I didn't read everything at all, mind you, but if it matters any:
If something vulgar was censured I I agree that it shouldn't be
censured.
One of many human stupidities is that we make words and forbid
ourselves their usage.
I think the problem was whether the videos were hate speech or
objective criticizing.
Usually it's criticizing, but has only as much objectiveness as the
author thinks is needed to push the limits.
But this is very hard to argue about because we NEED a privilege to
SEE the videos before we can search where they or their removal went
wrong.
Btw, is there a "copy" of those videos I could see? I like watching
controversial things, especially when those aren't horror movies.
xxxchaindriv, my original post was accurate.
you make accusations, but offer nothing in the way of facts of any
kind.
that simply makes you look ignorant and uneducated, which i suspect
is exactly the category you fall into.
if you want to hold yourself to such a low standard, that's your
business, but people will judge you accordingly.
I am an American, and very proud of that.
as a country, we are fine, it's you that is
in very deep trouble.
don't bother, you have no credibility.
your simply an embarrassment to
the united states of america.
> MerryChristmas2You
> Since you will not provide me with precisely which "accusations" you
> think are not supported by facts, there is no way to refute your
> stupidity. I can understand that, why would anyone want their
> stupidity proven beyond any doubt, when they can call people names
> I certainly hope you aren't an American, if you are, and there are
> others like you, our Country is indeed in very deep trouble.
> Again, and for the last time, if you will provide me a list of the
> things you think I am wrong about, I will be more than happy to
> provide facts to support my views, point by point. If you are
> unwilling to do this very simple thing, you will have proven you have
> as much credibility as Santa Claus and his tiny flying reindeer.
> On Sep 23, 4:40 am, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> > rewboss, learn how to mind your own fucking business.
> > my comments weren't directed towards you, therefore what
> > was said doesn't concern you at all.
> > unless you're an American citizen, the discussion
> > doesn't concern you anyway.
> > get your head out of your anal cavity, just once.
> > On Sep 18, 4:16 pm, rewboss wrote:
> > > OK, this isn't a political forum (there are plenty of those out
> > > there); and MerryChristmas2You, that was in any case an ad hominem
> > > attack, which has no place in political debate or technical support
> > > forums.- Hide quoted text -
When the facts are self evident, and research-able, especially in my
additional posts, the only one who looks ignorant and uneducated is
the person who is too stupid to know that the evidence is there,
staring them in the face.
since you never had the common decency or intelligence to enumerate
your objections to my posts, except to rant like a person afflicted
with tourettes of the typewriter, I see no further reason to engage in
a battle of wits with an obviously unarmed person.
I want to thank all the people who e-mailed me in support of my
position, if you have any further questions regarding my views please
feel free to keep in touch via e-mail. I look forward to further
discourse on this, or any other relevant subject
> xxxchaindriv, my original post was accurate.
> you make accusations, but offer nothing in the way of facts of any
> kind.
> that simply makes you look ignorant and uneducated, which i suspect
> is exactly the category you fall into.
> if you want to hold yourself to such a low standard, that's your
> business, but people will judge you accordingly.
> I am an American, and very proud of that.
> as a country, we are fine, it's you that is
> in very deep trouble.
> don't bother, you have no credibility.
> your simply an embarrassment to
> the united states of america.
> On Sep 23, 7:37 am, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > MerryChristmas2You
> > Since you will not provide me with precisely which "accusations" you
> > think are not supported by facts, there is no way to refute your
> > stupidity. I can understand that, why would anyone want their
> > stupidity proven beyond any doubt, when they can call people names
> > I certainly hope you aren't an American, if you are, and there are
> > others like you, our Country is indeed in very deep trouble.
> > Again, and for the last time, if you will provide me a list of the
> > things you think I am wrong about, I will be more than happy to
> > provide facts to support my views, point by point. If you are
> > unwilling to do this very simple thing, you will have proven you have
> > as much credibility as Santa Claus and his tiny flying reindeer.
> > On Sep 23, 4:40 am, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> > > rewboss, learn how to mind your own fucking business.
> > > my comments weren't directed towards you, therefore what
> > > was said doesn't concern you at all.
> > > unless you're an American citizen, the discussion
> > > doesn't concern you anyway.
> > > get your head out of your anal cavity, just once.
> > > On Sep 18, 4:16 pm, rewboss wrote:
> > > > OK, this isn't a political forum (there are plenty of those out
> > > > there); and MerryChristmas2You, that was in any case an ad hominem
> > > > attack, which has no place in political debate or technical support
> > > > forums.- Hide quoted text -
your dis-honest rant speaks for itself.
only someone with a limited intellect and vocabulary
would throw around words like "treason" and "murder"
without providing anything to support their claims.
the facts are self evident, you're the only one
that can't grasp what a fact is.
you potentially make a nation weaker, not stronger.
as far as matching wits, you've yet to attain any
minimal standard, therefore you walk away in obvious
defeat.
> When the facts are self evident, and research-able, especially in my
> additional posts, the only one who looks ignorant and uneducated is
> the person who is too stupid to know that the evidence is there,
> staring them in the face.
> since you never had the common decency or intelligence to enumerate
> your objections to my posts, except to rant like a person afflicted
> with tourettes of the typewriter, I see no further reason to engage in
> a battle of wits with an obviously unarmed person.
