You Tube Free Speech Purge Accelerates, Infowarrior Channel Banned

reply to post by dgtempe


dg, can I go and post a video of my dog skateboarding on Infowars?

Does that mean they are owned by the government?

Maybe maybe not, but private web companies have right to control their content.

Again, youtube isn't a social service, it is a business, no one is entitled to post content there.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


You dog skateboards? I have a bulldog, tried to get him to skateboard but he just chews the board!

reply to post by Twista




My bulldog wouldn't get on a skateboard if a sausage was attached to it.

I was being metaphorical and junk.

The thing is YouTube is the most visited Video portal on the internet (by millions). So More visitors/viewers means bigger problem. It reaches a larger audience then other video host websites.

Originally posted by Twista
The thing is YouTube is the most visited Video portal on the internet (by millions). So More visitors/viewers means bigger problem. It reaches a larger audience then other video host websites.

True, and ATS is the most visited conspiracy/alternative news based website, that doesn't mean that they have no T&C.

Listen, if Google or other search engines were removing Alex Jones links from their search results that would be one thing, but as far as I know they are not.

So the only difference here is that instead of typing "Alex Jones Video" on youtube search, you have to type it into a search engine which will take you to his website.

[edit on 14 May 2009 by schrodingers dog]

I agree, the only issue is a Search Engine and a video host (in means of workings) are on a completely opposite boat. To remove him from their SE would be difficult due to the millions of sites that may promote him or the video its self. And lets be honest SE's dont have a T&C, you can just about submit anything and Google will index it.

reply to post by dgtempe


So you reject reason and rationality for speculation and accusation?

Well, thanks for clearing that up at least.

Like I said, everyone has their T&C or if you like censorship.

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.

prisonplanet forum

Goose meet gander.

[edit on 14 May 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Now I don't agree with dg, but, as you say "t&c, I has seen some vulgar, disgraceful videos on youtube which were uploaded 2,3+years ago still running as we speak. Why hasn't Google come down on that?

Don't Cross the Line
Here are some common-sense rules that will help you steer clear of trouble:

YouTube is not for pornography or sexually explicit content. If this describes your video, even if it's a video of yourself, don't post it on YouTube. Also, be advised that we work closely with law enforcement and we report child exploitation. Please read our Safety Center and stay safe on YouTube.
Don't post videos showing bad stuff like animal abuse, drug abuse, under-age drinking and smoking, or bomb making.
Graphic or gratuitous violence is not allowed. If your video shows someone being physically hurt, attacked, or humiliated, don't post it.
YouTube is not a shock site. Don't post gross-out videos of accidents, dead bodies or similar things intended to shock or disgust.
Respect copyright. Only upload videos that you made or that you are authorized to use. This means don't upload videos you didn't make, or use content in your videos that someone else owns the copyright to, such as music tracks, snippets of copyrighted programs, or videos made by other users, without necessary authorizations. Read our Copyright Tips for more information.
We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).
Things like predatory behavior, stalking, threats, harassment, intimidation, invading privacy, revealing other people’s personal information, and inciting others to commit violent acts or to violate the Terms of Use are taken very seriously. Anyone caught doing these things may be permanently banned from YouTube.
Everyone hates spam. Don’t create misleading descriptions, tags, titles or thumbnails in order to increase views. It's not okay to post large amounts of untargeted, unwanted or repetitive content, including comments and private messages.

YouTube community guidelines
YouTube Terms of Service

I do not know how they enforce these and with what level of consistency. The point is a private company still has the legal right to control its content.

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Indeed I agree!

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
what " free speech " ?????????????????

it amazes me trhat people continue to schreech about the alleged denial of internet " free sppeech "

when what they really mean is they expect someone else to allow them to freeload

You are right to a degree. He still has a massive website with a massive amount of media content. And just as he so often sais on his radio show "All the videos are up on the website for free" anyway. To AJ, Youtube only acts as a secondary information outlet for his preaching.

What is interesting, though, is this comes in conjunction with the recent denial of service attacks on his website that have supposedly been traced to U.S. military/government facilities. This happened right after swine flu started being the big AJ discussion topic on the radio show.

