensive, hateful, or defamatory.

If we all do that, Youtube isn't going to have very much fun trying to tell us how to think. They'll change their ways.

Posted by: DJ at October 05, 2006 01:52 PM (24SEk)

45 Here's a good one.

It's titled:
Proving that the Bible is repulsive

I'm betting it wouldn't be up there long if it was about proving the Koran wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkXOwBIRX7Y&mode=related&search=

If you want to go and flag it.

Posted by: DJ at October 05, 2006 02:11 PM (24SEk)

46 I agree with streamersolution about fighting back with a counter YouTube. Heck I would even learn how to make vids to put on a site like that

Meanwhile yes, lets tag anything we find offensive to us at YouTube. I am against censorship BUT I am not against retaliation.
Their TOS allows them literally to be as biased about what the censor, as they like, and the actual wording does not require any semblance of fairness on YouTubes part.
I see no reason not to let our own bias play with the same toys. It is after all a free country...
USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 05, 2006 02:56 PM (2OHpj)

47 google video so far does not seem to engage in political censorship

google video also has far less downtime than youtube

and google video is far less likely to begin integrating metacafe style video lists into your embedded video

google video however does not allow any copyright violations and thus any videos that feature news broadcasts or footage will not be put up

Posted by: sultan knish at October 05, 2006 03:01 PM (Xqi30)

48 ""On YouTube.com right now there is a video of a woman telling people that "Jews Lie" and that "Jews want to take over the crescent".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSNGGOuVisc

I have marked it as inappropriate. How long will it still be there?

Posted by: Buck at October 4, 2006 07:32 PM ""

Apparently removed from YouTube for "Copyright Infringment"

Hmmmmm....
well thats good anyway I guess.

USA all the way!

Posted by: Michael Weaver at October 05, 2006 03:14 PM (2OHpj)

49 There are two things going on here: one is the denial to conservatives of You Tube's server space/ hosting. The other is that an extremely popular website is becoming a playground for anti American sentiment. The first one is an issue that can be dealt with by starting an alternative site or just paying for hosting elsewhere. The second is really something that we can't deal with, since for every You tube that floats, about 100 more sink, and any site, especially one aimed at conservatives, would have a very hard time getting the same main stream exposure that the Jihadis on You Tube get.

Posted by: Max at October 05, 2006 09:02 PM (aWGyw)

50 Y'all are fun (and sometimes a bit scary) to read.

From reading these posts, you'd think YouTube was a government agency that's suppressing your right to free speech. The internet presents virtually limitless opportunity for anyone with a bit of knowhow and some resources to buid an e-soapbox to stand on and shout to the world, and if it's well done and/or has a good hook then people will look at it.

Of course, it's MUCH more fun (and a lot less work) to bitch, moan, and complain about a successful site that has editorial policies you disagree with.

Did anyone ever consider that the deletion of anti-Koran content might be as much out of fear of reprisal rather than lefty leanings? A lot of you right wingers are, in fact, quite scary in myriad ways, but not nearly as scary at a visceral level as a twenty-something middle eastern male with a vest choc full o' plastique...

Let's see how long THIS post lasts HERE...

(BTW, I voted for Reagan - twice.)

Posted by: Incognito Bandito at October 06, 2006 11:26 AM (eb47V)

51 Incognito--I second that emotion. This is a scary place to me--so many people who call themselves conservatives with so little knowledge of how the free market works. "Waaaa, Waaaaa, Waaaaaa! People don't like our message anymore." Start your own site to compete or stop complaining.

Posted by: chris at October 06, 2006 12:27 PM (ztWm2)

52 Voltaire said "Think for yourself, and let other people enjoy the privilage to do so too," which is often paraphrased as "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." I am one of those nasty left wing liberals...and I think it is horrible that YouTube deleted these videos. The great thing about the internet is that you can discover any opinion in the world--and differing opinions are what create progress in the world. If they had not deleted the videos, I could have seen them and commented about my personal disapproval, or changed my viewpoint and commented about that. Probably it would have been the former, but it doesn't matter. Opposition about opinions should be voiced in public--not through censoring the opinion nobody likes. That doesn't make the opinion wrong, or go away; it doesn't make the person whose opinion it is change their mind, it just...makes YouTube look really dumb.

Posted by: Jane at October 06, 2006 12:36 PM (K+Tfl)

53 Love that you yahoos want Keith Olbermann purged.

Yeah, his once a week ten-minute commentaries are really offensive compared to the 24/7 Ministry of Propaganda that is Fox Faux News.

But, let's jettison him anyway, whadda ya say!