> I want to thank all the people who e-mailed me in support of my
> position, if you have any further questions regarding my views please
> feel free to keep in touch via e-mail. I look forward to further
> discourse on this, or any other relevant subject
> On Sep 23, 9:03 am, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> > xxxchaindriv, my original post was accurate.
> > you make accusations, but offer nothing in the way of facts of any
> > kind.
> > that simply makes you look ignorant and uneducated, which i suspect
> > is exactly the category you fall into.
> > if you want to hold yourself to such a low standard, that's your
> > business, but people will judge you accordingly.
> > I am an American, and very proud of that.
> > as a country, we are fine, it's you that is
> > in very deep trouble.
> > don't bother, you have no credibility.
> > your simply an embarrassment to
> > the united states of america.
> > On Sep 23, 7:37 am, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > > MerryChristmas2You
> > > Since you will not provide me with precisely which "accusations" you
> > > think are not supported by facts, there is no way to refute your
> > > stupidity. I can understand that, why would anyone want their
> > > stupidity proven beyond any doubt, when they can call people names
> > > I certainly hope you aren't an American, if you are, and there are
> > > others like you, our Country is indeed in very deep trouble.
> > > Again, and for the last time, if you will provide me a list of the
> > > things you think I am wrong about, I will be more than happy to
> > > provide facts to support my views, point by point. If you are
> > > unwilling to do this very simple thing, you will have proven you have
> > > as much credibility as Santa Claus and his tiny flying reindeer.
> > > On Sep 23, 4:40 am, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> > > > rewboss, learn how to mind your own fucking business.
> > > > my comments weren't directed towards you, therefore what
> > > > was said doesn't concern you at all.
> > > > unless you're an American citizen, the discussion
> > > > doesn't concern you anyway.
> > > > get your head out of your anal cavity, just once.
> > > > On Sep 18, 4:16 pm, rewboss wrote:
> > > > > OK, this isn't a political forum (there are plenty of those out
> > > > > there); and MerryChristmas2You, that was in any case an ad hominem
> > > > > attack, which has no place in political debate or technical support
> > > > > forums.- Hide quoted text -
> your dis-honest rant speaks for itself.
> only someone with a limited intellect and vocabulary
> would throw around words like "treason" and "murder"
> without providing anything to support their claims.
> the facts are self evident, you're the only one
> that can't grasp what a fact is.
> you potentially make a nation weaker, not stronger.
> as far as matching wits, you've yet to attain any
> minimal standard, therefore you walk away in obvious
> defeat.
> On Sep 23, 12:25 pm, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > When the facts are self evident, and research-able, especially in my
> > additional posts, the only one who looks ignorant and uneducated is
> > the person who is too stupid to know that the evidence is there,
> > staring them in the face.
> > since you never had the common decency or intelligence to enumerate
> > your objections to my posts, except to rant like a person afflicted
> > with tourettes of the typewriter, I see no further reason to engage in
> > a battle of wits with an obviously unarmed person.
> > I want to thank all the people who e-mailed me in support of my
> > position, if you have any further questions regarding my views please
> > feel free to keep in touch via e-mail. I look forward to further
> > discourse on this, or any other relevant subject
> > On Sep 23, 9:03 am, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> > > xxxchaindriv, my original post was accurate.
> > > you make accusations, but offer nothing in the way of facts of any
> > > kind.
> > > that simply makes you look ignorant and uneducated, which i suspect
> > > is exactly the category you fall into.
> > > if you want to hold yourself to such a low standard, that's your
> > > business, but people will judge you accordingly.
> > > I am an American, and very proud of that.
> > > as a country, we are fine, it's you that is
> > > in very deep trouble.
> > > don't bother, you have no credibility.
> > > your simply an embarrassment to
> > > the united states of america.
> > > On Sep 23, 7:37 am, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > > > MerryChristmas2You
> > > > Since you will not provide me with precisely which "accusations" you
> > > > think are not supported by facts, there is no way to refute your
> > > > stupidity. I can understand that, why would anyone want their
> > > > stupidity proven beyond any doubt, when they can call people names
> > > > I certainly hope you aren't an American, if you are, and there are
> > > > others like you, our Country is indeed in very deep trouble.
> > > > Again, and for the last time, if you will provide me a list of the
> > > > things you think I am wrong about, I will be more than happy to
> > > > provide facts to support my views, point by point. If you are
> > > > unwilling to do this very simple thing, you will have proven you have
> > > > as much credibility as Santa Claus and his tiny flying reindeer.
> > > > > rewboss, learn how to mind your own fucking business.
> > > > > my comments weren't directed towards you, therefore what
> > > > > was said doesn't concern you at all.
> > > > > unless you're an American citizen, the discussion
> > > > > doesn't concern you anyway.
> > > > > get your head out of your anal cavity, just once.
> > > > > On Sep 18, 4:16 pm, rewboss wrote:
> > > > > > OK, this isn't a political forum (there are plenty of those out
> > > > > > there); and MerryChristmas2You, that was in any case an ad hominem
> > > > > > attack, which has no place in political debate or technical support
> > > > > > forums.- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
I see nothing in 'Fitna' that says anything about banning the
Qur'an...I see a suggestion that MUSLIMS have a reformation like the
catholic church did, and quit with the "kill everyone who isn't a
muslim" behavior.