Infowars Under Sophisticated Denial of Service Attack

But, again, this is all coming from Infowars.com
Not exactly known for their unbiased look on global events.. However, the internet stats they posted speak for themselves and it definitely seems they are being attacked by someone somewhere. But it could just be an internally created hoax in order to produce public sympathy for AJ's cause while "Riling up the troops" so to speak. Alot of people are like "Of coarse, he's so right they're after him". It's a little more complicated than just outrightly making such an assumption, even though the government really has gone after him before. All I'm saying.. The hype is the hype. It's there for some purpose. Alex Jone's purpose isn't just to inform, but also to "recruit" new listeners and website subscribers. So, we know that this source is not without it's biased interpretations.

The following is something I've had a beef with for a while now...
Honestly, AJ seems concerned, fearful, and genuinely scared for the country as a whole. I don't see anything wrong with that, in particular.
I feel, personally, like he's preaching to the choir.

Alex talks alot about how all his media is free.. It's all for free.. You can go right to prisonplanet.tv and download all the videos, all the documentaries, everything is free. But this isn't COMPLETELY true.. And this is something that has really gotten under my skin.

The following happened probably a couple months ago..

The youtube videos that were posted of all his videos were very grainy, very low quality, alot of them probably posted by pimply teenagers just wanting youtube "online cred" for people watching their vids.. I wanted a decent, high quality verson of his documentaries (didn't necessarily have to be CD quality). The youtube videos I checked out were ALL extremely grainy, extremely pixelated, the audio was nightmarishly bad, the list goes on.

So I remembered that he talked on his show about the free videos on his site and I went to infowars to check it out..
I did some searching on the site, didn't find any videos. So I was listening to one of his radio shows and he mentions the .tv portion of his website. I go and check THAT out. But I was really pissed off when I found out you have to be a subscriber to his website first (which comes with a fee of a couple bucks).

A subscription fee of couple bucks, even though it is cheap, is not free. I was extremely frustrated with the whole scenario. SO.. later on I was in an ATS thread where AJ was being discussed. Everyone's like "His videos are free, his videos are free, he has nothing to gain". That isn't necessarily true either.. When I pointed that out, I was basically attacked for being nitpicky and whiny.

To me, it was the principle of the thing. AJ sais his videos are free. That might be true, It is completely free to watch the videos themselves. But to gain access to that portion of his website you have to be a paid subscriber. Sure, you can get great CD quality video by actually purchasing the DVD's. I think you can even get the DivX high quality video versions of his documentaries on his website. But why should I have to sign up and pay for such a service when he sais, at least a couple times every single show, that it is completely free?

I have nothing biased against AJ, I even listen to his show still (without paying the fee). But, for me, this basically deligitimizes the Alex Jones media campaign to a certain degree. He knows that the internet is the best media outlet for people sharing his kind of socio-political sympathies. But I see his "pushing" of his own media content, you have to pay for, as misleading. It also makes me question every single news story and article on his website.. The information included in the news stories might even be pretty accurate.

The afformentioned article on "denial of service" attacks is a good example. Who knows what really happened. Maybe someone close to AJ cooked up a plan to get an internet connection from a military installation somewhere (maybe in a dorm room, maybe somewhere more public) and then purposefully attack and/or hack the website (just enough to make it obvious, not enough to crash the site). Then they write up an article about how they are being attacked from a military installation and can claim to have the proof. When maybe it was really just a ploy to get attention from the public and the media in general.

-ChriS

Originally posted by flightsuit

Originally posted by Flighty


I think it's really important that conspiracy theorists find an alternative source that hasn't been bought out.

BetterStream.com

I've had YouTube permanently suspend two of my previous accounts, and it sucks. There's no explanation, no arbitration, nobody you can call or write to plead your case. You just log in one day and all your hard work, not to mention your contacts, your "favorites" list, your sent and received messages, subscribers and friends list are just... gone.

It's heartbreaking and cruel.

So now I upload all my stuff to the above-referenced site, including stuff which YouTube would delete in a heartbeat. BetterStream is owned an operated by a guy who hates corporate media with a passion.

The video and sound quality, not to mention the fast upload, processing, and streaming times, are so much faster that YouTube should really be embarrassed.

