Former Legislator Makes Statement May 8, 2010 on Un-Released Eisenhower Brief Regarding ET's , page 31

Pages: << 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 229 times

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 12:40 PM by InfaRedMan

Originally posted by DreamerOracle
as soon as it was actually realised to be out there and label it as fiction....You know you are basicly confirming it's validity!!

Given that flawed logic, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny must be true!

Give me a break man!

IRM

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 12:54 PM by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by 259360
In a weeks/months time when it gets taken off DUE TO COPYRIGHT - it will just go to show that it's meaningless to the government. Doesn't it? They'd take it off immediately wouldn't they? So why's it still available now? Ask yourself that.

What I'm asking myself is why you think there are any copyright concerns with a video that ends with the statement:

And, I'd also like to authorize distribution of this video for anyone who wants to use it for educational purposes.

Thank you."

The only implication there is that since it's for education, it's not "for profit", so charging to see it might be a problem, but showing it for free on youtube shouldn't be a problem with any kind of copyright violation, it's just educational use as authorized in the video, right?

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:03 PM by 259360

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by 259360
In a weeks/months time when it gets taken off DUE TO COPYRIGHT - it will just go to show that it's meaningless to the government. Doesn't it? They'd take it off immediately wouldn't they? So why's it still available now? Ask yourself that.

What I'm asking myself is why you think there are any copyright concerns with a video that ends with the statement:

And, I'd also like to authorize distribution of this video for anyone who wants to use it for educational purposes.

Thank you."

The only implication there is that since it's for education, it's not "for profit", so charging to see it might be a problem, but showing it for free on youtube shouldn't be a problem with any kind of copyright violation, it's just educational use as authorized in the video, right?

The reason being is because it's been carefully edited. This video is part of a 45 minute fictional documentary. Naturally, he's going to state that it's for educational reasons - to make it sound like it's an official statement. It's just part of the script that's all.

The original students didn't expect that their work would get spliced up and sent to internet forums like this - where advertising turns profit. That's where the copyright comes in.

PS - Don't shoot the messenger - I mean, I'd like all information to be free too. But you have to make sure that the information is GOOD information. Do not be misled by spliced up edited videos such as this.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by 259360]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:17 PM by DreamerOracle

We will look at the video like we do all other videos and scrutinize it properly.....reguardless of a new members attempts to make us do otherwise......
See now you've got me taking this video apart to check for editing and SPLICING ..........

[edit on 15-5-2010 by DreamerOracle]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:17 PM by turk182

Just an old gentleman reading something that he obviously did not write.
That is what I thought, and said, when I first saw it, and posted.
I believe this guy about it all being baloney.
31 pages of discussion. I was wondering why this was taken off the home page today.

LOL

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:19 PM by manta78

To 259360:

Since you seem very confident in your position, and just joined today, and don't seem to have made an introductory post, how about telling us a little about your background?

[edit on 15-5-2010 by manta78]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:31 PM by DelMarvel

Originally posted by manta78

To 259360:

Since you seem very confident in your position, and just joined today, and don't seem to have made an introductory post, how about telling us a little about your background?

[edit on 15-5-2010 by manta78]

I don't care about his/her background.

How about a link to something confirming/referring to this documentary?

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:31 PM by manta78

reply to post by turk182

Not that the position really matters to me, but it's still on the home page.

Topics remain on the home page according to interest, and how long ago it was posted.

Scroll down a little further on the home page and you will see it there under Top Topics, 1 week, with articles appearing at the top of the home page that were posted less than 30 hours ago.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by manta78]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:32 PM by cripmeister

reply to post by 259360

You know you will have to prove the claim you made, otherwise it's just as useless as Mr McElroys.

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:37 PM by manta78

reply to post by DelMarvel

Good point and I agree. His source data, if it exists, would be very interesting to see. I am always a little skeptical however when someone comes into a forum, and never introduces themself, and expects to have everything they say accepted as the truth. Doesn't mean it couldn't be done after an introduction, it just raises a question in my mind.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by manta78]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:38 PM by 259360

Originally posted by cripmeister
reply to post by 259360

You know you will have to prove the claim you made, otherwise it's just as useless as Mr McElroys.

The smartest thing anyone's ever said. The proof will be when it's taken down.

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:45 PM by manta78

reply to post by cripmeister

Useless no. Subject to much more scrutiny and investigation yes.

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:53 PM by sherpa

reply to post by 259360

Frankly 259360 you are just wasting members time here when you do not respond to requests for information regarding your claim now you have got to the point of repeating yourself.

Sorry you have just lost my vote.

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:54 PM by DelMarvel

I've seen enough evidence to believe that there really is a Henry W. McElroy who was a state representative in New Hampshire.

Is the claim now that someone was pretending to be Henry W. McElroy for a mockumentary?

Or that McElroy himself was going along with the joke?

[edit on 15-5-2010 by DelMarvel]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 01:54 PM by IntastellaBurst

reply to post by 259360

Taking a video down is proof of nothing.

Why would you join a forum to post on only ONE topic and continue trying to debunk it, when you have absolutely no proof.

I don't remember seeing any editing or spicing of the video, it seems complete in its entirety and in itself allows it to be distributed freely without copyright.

Student's don't go enforcing copyrights, hell, why would they copyright it in the first place, how many students do u think actualy copyright their films ??? they would want to draw attention to their work instead of deleting it.

if it is only a dumb 45 minute student documentary, where is it ?? and why are you making such a big deal over it ??

Like I said earlier, .... copy, copy, copy !!

I think if the video was valid, and the government wanted it gone they would go about it exactly in this way, ...... because if it was immediately pulled the conspiracy would be quite clear. However they know they cannot destroy every copy of the video, therefore they work to discredit it completely.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by IntastellaBurst]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 02:02 PM by cripmeister

Originally posted by 259360

Originally posted by cripmeister
reply to post by 259360

You know you will have to prove the claim you made, otherwise it's just as useless as Mr McElroys.

The smartest thing anyone's ever said. The proof will be when it's taken down.

Sorry dude but that's not enough, it will only lead to more speculation. I want to see proof that the man in the video isn't who he says he is. I would also like to see the entire student film you talk about.

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 02:02 PM by DelMarvel

Originally posted by IntastellaBurst
I think if the video was valid, and the government wanted it gone they would go about it exactly in this way, ...... because if it was immediately pulled the conspiracy would be quite clear. However they know they cannot destroy every copy of the video, therefore they work to discredit it completely.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by IntastellaBurst]

The video itself is irrelevant.

Because presumably Henry W. McElroy is still alive and well.

Someone could go find him and make more videos.

And while they're at it, find out if he seems like he's on the level or if he has aluminum foil on his ceiling.

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 02:03 PM by 259360

Ok Where is the original uploader of this video? The supposed 46 year old of YT origins? He will tell us that it wasn't edited won't he? Where is he? WHEN WILL HE POST HERE. HE WON'T.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by 259360]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 02:06 PM by 259360

I've waited through 30 pages of crap for the original uploader. Where is he, make yourself known.

[edit on 15-5-2010 by 259360]

reply posted on 15-5-2010 @ 02:09 PM by manta78

reply to post by 259360

If you are referring to who originally posted this video on this site,
I am standing right behind you buddy.....