> Flawed logic defeats its defender
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
> » On Wed 17 Sep 2008 07:55:48 -0700, RedwoodTheElf wrote:
> » The fact that the movie "Fitna" is still online is PROOF
> » that legitimate films with themes critical of religion are
> acceptable
> » (within the limits of being flagged for graphic content)
> The "Fitna" filmhttp://www.fitnathemovie.info > is apparently fighting freedom,
> from inside by ridiculing it with a stupid apology,
> from outside by calling for its suppression
> in at least one important cases ("a ban on the Qur'an").
> And being fair to it would be, for a society,
> a PROOF of being fair to freedom?
> Even if Fitna was anything else, Goebbels could have used your
> reasoning, after promoting just one anti-nazi, to hype it everywhere
> and then, as a PROOF that the nazis were respectful of freedom...
Copy-paste person names, and from their own writing
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
Remember, each man on earth has a word he loves more than any other
word: his name. Everyone must be extremely careful to never alter a
person's name. A person's name must never be retyped, but *copy-
pasted*; and this, *from that person's own writing* (or, rarely, from
an official or trusted source), not from a 2nd-hand writing.
xxxchaindrive, I read your long post of Wed 17 Sep 2008 17:49:47 -0700
http://help.youtube.com/group/youtube-feedback/browse_thread/thread/1... I agree with the most important parts - but another point is very
annoying and may be lessen your credibility: you twice falsify
persons' names, peacenik1956 and me (falsified into "peacnik1956" and
"Meriln1940"). This makes readers feel you as careless or casual, and
zap to other posts (I confess that I didn't read you entirely).
- Mistyping ordinary words denotes lack of care for the facts and
information, thus for the persons to whom you are writing, and for all
other readers. It makes your writing unable to be retrieved by search
engines.
- When *person names* get mistyped, this becomes even more harmful;
The harm to search becomes even more harmful; here, searching for
"peacenik1956" or "Merlin1940" will NOT find your mistyped
occurrences; worse, someone reading you and searching for your wrong
occurrences, will NOT find the persons and posts you are replying.
Finally, a bad harm to efficiency and pleasantness of discussion, just
because you failed to copy-paste the names as you should.
- When person names get mistyped *twice in the same message*, it gets
even worse; it starts to being indefensible, it's more like
falsifying. Annoying from someone posturing as defending honesty and
freedom.
Sorry to bother you with this, but this is so sensitive that little
people will dare speak of it; meanwhile you are *certainly* hurting
some - even may be the very ones who affect to not find it important.
Please think of it, your post deserves better writing.
You are right, I am wrong. My apologies. When I searched, Wikipedia
was down, so I linked another article, that eventually appeared (to
me) to be rather isolated. Sorry for that.
It remains that for a regime to show themselves letting *some*
entities free (be they persons, films, groups, or else), never is a
"PROOF" that *all* entities are let free - or the Nazis (or
Communists) could have easily "proved" themselves angels.
Versailles, Wed 24 Sep 2008 23:38:40 +0200
» On Wed 24 Sep 2008 06:23:11 -0700, RedwoodTheElf wrote:
» I see nothing in 'Fitna' that says anything about banning the
» Qur'an...
Merlin1940, and peacenik1956, I apologise for spelling your user-names
wrong. it is solely my own fault, and for that I am indeed sorry. I
certainly hope it will not diminish the meaning of the messages I am
attempting to impart. I want to thank you for pointing this out to me,
and I will endeavor to proofread my posts more closely in the future.
Again, my apologies.
> Copy-paste person names, and from their own writing
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
> Remember, each man on earth has a word he loves more than any other
> word: his name. Everyone must be extremely careful to never alter a
> person's name. A person's name must never be retyped, but *copy-
> pasted*; and this, *from that person's own writing* (or, rarely, from
> an official or trusted source), not from a 2nd-hand writing.
> xxxchaindrive, I read your long post of Wed 17 Sep 2008 17:49:47 -0700http://help.youtube.com/group/youtube-feedback/browse_thread/thread/1...
> I agree with the most important parts - but another point is very
> annoying and may be lessen your credibility: you twice falsify
> persons' names, peacenik1956 and me (falsified into "peacnik1956" and
> "Meriln1940"). This makes readers feel you as careless or casual, and
> zap to other posts (I confess that I didn't read you entirely).
> - Mistyping ordinary words denotes lack of care for the facts and
> information, thus for the persons to whom you are writing, and for all
> other readers. It makes your writing unable to be retrieved by search
> engines.
> - When *person names* get mistyped, this becomes even more harmful;
> The harm to search becomes even more harmful; here, searching for
> "peacenik1956" or "Merlin1940" will NOT find your mistyped
> occurrences; worse, someone reading you and searching for your wrong
> occurrences, will NOT find the persons and posts you are replying.
> Finally, a bad harm to efficiency and pleasantness of discussion, just
> because you failed to copy-paste the names as you should.
> - When person names get mistyped *twice in the same message*, it gets
> even worse; it starts to being indefensible, it's more like
> falsifying. Annoying from someone posturing as defending honesty and
> freedom.