I e-mailed Ben Ligeri, the owner of BetterStream.com, to bring this thread to his attention. Read his response to me, and I think some of you will see that he is a kindred spirit. I should mention by the way, that Mr. Ligeri has considerable experience working in the legal field, and I believe he currently has lawsuits pending against YouTube. Here is what he had to say about this thread:

Really cool, I read the first two pages of content, some people say strongly that Youtube should effectually be boycotted, whiles still others (the Drones?) say YouTube can do what it wants. I wouldn't mind a media site that's censored as long as they say "We Do Censor". Otherwise it's false advertising for a media site, especially a self-proclaimed "Broadcast Yourself" media site, to go ahead and start censoring behind the scenes at such a widespread level. That's false advertising, and when you're a massive company, that's a #ing lot of false advertising.

All YouTube did was tell everyone it was a place for them to air their own little tv show for the world, and maybe someday if you make it around the yellow brick road to here, you'll win big time and all, but all they're doing is leading you in a circle as they slowly start to move big media in and take control of the world's media.

Yes, they are a monopoly media source and cannot legally exist and to also censor is to institute a tyrannical regime in this country via the digital airwaves. I was laughed at two years ago for saying their goal was to compete with Hulu.

They're just using all the indie work to create a false show to get all the "eyeballs" as Eric Schmidt calls it, get all the eyeballs together and then put on the mainstream media eyeball hypnosis show with teen horror movies, video games, coca cola, dunkin donuts, and another #ing place to watch Child Rape on Law & Order or the Angels & Demons trailer.

Notice that movie trailer just took over the internet airwaves on every media site including the indie poser "YouTube". The internet has gone completely and utterly mainstream and now there is only one other distribution line: The BetterStream(.com). I hate posting to forums, if you want to add my two cents you can.

Just for comparison's sake, and note that both AJ and JR admitted to using copyrighted material that they did not own. Make of what transpires, what you will, but I ask. Which of the two is acting rationally? Which of the two is being professional? Which of the two are objectively looking at the truth of the situation? Which of the two seem to be the most cooperative and willing to work towards a viable resolution? Which of the two are acting like well balanced adults? Which of the two seem the most trustworthy? And which of the two would you consider trustworthy and possessing good judgment?

Again, make of it what you will.

[edit on 14-5-2009 by Lasheic]

Originally posted by Lasheic

Just for comparison's sake, and note that both AJ and JR admitted to using copyrighted material that they did not own. Make of what transpires, what you will, but I ask. Which of the two is acting rationally? Which of the two is being professional? Which of the two are objectively looking at the truth of the situation? Which of the two seem to be the most cooperative and willing to work towards a viable resolution? Which of the two are acting like well balanced adults? Which of the two seem the most trustworthy? And which of the two would you consider trustworthy and possessing good judgment?

Again, make of it what you will.

[edit on 14-5-2009 by Lasheic]

Absolutely fair comment. However, we NEED to look at the bigger picture here. Like i said before, AJ may not be right about everything, his manor in presenting the information may not be politically correct and he may come across as very loud mouthed and sometimes one sided, BUT, and this is a big BUT, he is opening the eyes of the people, he is expressing his right to question everything that comes out of washington which IMO is needed right now by everyone.

He is a very brave man, and you need to remember if we were in the spotlight like AJ is, we may make mistakes and annoy other people. Remember you cannot please everyone in the world.

Now what is IMPORTANT is that we do not fight between ourselves, we are here for the same reasons, we will not always agree with each other about the fine print, but we agree on ONE point that the world is not right and we are trying to figure out what is wrong. If we stand tall together we will defeat the evil powers running the world.

Also i would recommend listening to MAX IGAN....

MAX's website

His youtube account:

aodscarecrow

Peace and Love.




[edit on 14-5-2009 by 1234567]

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
[I do not know how they enforce these and with what level of consistency. The point is a private company still has the legal right to control its content.

That is true,and will agree with you..(I think its the first time) But on the same note,it only tips there hand...

Originally posted by Redpillblues

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
[I do not know how they enforce these and with what level of consistency. The point is a private company still has the legal right to control its content.

That is true,and will agree with you..(I think its the first time) But on the same note,it only tips there hand...

I also agree with you there, BUT, it does smell or a rat IMO that all this NWO, anti governemnt content is being cesored now. It sucks big time.

