Free speech loses. Islamic facists are apparently off limits when it comes to demonizing on the popular video site.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006048.htm

10/6/2006 4:35:13 PM

dont you know the rule about muslims?

they can pick on us but we cant pick on them

long live this pic:

10/6/2006 4:38:44 PM

artistically speaking, that's a pretty shitty drawing.

10/6/2006 4:40:40 PM

[Edited on October 6, 2006 at 4:43 PM. Reason : .whatev. realized i dont' care]

10/6/2006 4:41:47 PM

that's strange. i wasn't aware that the freedom of speech applied to a private company's decision to host or not to host videos they feel voilate their terms of service.

10/6/2006 4:51:47 PM

^ well randy is into big powerful socialist govt.

10/6/2006 4:54:37 PM

not to mention, if i were you, i'd be less worried about some private website taking down some videos and more worried about Dick Cheney's Secret Service agents (i.e. government officials) arresting people for saying the wrong thing to him
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5039230,00.html

10/6/2006 6:02:28 PM

kind of stupid for them to take it off but they can do what they want.

[Edited on October 6, 2006 at 6:17 PM. Reason : Malkin is a big idiot also]

10/6/2006 6:17:07 PM

^^ Well at least he knows how to use the secret service like a REAL secret police.

10/6/2006 6:45:41 PM

Quote :

"that's strange. i wasn't aware that the freedom of speech applied to a private company's decision to host or not to host videos they feel voilate their terms of service."

I am sick of people in this country trying to apply protections from the government to private situations. (i.e. I have a right to free speech so I can tell my boss to suck my nuts and if he fires me, he's violated my constitutional rights...)

[Edited on October 7, 2006 at 7:11 AM. Reason : ]

10/7/2006 7:10:01 AM

^ remember the Boy Scout's problem with gay people as leaders. Them stopping gays from being leaders is exactly the same thing as youtube stopping this anti-jihad video.

i have no idea what your babbling about but private companies can do what they want within the bounds of the law.

10/7/2006 9:17:08 AM

^ i'm pretty sure he agrees with you....

10/7/2006 2:45:45 PM

yeah im retarded

10/7/2006 5:09:57 PM

I'm happy to see you guys feel that the government shouldn't interfere with other peoples business!!!

10/7/2006 5:41:18 PM

^^^^ Non-profits have to behave a little differently don't they? There's no right to tax-exemption.

But yes, private for-profits aren't bound by the same rules as the government because they, individually at least, don't pose the same kinds of threats to your freedoms that a government can. It'd be stupid to expect a buisness not to be able to control the speech that comes through its employees, websites, etc. That'd be like saying walmart can't chose not to sell giant posters that say "Wal-Mart is killing america" or portray walmart CEO's as Nazi's in blue uniforms.

[Edited on October 7, 2006 at 5:52 PM. Reason : ]

10/7/2006 5:48:03 PM

YouTube bans all kinds of content.

Personally, I prefer sites with fewer restrictions, such as TWW.

But this isn't against the law or anything.

10/7/2006 6:07:28 PM

^^^
ha i think the only difference is that I have no problem with the government interfering with peoples money. Because they kinda own it ya know.

10/7/2006 6:08:50 PM

ummmmm


ummmm


whats the point of working for it then?

they didn't earn it

10/7/2006 6:16:05 PM

that would be the debate dope,

this is a different thread

10/7/2006 6:21:17 PM

damn commies

10/7/2006 6:22:50 PM

im not a communist

im an aburdist

10/7/2006 6:26:22 PM

in the name of free speech, youtube should not have given in to the possible protests of islamic facists and taken the video down. they should have shown the video in the name of exposing the islamic facists. noone should force them to do anything, at least no govt. should!

10/7/2006 6:51:33 PM

To abonorio: I disagree that the drawing above is "shitty" ("artistically speaking, that's a pretty shitty drawing"). Regardless of its subject, the cartoon has a quality that rather reminds me of the early nineteenth-century "Gerrymander" illustration.

10/7/2006 7:18:38 PM

^^ they run a business. Most businesses dont do things that will loose them money. Free speach isnt really what they are trying to uphold.