> Sorry to bother you with this, but this is so sensitive that little
> people will dare speak of it; meanwhile you are *certainly* hurting
> some - even may be the very ones who affect to not find it important.
> Please think of it, your post deserves better writing.
xxchaindrive, if your going to apologize, you should first and
foremost apologize
for making accusations that are completely unfounded, despite
what a mental case like Merlin1940 would have you believe.
if you want to make accusations, support those accusations
with facts, otherwise you simply look foolish and ignorant.
secondly, you should also apologize for posting your rant in exactly
the wrong forum. the very people you are trying to get the attention
of, don't even read this forum.
maybe in the future you'll make "smarter" choices.
> Merlin1940, and peacenik1956, I apologise for spelling your user-names
> wrong. it is solely my own fault, and for that I am indeed sorry. I
> certainly hope it will not diminish the meaning of the messages I am
> attempting to impart. I want to thank you for pointing this out to me,
> and I will endeavor to proofread my posts more closely in the future.
> Again, my apologies.
> On Sep 24, 4:22 pm, Merlin1940 wrote:
> > Copy-paste person names, and from their own writing
> > ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
> > Remember, each man on earth has a word he loves more than any other
> > word: his name. Everyone must be extremely careful to never alter a
> > person's name. A person's name must never be retyped, but *copy-
> > pasted*; and this, *from that person's own writing* (or, rarely, from
> > an official or trusted source), not from a 2nd-hand writing.
> > xxxchaindrive, I read your long post of Wed 17 Sep 2008 17:49:47 -0700http://help.youtube.com/group/youtube-feedback/browse_thread/thread/1...
> > I agree with the most important parts - but another point is very
> > annoying and may be lessen your credibility: you twice falsify
> > persons' names, peacenik1956 and me (falsified into "peacnik1956" and
> > "Meriln1940"). This makes readers feel you as careless or casual, and
> > zap to other posts (I confess that I didn't read you entirely).
> > - Mistyping ordinary words denotes lack of care for the facts and
> > information, thus for the persons to whom you are writing, and for all
> > other readers. It makes your writing unable to be retrieved by search
> > engines.
> > - When *person names* get mistyped, this becomes even more harmful;
> > The harm to search becomes even more harmful; here, searching for
> > "peacenik1956" or "Merlin1940" will NOT find your mistyped
> > occurrences; worse, someone reading you and searching for your wrong
> > occurrences, will NOT find the persons and posts you are replying.
> > Finally, a bad harm to efficiency and pleasantness of discussion, just
> > because you failed to copy-paste the names as you should.
> > - When person names get mistyped *twice in the same message*, it gets
> > even worse; it starts to being indefensible, it's more like
> > falsifying. Annoying from someone posturing as defending honesty and
> > freedom.
> > Sorry to bother you with this, but this is so sensitive that little
> > people will dare speak of it; meanwhile you are *certainly* hurting
> > some - even may be the very ones who affect to not find it important.
> > Please think of it, your post deserves better writing.
Lynching is going on
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
"MerryChristmas2You" violates in the 1st line cited, the statement he
makes in the 2nd and 3rd.
And after more than 24 hours, none told him as due:
"please apply yourself; if you want to make accusations, support those
accusations with facts, or you look foolish and ignorant".
- http://help.youtube.com/group/youtube-feedback/browse_thread/thread/1... - On Thu 25 Sep 2008 12:16:52 -0700, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
» ...what a mental case like Merlin1940 would have you believe.
» if you want to make accusations, support those accusations
» with facts, otherwise you simply look foolish and ignorant.
someday when either one of you (xxxchaindrive and Merlin1940),
want to produce facts to support your accusations, feel free
to do so.
until which time either of you do so, you have zero credibility
as far as i'm concerned.
the word "lynching" doesn't apply, then again, when you
have an extremely limited vocabulary, what choice
do you have ?
> Lynching is going on
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
> "MerryChristmas2You" violates in the 1st line cited, the statement he
> makes in the 2nd and 3rd.
> And after more than 24 hours, none told him as due:
> "please apply yourself; if you want to make accusations, support those
> accusations with facts, or you look foolish and ignorant".
> -http://help.youtube.com/group/youtube-feedback/browse_thread/thread/1...
> - On Thu 25 Sep 2008 12:16:52 -0700, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> » ...what a mental case like Merlin1940 would have you believe.
> » if you want to make accusations, support those accusations
> » with facts, otherwise you simply look foolish and ignorant.
Brother, the best thing you can do when being confronted via message
boards by idiots, is to ignore them. When an individual attacks in
this way, despite truth, proof, and wisdom, they obviously have a
severe mental defect, indicative of some form of abuse. It is the
nature of these types of persons to maintain a constant barrage of
abuse, in an attempt to alleviate the pain of their pathetic lives.
When all someone can do is keep repeating that they are right and you
are wrong, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary,
you, and everybody else who reads their diatribe, must realize just
how pitiful they are.
Of course, they may also just be tools of the murderous criminal
traitors in office, trying to discredit true patriotism. Only their
shrinks or agents in charge knows for sure.
My suggestion, block them from e-mailing you, and disregard their
posts.
> Lynching is going on
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
> "MerryChristmas2You" violates in the 1st line cited, the statement he
> makes in the 2nd and 3rd.