Peace.

reply to post by flightsuit


Yeah well BetterStream owes me money or the product I actually paid for! I bought an album from an independent artist to download on their website but their site is broken and the actual link for the download takes me back to the download page. What a con.

How is this company any better than YouTube?

Originally posted by Goathief
reply to post by flightsuit

 

Yeah well BetterStream owes me money or the product I actually paid for! I bought an album from an independent artist to download on their website but their site is broken and the actual link for the download takes me back to the download page. What a con.

How is this company any better than YouTube?

Sounds bad. Did you contact them / make a complaint?

This raises the question --> Would AJ be ok to upload his video to MATS with no problems? Maybe a moderator could answer this one. To be honest i would love to see on MATS some channels devoted to :

1) Alex Jones
2) Max Igan
....
..

the more specific video channels for these sort of people would be fantastic with no cersorship.

ATS would this be allowed with all the adverts in AJs videos? I dont see any reason why not.

Peace.

reply to post by 1234567

However, we NEED to look at the bigger picture here.

Agree'd, but I fear not very many people are looking at the big picture. They're merely looking at the same picture, but from a different angle or a different perspective. They don't take into account things such as evolutionary biology - especially in terms of behaviors, neurology, sociology, complexity, emergence, and non-linear systems, etc. They don't look beyond the obvious. They don't even have a good tentative grasp of their place in the cosmos, this planet, or it's history.

Take a step back. Look at the BIG picture. What do you see?

BUT, and this is a big BUT, he is opening the eyes of the people, he is expressing his right to question everything that comes out of washington which IMO is needed right now by everyone.

The problem isn't that he's questioning everything that comes out of Washington, but that he's drawing unfounded conclusions off of bias data and offering speculation. This is a trend we've also been seeing in the main-stream media, and all it's ever served to do is to perpetually misinform the public.

Fox News may report some accurate facts... but they have a known track record of misinterpretations, bias, and speculation. Why should Alex Jones be granted special privileged over Fox News?

Both sources have shown to be unscrupulous and untrustworthy, so I don't listen to either of them.

and you need to remember if we were in the spotlight like AJ is, we may make mistakes and annoy other people. Remember you cannot please everyone in the world.

To delve into the realm of quotations:

"An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it" ~ Orlando A. Battista (?)

I don't watch much Alex Jones, but may I ask, how often does he offer a retraction for anything he's said or offered to make amends for any damage caused by those who took his words with deadly seriousness and came to harm or harmed others? How often does he admit, and correct, his errors?

The second quote, yours, is a paraphrasing of a modification of Abraham Lincoln's "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."

Wise words, I think, especially within the context of Alex Jones and Conspiracy Theories.

we are here for the same reasons, we will not always agree with each other about the fine print, but we agree on ONE point that the world is not right and we are trying to figure out what is wrong.

Not quite. I think the world is perfectly all right and turning out as one would expect it to considering the variables going into it. To claim that the world is "wrong" is a subjective view. Were everything "right", we would be living in a utopia.. which is itself a fallacy, an illusion. One man's utopia is another man's hell on Earth. Like absolute truth, it can only ever be pursued, but never obtained. What do "I" think is wrong with the world?

If we stand tall together we will defeat the evil powers running the world.

This kind of thinking. Too many people think that there are those who are evil for merely the sake of evil. Those "behind the throne" in conspiracy theory plots are generally depicted as two dimensional characatures who make even the most shallow of saturday morning cartoon characters seem like Shakespear's Iago by comparison.

I don't believe evil is ever done for evil's sake. Evil is done in the performance of noble intentions at any cost. Even the great devil of the 20th century, Adolf Hitler, merely desired a strong and respected Germany to arise from the humiliation and subjugation of the Versailles treaty. He wanted the best for a strong and respected Germany. It was through the process of acknowledging that we created that monster, and through understanding WHY he was waging his war, that we changed policies and rebuilt Germany and Japan - working with them to help rebuild their nations after the war, and defending them when they were most vulnerable.

To exemplify with another quote:

"The Road to hell is paved with good intentions."

I believe the author of that quote had a clearer insight into the collective souls and psyche of men than any conspiracy theorist I have ever heard.

[edit on 14-5-2009 by Lasheic]