It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


You Tube Free Speech Purge Accelerates, Infowarrior Channel Banned

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on May, 13 2009 @ 04:50 PM
I think that if Youtube started removing Christianity/Jesus videos just because they didn't agree with Christianity many of you people who claim not to care would start getting upset.

There really isn't a difference between the two situations because suppressing information that others believe is true, just because you do not agree with it, is censorship! YouTube is a large enough company that it is a violation of free speech.

Which is exactly what the creators of this thread are suggesting. Could it be clearer?

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 04:53 PM
What more does YouTube/Google Video have to do before people get that they actively suppress information? I thought people would get it when they started modifying the view counts of conspiracy videos that were getting too many hits, in their opinion.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 04:59 PM
Okay the internet is not the United states, it is not a free speech area, it is not a place that a person has rights in, the internet is not a real place and if you honestly think someone can infringe on your rights as laid out in the constutution through not letting you post on some site, then you have already lost. You want a voice that can't be silenced then don't complain and start your own website. Search engines not displaying your page? Then start your own search engine.
The internet is a collection of websites that are owned by individuals or corperations. Think of the internet has just as a city full of private property without sidewalks only search engines.
Youtube is a PRIVATELY owned site. So they can do what ever they want with or without reguard to the rules. Think of your house and you open the door and put a sign up that says anyone is welcome to come in. now lets say a neighbor comes in your house and starts telling black jokes and pissing off everyone else. He has a right to free speech but you have the right to throw him out becasue it is still your house. Alex Jones has his own site and his own forum. There is no reason why he has to go on someone elses site when he has his own.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by The Mack]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:08 PM
reply to post by The Mack

Right but ATS is a privately owned site, too, and it doesn't stop people from getting really mad that their supposed "rights" are being infringed upon.

This is kind of why, I think, that ATS has a media portal. Not everyone is being allowed to post and keep their videos on Youtube. So now people can post them here. Or google videos. Or wherever they're allowed to keep them. If they really wanted, they could make their own website for showcasing their beliefs.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:14 PM
Upstream Of Mainstream

Originally posted by Dr Love
You're right, and as long as YouTube allows all the soft porn you can handle and that idiot kid with the helium voice to rule their site, I'm a happy camper. Real information should not interfere with the demoralization of the masses, IMHO of course.

Yeah yeah, the people must never know the awful truth, the Illuminati must protect us from the Things Man Was Not Meant To Know, if it's not on TV, it's not real, and I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords. Bleh.

For what it's worth, sensationalism and all, I think Alex Jones is pretty awesome, if for no other reason than the fact that he does rattle cages, fearlessly promotes some of the boldest "conspiracy theories" out there and tirelessly rages against the status quo. We could use more of that, as far as I'm concerned.

At least, as long as it's honest.

In this case, I feel compelled to comment when I see AJ ripping a page from the Al Sharpton Playbook and (once again) indulging in gratuitous drama queenery.

Even if we assume his assertions about YouTube are true, I'm pretty sure he could work things out with them such that he could air pretty much anything he wants. I mean damn, just look at what they don't remove.

But then again, maybe they really are trying to squash "alternative" points of view. God knows we see enough of that in the "mainstream media". Maybe it really is part of some sort of push to make YouTube more "mainstream" for whatever reason.

I honestly don't know, but I'm pretty sure Alex Jones honestly doesn't know either.

If he's trying to convince me he's telling the truth by using these sorts of tactics, it ain't working. :shk:

Channel Surfing

Meanwhile, whatever the real deal between Alex Jones and YouTube may be, I do like the idea of MATS as an alternative to YouTube.

Granted, it's not an option for people who can't stomach the T&C, but it would be laughably self-defeating indeed for ATS to censor media because it's not "mainstream" enough.

And hey, who knows? If he's interested in a YouTube alternative, maybe Mr. Jones should drop a line to the Amigos and see if they can work something out.

You never know what might come of it.

(Just my personal opinion, nothing more.)

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:17 PM
reply to post by ravenshadow13

Nobody is allowed to pos whatever they want there are always T&Cs. And those T&Cs are enforced by the opinions of the moderators.Not just here on every site and not that's a bad thing it is just the way it is. Go to any website that talks about religion or politics you will see the bans handed out to one side more than the other.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by The Mack]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:26 PM
Don't forget that YouTube isn't public access although the public can view and add to it, they have T&C. It's a private company and so doesn't really have to allow anyone to do as they please.