> And after more than 24 hours, none told him as due:
> "please apply yourself; if you want to make accusations, support those
> accusations with facts, or you look foolish and ignorant".
> -http://help.youtube.com/group/youtube-feedback/browse_thread/thread/1...
> - On Thu 25 Sep 2008 12:16:52 -0700, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> » ...what a mental case like Merlin1940 would have you believe.
> » if you want to make accusations, support those accusations
> » with facts, otherwise you simply look foolish and ignorant.
Thanks for your support.
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Was needed and is welcome. I fully agree (excepted the 5 words: "block
them from e-mailing you" - I never block any expression even from the
worst ones).
Versailles, Sat 27 Sep 2008 18:02:25 +0200
» On Sep 27, 9:53 am, xxxchaindrive wrote:
» ...the best thing you can do when being confronted via message
» boards by idiots, is to ignore them...
» Of course, they may also just be tools of the murderous criminal
» traitors in office, trying to discredit true patriotism. Only their
» shrinks or agents in charge knows for sure.
» My suggestion, block them from e-mailing you, and disregard their
» posts.
Your point is well taken, and I essentialy agree. My advice was meant
as a way to deal with an obviously disturbed person who continually
attacks via e-mail, repeating the same nonsense over and over. It is
not healthy to enable these persons, as it may add to their mental
instability.
Of course that can, in some instances, be entertaining, lol.
> Thanks for your support.
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
> Was needed and is welcome. I fully agree (excepted the 5 words: "block
> them from e-mailing you" - I never block any expression even from the
> worst ones).
> Versailles, Sat 27 Sep 2008 18:02:25 +0200
> » On Sep 27, 9:53 am, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> » ...the best thing you can do when being confronted via message
> » boards by idiots, is to ignore them...
> » Of course, they may also just be tools of the murderous criminal
> » traitors in office, trying to discredit true patriotism. Only their
> » shrinks or agents in charge knows for sure.
> » My suggestion, block them from e-mailing you, and disregard their
> » posts.
> Why is youtube removing important political videos that depict the
> crimes that our current U.S. regime are committing, and suspending the
> accounts of patriotic Americans??
> The first amendment to our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech,
> and makes any law attempting to abridge that freedom an
> unconstitutional act.
> There is currently no law abridging that freedom, but if venues such
> as youtube cave to the possibility of such an unconscionable and un-
> American law, American society will soon follow.
> Youtube, Google, MSN, Yahoo, and all the other internet giants may be
> our last defense against the traitors in our government who are trying
> to usurp our unalienable rights.
> Remember, our Constitution is still intact. No amendments have been
> passed that revoke the first amendment, or for that matter the fourth,
> fifth or any other amendments. Any laws passed that violate these
> sacred ideals are patently unlawful, (read patriot act, and executive
> orders), and must be challenged by any means available, along with the
> people or entities who author these deplorable attacks on our
> freedoms.
> Youtube I implore you, do not let the criminals in government
> terrorize you into mediocrity.
What!!??!!
The first amendment was first to guarantee unpopular speech, speech
that may inspire people to act. That those actions may become
dangerous, fall to other bodies of law.
> Amendment 1 may and will be broken if the act of speech creates a
> dangerous or suspectfully dangerous environment.
> It's that simple.
> On Sep 16, 8:31 pm, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > Why is youtube removing important political videos that depict the
> > crimes that our current U.S. regime are committing, and suspending the
> > accounts of patriotic Americans??
> > The first amendment to our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech,
> > and makes any law attempting to abridge that freedom an
> > unconstitutional act.
> > There is currently no law abridging that freedom, but if venues such
> > as youtube cave to the possibility of such an unconscionable and un-
> > American law, American society will soon follow.
> > Youtube, Google, MSN, Yahoo, and all the other internet giants may be
> > our last defense against the traitors in our government who are trying
> > to usurp our unalienable rights.
> > Remember, our Constitution is still intact. No amendments have been
> > passed that revoke the first amendment, or for that matter the fourth,
> > fifth or any other amendments. Any laws passed that violate these
> > sacred ideals are patently unlawful, (read patriot act, and executive
> > orders), and must be challenged by any means available, along with the
> > people or entities who author these deplorable attacks on our
> > freedoms.
> > Youtube I implore you, do not let the criminals in government
> > terrorize you into mediocrity.- Hide quoted text -
Not everyone who disagrees with your contention that everyone's real
life name and address should be freely available to every lunatic on
the net is the same person.
Being Harrassed by a lunatic with multiple accounts myself (which I
have provided ample proof of, even though you choose to ignore it and
claim that I'm harrassing myself for some bizzarre reason) There are
TIMES that I would like to find out who he is and go give him a punch
in the snoot...but then I think "Ok...if I did THAT, how would that
make me better than some lowlife cyberstalker who finds little kids
online and kidnaps them?
The Anonymity of the Internet is a shield, protecting you and your
family from such lunatics...yet you WANT them to be able to find you
in real life?
> Lynching is going on
> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
> "MerryChristmas2You" violates in the 1st line cited, the statement he
> makes in the 2nd and 3rd.
> And after more than 24 hours, none told him as due:
> "please apply yourself; if you want to make accusations, support those
> accusations with facts, or you look foolish and ignorant".