10/7/2006 7:22:32 PM

newspapers didnt lose business by running the cartoons

maybe theyd be worried in iran, but here it should be fine

10/7/2006 7:28:05 PM

lol that video was cute

10/7/2006 7:34:29 PM

You don't think there's a cost assosciated with vandalism, death threats, and offending an entire possible customer base? Most companies would rather not stand up for free speech if it means either death threats or alienating a billion potential customers. When standing up for free speech means both, it's hard to blame a buisness for chosing to self-censor.

I'd have a hell of a lot more respect for a buisness that chose to stand up for free-speech and give a nice big middle finger to people who bitched about being offended (christians, muslims, athiests, whoever.) You can't argue that there isn't a cost for doing it though. Not only is that naive, it demeans those who risk their life, livelyhood, or credibility to do so.

10/7/2006 7:47:51 PM

did you watch the video?

10/7/2006 8:05:46 PM

^ Seriously this is not a free speech issue. Michelle Malkin has her own site. Let her host her own video.

YouTube is under no obligation to spend time and money trying to decide what is "appropriate satire" and what is crap. If people complain the system boots their videos. They are not in the business of hosting video the viewers don't like.

10/7/2006 8:12:33 PM

seriously, wtf happened to peoples right to do whatever the fuck they want with their websites.

lets make it manditory to host anti muslim videos on your website....starting now!

10/7/2006 9:20:52 PM

^^^

Whether something should realistically offend someone and what people whine loudly enough about to get censored/banned/removed aren't the same thing. Things are censored all the time because executives decide that censoring themsleves is cheaper than dealing with mass letter campaigns and boycotts. The only difference is that few other groups can be offended en-masse as effectively.

10/7/2006 10:57:35 PM

After watching the video I would recommend watching it. If nothing else put it on mute because she's a total cutey.

10/8/2006 2:30:13 AM

it's funny because she's talking about the threat of "bombing us into the middle ages" where i think western nations are pretty much the only ones doing that to anyone.

[Edited on October 8, 2006 at 11:36 AM. Reason : well them and israel i suppose]

10/8/2006 11:28:54 AM

I think its gay for them to ban it, but its within their rights as a private organization.

Sorry Randy, but you can't apply free speech here.

10/8/2006 11:35:30 AM

and of course if there was a video about how republicans suck you guys would be happy it was removed.

its fun making up double standards.

10/8/2006 11:57:26 AM

im sorry that youtube gave into the islamic facists pressure and removed it. yes, they are private and can do such a thing, but in the name of free speech against islamic facists, they should have left it up for the world to see. they wouldnt have been champions of the cause, like the newspapers that put up the muhammad cartoons.

10/8/2006 1:17:30 PM

the domain

http://www.anti-jihadyoutube.com is available!

10/8/2006 2:00:42 PM

^^ Do you equally condem networks like Fox from refusing to air episodes or parts of episodes of shows that offend christians and jews? There's a lot of stuff that doesn't get aired because of the reaction or feared reaction of certain extremely vocal christian and jewish groups. The family guy episode- "Wish Upon a Weinstein" not airing on fox comes to mind right off.

10/8/2006 2:06:36 PM

jews and christians arent the ones waging massive terrorism, the ones that need to be exposed to the world for the threat that they pose.

[Edited on October 8, 2006 at 2:25 PM. Reason : .]

10/8/2006 2:23:45 PM

Hell, which is supposedly worse than anything on Earth, is used to threaten all sorts of people, including small children into folowing your beliefs. I call that terrorism, and I call your "moral beliefs" a threat to the free world.

10/8/2006 2:32:24 PM

youtube

....informing you about the threat of terrorism one stupid video about getting hit in the nuts at a time.

10/8/2006 3:53:47 PM

YouTube is clearly a dangerous organization. We should invade their offices, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity. Only then will we defeat this nefarious threat.

10/9/2006 10:40:22 PM

^google is buying them. Perhaps they read your post.

10/10/2006 7:31:29 AM

Want to take bets on how long it takes copyright holders to sue now that there's some deep pockets behind youtube?

10/10/2006 8:47:10 AM

^I wondered the same thing myself, but surely Google is smart enough to not pay 1.65 billion for it without at least looking into that.

10/10/2006 8:58:16 AM

GooTube?

10/10/2006 3:09:54 PM

i'd hit it

10/10/2006 10:30:42 PM

^^ Was that Conan or Leno?

10/10/2006 10:31:32 PM

^ that was every tech blogger since the rumors broke last week

10/11/2006 7:19:11 AM