After all, Supreme War Lord Bush tells us the terrorists hate us for our freedoms, which must be why he and his army of lemming-like sycophants work so hard at suppressing those freedoms.

Torture? Bring it on! Suspension of habeas corpus? Why not! Sieg heil? Hell yes!

You guys are pathetic.

Posted by: Lance at October 06, 2006 02:54 PM (a+Sop)

54 I did not see this video. I actually don't watch many videos on YouTube. I also am one of your blog readers that is not a conservative, not a liberal, just an interested American. So why bother to write again? I've seen some truly raunchy stuff on YouTube, videos I've complained about. Are they still up? They were the last time I bothered to check. I do agree that there must be a whole group of net viewers who are trying to tie up the entire web for viewing of only their points. Probably not a conspiracy - I don't much believe in those, but a group who never did understand "freedom of the press" means for Every Man.

Posted by: MarchDancer at October 06, 2006 03:20 PM (+pp5w)

55 Yes, flag all the videos by people who tick you off as "racist" or "offensive," because NOBODY will figure out what you are up to, and they will run right out and pull them. Are you serious? Back when conservatives were really an oppressed minority, they were much more interesting, and looked to compete with the national media. Now that they have nagged everyone into submission, clogged every radio dial, and dominated talk shows, they cry like little girls about every slight. Yeah, it would be a big risk of money to start a right-wing version of youtube, but you've got enough sugar daddies to pull it off. Knock a few wingnuts off the column writing/thinktank/ welfare wagon, and get the cash together.

Posted by: ciocia at October 07, 2006 07:18 AM (6TS42)

56 USA all the way... but only under rightwing rule.

Freedom of speech... but only if it agrees with rightwing policies.

Freedome of commerce... but only if it doesn't offend rightwing sensibilities.

Posted by: Not Dick but Richard at October 07, 2006 12:09 PM (1HuM5)

57 Outstanding video!

Posted by: Mark at October 07, 2006 07:33 PM (WOrHV)

58 I only watch you tube for the super bowl commercials, really who would watch any of this crap. The vast majority of us couldn't care, show me more guys getting kicked in the balls, or half naked women.

Posted by: Marty at October 09, 2006 09:54 AM (/urpu)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

What Happens When You Cut And Run (Bumped, Because I'm Still Pissed And So Should You Be)

For some reason, this got posted twice.

The original is here.

Posted by: Vinnie at 12:01 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Future Jihad by Walid Phares - good reading.

Posted by: Heroic Dreamer at October 04, 2006 12:09 AM (pxs4y)

2 It's kinda odd...I actually remember this clip from when I was 11

I couldn't help but laugh derisively about Clinton wanting to do more to protect the troops so he's sending armor units.  Oops, guess you should've sent them ahead of time like they requested, eh Bill?

Posted by: Ranba Ral at October 04, 2006 12:23 AM (VvXII)

3 So, because of some long-ago atrocities commited by a Somali militia, you admit that you'd attempt to murder any Somali-American you might encounter on the street? Never mind that this Somali would almost certainly be a refugee, fleeing the same chaos we went over there to end. Why not get a crowd together and just *lynch* this imagined Somali? Or, better yet, why not go to one America's many teeming Somali communities, and back up your big words in person? See what happens, why don'tcha? No? Typical racist loudmouth.

Posted by: Laika at October 04, 2006 07:33 AM (OgIW6)

4 Bluto's wife is Somalian.

Posted by: greyrooster at October 04, 2006 07:50 AM (xJ3Xm)

5

These are my younger brothers in the 75th we're talking about here.  (They came after me, I left the Regiment in 85.)

  Quit bickering, and instead be grateful that rough men stand ready to do violence on your behalf.
 
 
Lonevoice
2/75th

Posted by: Lonevoice at October 04, 2006 09:28 AM (5FJlF)

6 Laika: That a boy. You tell em. Dirty racists loudmouths is all they are.

Posted by: greyrooster at October 04, 2006 10:27 AM (xJ3Xm)

7 Million dollar bombs dropped on mud huts - sounds like a winning solution for everything. Man's animal nature is on full spectrum display at this website.

Posted by: tbone at October 04, 2006 02:12 PM (cviJ2)

8 greyrooster's fuck-buddies are somali and latino.

Posted by: Dale Gribble at October 04, 2006 03:41 PM (HSkSw)

9 Dale Dribble dribbles what? Whatever Mark Foley gives him.

Posted by: greyrooster at October 04, 2006 04:44 PM (xJ3Xm)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

October 03, 2006