Having said that, I fully support Joneses right to free speech but he needs to move away from youtube, leave that for the sheep to watch idiotic clips.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:33 PM
Moderator-Note: Entire Post Removed. Please do not post telephone numbers, email addresses or home addresses of other people. Thank you.

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by Skyfloating]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:40 PM
While I accept the point that if one owns a website, whether to show specific content is your right. However, YT does place itself in the sphere of 'community' media. The word community is used on the site itself. Communities, by their nature will self censure. In the case of the AJ channel, this is censorship without community action. Unless AJ has contravened the T&Cs, the channel should be up in my opinion. However, no one can claim a right to having or viewing a channel.

So yes it is censorship but the motive? I would suggest the motive purely financial - YT doesn't want to become a conspiracy site (hey, we've got ATS for that!) and lose users to the many other sites offering a similar entertainment experience. fewer users means less advertising and less advertising equal less profit.

Even I'm on on YT!: mithrawept

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by 12340987

i do not think that ATS is the propper place to organize rAIDS. As this is also privateley owned and i see you made an account just to put that snipet on there.

back on the subject: Alex Jones has his own sites and fanbase he should stick to that. He has enough to talk about he does not need to go out and find another enemy to talk at length about.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:56 PM
Google It™

Originally posted by mithrawept
So yes it is censorship but the motive? I would suggest the motive purely financial - YT doesn't want to become a conspiracy site (hey, we've got ATS for that!) and lose users to the many other sites offering a similar entertainment experience. fewer users means less advertising and less advertising equal less profit.

Actually, I think a financial motive would tend to work in favor of YouTube being as inclusive as possible. Why turn away potentially profitable content?

If the concern is that hosting Alex Jones might offend other "corporate" sponsors, there's plenty of content they don't remove which is much more offensive to a much broader range of corporate interests, so I find that implication to be rather weak.

Considering that we're talking about a Google company, and Google's overall strategy might best be described as "conquer the world", the idea of them deliberately cutting themselves out of market share just doesn't compute.

Heck, it wouldn't surprise me if we were to see a new Google Conspiracies™ website, not to mention Google Motors™ (formerly General Motors), Google Dentistry™ and McGoogle's™ fast-food restaurants.

Never underestimate the power of a profit motive.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 06:19 PM
reply to post by The Mack

Very well said. Alex feels you tube has no right to control there own web site but he wants total control of his own.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 06:41 PM
Maybe we don't know the full story.

What if he was kicked off not to silence him for being anti-government, but because he was being an asshole?

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:05 PM

Originally posted by Common Good
im with the rest of you guys on this, You Tube, nor any other corporation or govt entity should be able to pick and choose which information they think is suitable for people to see. It is not their place to be able to come in and say "ah we dont like this guy take him off". They have no right whatsoever to dosomething like that. As above posters have stated, all this is doing is ruining their cause, and helping his. Hes got my support.

Why not? Is it not a Company. Shouldnt A company be able to choose what products they sell or offer? If you dont agree, move on to Liveleak or some other user video service.
They, like any business should have the right to run their business into the ground if they want, by ticking off people like you.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:09 PM
YouTube is about to get a mighty blow dealt against it.

1st Amendment Lawyers are already on the move against the web giant. I would suspect that YouTube is going to be forced into submission in US District Court in California as soon as the suit is filed there.

They are going to have PROVE that they are not violating Alex Jones's 1st Amendment Rights to "Free Speech" via his video presentations on the YouTube website. They are also going to have to prove that He and anyone else "broke their rules" in posting said video presentations.

Let us all not forget that "FREE SPEECH" comes with consequences. Since YouTube is based in California according to the Network Solutions "WHOis" information, they are on US soil and therefore, US Constitutional Law is BINDING upon them.

I can't wait to see how this all turns out.

Here is the WHOis data:

MarkMonitor, the Global Leader in Enterprise Brand Protection

Domain Management
Online Trademark Protection
Online Channel Protection
AntiPhishing Solutions
The Data in's WHOIS database is provided by
for information purposes, and to assist persons in obtaining information
about or related to a domain name registration record.
does not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a WHOIS query, you agree
that you will use this Data only for lawful purposes and that, under no
circumstances will you use this Data to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise
support the transmission of mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or
solicitations via e-mail (spam); or (2) enable high volume, automated,
electronic processes that apply to (or its systems). reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.
By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this policy.