> -http://help.youtube.com/group/youtube-feedback/browse_thread/thread/1...
> - On Thu 25 Sep 2008 12:16:52 -0700, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> » ...what a mental case like Merlin1940 would have you believe.
> » if you want to make accusations, support those accusations
> » with facts, otherwise you simply look foolish and ignorant.
I agree with Redwood; YouTube is a private company and can censor
whatever it wants to. I think it's wrong to censor the internet, but I
understand that certain laws must be followed and business must
protect themselves.
But here's that I want to argue: that this 'unconstitutional' means
nothing. The U.S. government can do whatever it wants.
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18:
The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,
and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of
the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
This is called the 'Elastic Clause' because "necessary and proper" can
mean whatever Congress or the Supreme Court wants it to.
Think the Supreme Court cares about the Constitution? Please see
Toyosaburo Korematsu vs United States, decided December 18, 1944. Mr.
Korematsu was trying to call out the United States on illegally
detaining Japanese Americans during World War II. Supreme Court told
him to prove that he was not a threat to the country, and only then
would he be released from the camps. (Essentially pissing all over
the Bill of Rights, and any American credibility in my opinion.)
Finally, the Patriot Act. This beautiful little document takes the
stomped on, pissed on Bill of Rights and finally defecates and burns
what was left. Sorry, my fellow American Citizens, hope you like your
government strong, centralized, and raping you up the ass in the
interest of big business. (Did you know that the government owns up to
1/3 of the wealth and property in the country? And that's just what
the textbooks admit to!)
> Why is youtube removing important political videos that depict the
> crimes that our current U.S. regime are committing, and suspending the
> accounts of patriotic Americans??
> The first amendment to our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech,
> and makes any law attempting to abridge that freedom an
> unconstitutional act.
> There is currently no law abridging that freedom, but if venues such
> as youtube cave to the possibility of such an unconscionable and un-
> American law, American society will soon follow.
> Youtube, Google, MSN, Yahoo, and all the other internet giants may be
> our last defense against the traitors in our government who are trying
> to usurp our unalienable rights.
> Remember, our Constitution is still intact. No amendments have been
> passed that revoke the first amendment, or for that matter the fourth,
> fifth or any other amendments. Any laws passed that violate these
> sacred ideals are patently unlawful, (read patriot act, and executive
> orders), and must be challenged by any means available, along with the
> people or entities who author these deplorable attacks on our
> freedoms.
> Youtube I implore you, do not let the criminals in government
> terrorize you into mediocrity.
the fact that you chose to post in the forums xxxchaindrive,
suggests that you are illiterate and don't know how to get your
message
across.
1) this is a general help forum
2) the very people you were trying to get the attention of, don't even
read the forums.
3) try reading the forum charter at some point, educate yourself.
4) if you want to make accusations that have no basis in fact, that's
your business.
by doing so, you simply look ignorant and uneducated.
> What!!??!!
> The first amendment was first to guarantee unpopular speech, speech
> that may inspire people to act. That those actions may become
> dangerous, fall to other bodies of law.
> It's that simple!
> On Sep 27, 2:34 pm, DaleOfHope wrote:
> > Amendment 1 may and will be broken if the act of speech creates a
> > dangerous or suspectfully dangerous environment.
> > It's that simple.
> > On Sep 16, 8:31 pm, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > > Why is youtube removing important political videos that depict the
> > > crimes that our current U.S. regime are committing, and suspending the
> > > accounts of patriotic Americans??
> > > The first amendment to our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech,
> > > and makes any law attempting to abridge that freedom an
> > > unconstitutional act.
> > > There is currently no law abridging that freedom, but if venues such
> > > as youtube cave to the possibility of such an unconscionable and un-
> > > American law, American society will soon follow.
> > > Youtube, Google, MSN, Yahoo, and all the other internet giants may be
> > > our last defense against the traitors in our government who are trying
> > > to usurp our unalienable rights.
> > > Remember, our Constitution is still intact. No amendments have been
> > > passed that revoke the first amendment, or for that matter the fourth,
> > > fifth or any other amendments. Any laws passed that violate these
> > > sacred ideals are patently unlawful, (read patriot act, and executive
> > > orders), and must be challenged by any means available, along with the
> > > people or entities who author these deplorable attacks on our
> > > freedoms.
> > > Youtube I implore you, do not let the criminals in government
> > > terrorize you into mediocrity.- Hide quoted text -
Since you didn't read my further posts, as they were too long, I
never said YouTube was doing anything un-Constitutional. I was
imploring, (to ask with heartfelt emotion), YouTube not to cave to the
un-Constitutional acts of our criminal government. The criminal
government I speak of, not only include certain factions of the
legislative branch and certainly the executive branch, but the
judicial branch as well
Your contention, that the "elastic clause" of the Constitution enable
congress and the supreme court to do whatever it wants, is flawed, in
that the clause only allows passage of laws that are necessary to
bring into execution the powers "VESTED BY THIS CONSTITUTION." This is
very important, as the Constitution, as written, severely limits the
power of government to the powers "vested" in it by that document. Any
act, law, or ruling, that gives the government more power than those
enumerated by the Constitution, are acts of sedition, and more
probably treason, if the act, law or ruling intentionally acts to
usurp or expand the scope of powers "vested" in government by the
Constitution. I say treason, as all government employees must take an
oath to uphold the Constitution. Those employees include, among
others, every member of congress, the president, and every sitting
judge in the United States. The only legal way the Constitution can be
changed, is by the amendment process, which was designed to be very
hard.