Domain Adminstrator
YouTube, Inc.
1000 Cherry Avenue, Suite 200
San Bruno CA 94066
US +1.6502530000 Fax: +1.6506188571

Domain Name:

Registrar Name:
Registrar Whois:
Registrar Homepage:

Administrative Contact:
Domain Adminstrator
YouTube, Inc.
1000 Cherry Avenue, Suite 200
San Bruno CA 94066
US +1.6502530000 Fax: +1.6506188571
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Domain Adminstrator
YouTube, Inc.
1000 Cherry Avenue, Suite 200
San Bruno CA 94066
US +1.6502530000 Fax: +1.6506188571

Created on..............: 2005-02-14.
Expires on..............: 2010-02-14.
Record last updated on..: 2009-02-17.

Domain servers in listed order:

MarkMonitor, the Global Leader in Enterprise Brand Protection

Domain Management
Online Trademark Protection
Online Channel Protection
AntiPhishing Solutions

The previous information has been obtained either directly from the registrant or a registrar of the domain name other than Network Solutions. Network Solutions, therefore, does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.

Show underlying registry data for this record

Current Registrar: MARKMONITOR INC.
IP Address: (ARIN & RIPE IP search)
Record Type: Domain Name
Server Type: Apache
Lock Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Web Site Status: Active
DMOZ 118 listings
Y! Directory: see listings
Secure: Yes
E-commerce: Yes
Traffic Ranking: 4
Data as of: 22-Apr-2008

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:26 PM

Originally posted by Scorched_Ohio
The other dangerous thing about YouTube is the way comments can be censored. After 6 or 7 "thumbs down" ratings, the comment is essentially erased. I noticed good insightful comments of the Anti-NWO type were being downed in this way for no apparent reason...with the exception that corporate goons are running around trying to control the information flow as usual.

The comments aren't erased, at the top you'll see Options next to Text Comments, click on it and you can choose which comments are filtered. By default the filter is set to Average, which is comments rated -5 and higher. If you want to view comments rated below -5, choose the Poor filter.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:52 PM
There is a simple(ish) mid term solution to corporate censorship. Take them out of the picture. The whole problem is due to their control of server based web architectures. So the solution is basically for some individual or group of freedom loving programmers to make a peer to peer, encrypted, content sharing system, similar to what exists today for file sharing, but that has a weblike html interface and a built in search engine, comment system, forum, etc. All serverless, with distributed file storage through the user base, with the most viewed videos being stored on the widest userbase so as to keep up performance.

The technology is here already and I'm surprised it has not been done yet, although the bittorrent sites are pretty close to this idea. This would up the ante on censorship. If the NWO (or whoever they really are) want censorship they would have to take down the whole web. I remind people that the web was designed to survive a full scale nuclear war.

If I had the talent I would program such an applicatio myself, perhaps as a browser plugin.

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:21 PM
I find it rather interesting that nobody has brought up the right to 'Freedom of The Press', as it makes a rather good term to rebut.

Strawman argument time!

Freedom of The Press only pertains to freedom when you are the medium that is trying to release/print/advertise something, not when you are trying to get someone else to publish it for you.
Alex Jones is well within the law by publishing his own website, but the owners of Youtube owe us nothing, they don't owe us any rights or privileges. Everything we post on to Youtube, through the terms and conditions of membership, grants them unlimited distribution and reserves publishing rights to Youtube. If an indepentant user, say, David Icke, were to post brand new videos on to Youtube, then sell them through a different publishing house, he would be in breach of his Youtube terms and conditions.

Youtube is the all-consuming Behemoth that wants to take over the internet, there's no stopping it!

P.S. Has anybody else noticed how a crapload of corporations are declaring insolvency and/or merging with other corporations, yet Youtube/Google/Newscorp et. al, all seem to be doing fine?!?

[edit on 13/5/2009 by nrky]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:26 PM
If you want do exercise free speech, don't rely on a private corporation's website as a means of doing it.

Get your own website. All the resources you need to do it are there for you.

I started for this very reason.

I wanted to write articles and provide information to people so they could learn and be aware of how the world operates around them. I present facts and information that I believe people should know about because it affects their everyday life.

I can't rely on another website to have all my work presented the way I would like. Another site hosting my material can be censored, manipulated or deleted in any way the owner chooses. Not the case if YOU OWN THE SITE.

I don't support youtube suspending AJs videos, but AJ has his own websites and he has all the free speech he likes there.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by Some Guy]

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:28 PM
AJ should be invited by the staff to post his vids and information here on the media site!

I will say more - so it is not a one liner.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by questioningall]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in