This does not mean people of power will not try to destroy our
country, and, as is evidenced by the current state of affairs. seize
powers they are not entitled to. These traitorous criminals MUST be
stopped and held accountable, as they are operating outside the scope
of not only our Constitution, but morality as well. The ill named
"patriot act" is one such traitorous act, as are most "executive
orders", or any other act, law, or ruling that is outside the scope of
powers vested in our government by our Constitution.
I agree that the courts have failed to uphold the Constitution, it
happens everyday all over the country, because WE LET IT!! Nobody,
but a certain few of us Patriots, seem to give a damn. As long as the
sheeple are fat and happy, the people of power will keep taking,
offering false promises of safety for our freedoms. In the end, we
will have neither.
> I agree with Redwood; YouTube is a private company and can censor
> whatever it wants to. I think it's wrong to censor the internet, but I
> understand that certain laws must be followed and business must
> protect themselves.
> But here's that I want to argue: that this 'unconstitutional' means
> nothing. The U.S. government can do whatever it wants.
> Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18:
> The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be
> necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,
> and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of
> the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
> This is called the 'Elastic Clause' because "necessary and proper" can
> mean whatever Congress or the Supreme Court wants it to.
> Think the Supreme Court cares about the Constitution? Please see
> Toyosaburo Korematsu vs United States, decided December 18, 1944. Mr.
> Korematsu was trying to call out the United States on illegally
> detaining Japanese Americans during World War II. Supreme Court told
> him to prove that he was not a threat to the country, and only then
> would he be released from the camps. (Essentially pissing all over
> the Bill of Rights, and any American credibility in my opinion.)
> Finally, the Patriot Act. This beautiful little document takes the
> stomped on, pissed on Bill of Rights and finally defecates and burns
> what was left. Sorry, my fellow American Citizens, hope you like your
> government strong, centralized, and raping you up the ass in the
> interest of big business. (Did you know that the government owns up to
> 1/3 of the wealth and property in the country? And that's just what
> the textbooks admit to!)
> On Sep 16, 7:31 pm, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > Why is youtube removing important political videos that depict the
> > crimes that our current U.S. regime are committing, and suspending the
> > accounts of patriotic Americans??
> > The first amendment to our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech,
> > and makes any law attempting to abridge that freedom an
> > unconstitutional act.
> > There is currently no law abridging that freedom, but if venues such
> > as youtube cave to the possibility of such an unconscionable and un-
> > American law, American society will soon follow.
> > Youtube, Google, MSN, Yahoo, and all the other internet giants may be
> > our last defense against the traitors in our government who are trying
> > to usurp our unalienable rights.
> > Remember, our Constitution is still intact. No amendments have been
> > passed that revoke the first amendment, or for that matter the fourth,
> > fifth or any other amendments. Any laws passed that violate these
> > sacred ideals are patently unlawful, (read patriot act, and executive
> > orders), and must be challenged by any means available, along with the
> > people or entities who author these deplorable attacks on our
> > freedoms.
> > Youtube I implore you, do not let the criminals in government
> > terrorize you into mediocrity.- Hide quoted text -
MerryChristmas2You:
I see you are back, showing your ignorance and idiocy once again. I
thought you had slunk back down into the hole from whence you came. So
be it, I will answer YOU one last time.
1) This is not the general help forum, it's the Feedback & Suggestions
forum.
2) The people I wanted to get the attention of from my OP, was
YouTube, that this thread has become the second most posted to thread
in this forum, means somebody must be reading my posts, and my
"message" must be getting out.
3) Perhaps YOU should read the forums charter, but I'm sure the
education would be wasted on you, as I am not, nor have not violated
the charter in any way.
4) The "accusations" I have made, for the umpteenth time, are all
based on fact and law, and should be the business of EVERYBODY in this
country!
By your repeated denial of fact, and unwarranted attack, you act as a
spoiled and child, not worthy of intelligent discourse. Perhaps you
were abused as a child, or have some mental disease or complex that
makes you this way. I don't know or care. You aren't worth any more of
my time.
> the fact that you chose to post in the forums xxxchaindrive,
> suggests that you are illiterate and don't know how to get your
> message
> across.
> 1) this is a general help forum
> 2) the very people you were trying to get the attention of, don't even
> read the forums.
> 3) try reading the forum charter at some point, educate yourself.
> 4) if you want to make accusations that have no basis in fact, that's
> your business.
> by doing so, you simply look ignorant and uneducated.
> > What!!??!!
> > The first amendment was first to guarantee unpopular speech, speech
> > that may inspire people to act. That those actions may become
> > dangerous, fall to other bodies of law.
> > It's that simple!
> > On Sep 27, 2:34 pm, DaleOfHope wrote:
> > > Amendment 1 may and will be broken if the act of speech creates a
> > > dangerous or suspectfully dangerous environment.
> > > It's that simple.
> > > On Sep 16, 8:31 pm, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > > > Why is youtube removing important political videos that depict the
> > > > crimes that our current U.S. regime are committing, and suspending the
> > > > accounts of patriotic Americans??
> > > > The first amendment to our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech,
> > > > and makes any law attempting to abridge that freedom an
> > > > unconstitutional act.
> > > > There is currently no law abridging that freedom, but if venues such
> > > > as youtube cave to the possibility of such an unconscionable and un-
> > > > American law, American society will soon follow.
> > > > Youtube, Google, MSN, Yahoo, and all the other internet giants may be
> > > > our last defense against the traitors in our government who are trying
> > > > to usurp our unalienable rights.
> > > > Remember, our Constitution is still intact. No amendments have been
> > > > passed that revoke the first amendment, or for that matter the fourth,
> > > > fifth or any other amendments. Any laws passed that violate these
> > > > sacred ideals are patently unlawful, (read patriot act, and executive
> > > > orders), and must be challenged by any means available, along with the
> > > > people or entities who author these deplorable attacks on our
> > > > freedoms.
> > > > Youtube I implore you, do not let the criminals in government
> > > > terrorize you into mediocrity.- Hide quoted text -
Please Readers refer to originals, ignore rewritings
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
» On Sun 28 Sep 2008 14:44 GMT, RedwoodTheElf wrote:
» ...quit with this persecution complex thing.
Please don't lend to others thoughts, speeches, acts or behaviors that
you know are absolutely not theirs (in plain English: don't insult)
» ...your contention that everyone's real life name and address
» should be freely available to every lunatic on the net...
Please don't rewrite others' saying (your sample is just another proof
that none rewrites but with intent to build in readers' minds a
falsified idea of the original).
Please Readers refer to originals, ignore rewritings - that will
probably continue.
xxxchaindrive, if i had the authority i would have closed your account
already.
you never produced any facts, only accusations.
note to youtube: maybe we should restrict letting illiterate and
ignorant users
like xxxchaindrive on youtube.
live in darkness xxxchaindrive, you've earned it, and you deserve it.
you simply can't comprehend what you read, there is no cure for that.
> MerryChristmas2You:
> I see you are back, showing your ignorance and idiocy once again. I
> thought you had slunk back down into the hole from whence you came. So
> be it, I will answer YOU one last time.
> 1) This is not the general help forum, it's the Feedback & Suggestions
> forum.
> 2) The people I wanted to get the attention of from my OP, was
> YouTube, that this thread has become the second most posted to thread
> in this forum, means somebody must be reading my posts, and my
> "message" must be getting out.
> 3) Perhaps YOU should read the forums charter, but I'm sure the
> education would be wasted on you, as I am not, nor have not violated
> the charter in any way.
> 4) The "accusations" I have made, for the umpteenth time, are all
> based on fact and law, and should be the business of EVERYBODY in this
> country!
> By your repeated denial of fact, and unwarranted attack, you act as a
> spoiled and child, not worthy of intelligent discourse. Perhaps you
> were abused as a child, or have some mental disease or complex that
> makes you this way. I don't know or care. You aren't worth any more of
> my time.
> On Sep 29, 3:28 am, MerryChristmas2You wrote:
> > the fact that you chose to post in the forums xxxchaindrive,
> > suggests that you are illiterate and don't know how to get your
> > message
> > across.
> > 1) this is a general help forum
> > 2) the very people you were trying to get the attention of, don't even
> > read the forums.
> > 3) try reading the forum charter at some point, educate yourself.
> > 4) if you want to make accusations that have no basis in fact, that's
> > your business.
> > by doing so, you simply look ignorant and uneducated.
> > > What!!??!!
> > > The first amendment was first to guarantee unpopular speech, speech
> > > that may inspire people to act. That those actions may become
> > > dangerous, fall to other bodies of law.
> > > It's that simple!
> > > On Sep 27, 2:34 pm, DaleOfHope wrote:
> > > > Amendment 1 may and will be broken if the act of speech creates a
> > > > dangerous or suspectfully dangerous environment.
> > > > It's that simple.
> > > > On Sep 16, 8:31 pm, xxxchaindrive wrote:
> > > > > Why is youtube removing important political videos that depict the
> > > > > crimes that our current U.S. regime are committing, and suspending the
> > > > > accounts of patriotic Americans??
> > > > > The first amendment to our Constitution guarantees freedom of speech,
> > > > > and makes any law attempting to abridge that freedom an
> > > > > unconstitutional act.
> > > > > There is currently no law abridging that freedom, but if venues such
> > > > > as youtube cave to the possibility of such an unconscionable and un-
> > > > > American law, American society will soon follow.
> > > > > Youtube, Google, MSN, Yahoo, and all the other internet giants may be
> > > > > our last defense against the traitors in our government who are trying
> > > > > to usurp our unalienable rights.
> > > > > Remember, our Constitution is still intact. No amendments have been
> > > > > passed that revoke the first amendment, or for that matter the fourth,
> > > > > fifth or any other amendments. Any laws passed that violate these
> > > > > sacred ideals are patently unlawful, (read patriot act, and executive
> > > > > orders), and must be challenged by any means available, along with the
> > > > > people or entities who author these deplorable attacks on our
> > > > > freedoms.
> > > > > Youtube I implore you, do not let the criminals in government
> > > > > terrorize you into mediocrity.- Hide quoted text -
