YouTube Silences Conservative View as Hate Speech!

Originally posted by grover
reply to post by jjohns

 

Don't give me that crap you know damned good and well what hate speech is.

Ooh... a little testy when I ask you to define hate speech. I'm only sorry I didn't predict this would be your reaction in my initial post. I knew it would be something like this...

And I could have guaranteed you were going to evade the question.

So what is hate speech? Are the liberals coming down on the mullahs (and the Kent St. professor) for calling for a jihad against America? Is that hate speech or is that speech protected by their 1st Amendment rights?

See, if you can't tell me ahead of time the definition of hate speech then it entirely undermines any credibility you have labeling something as hate speech AFTER the fact. This allows people like you to pick and choose what they think is hate speech based on furthering your own political agenda or ideology.

This is exactly the problem with the YouTube label. It allows people to decide arbitrarily what is hate speech. This leads down the slippery slope of taking away freedom of speech one sentence at a time, until all that's left is politically correct crap that the government says is ok.

Ok. This time I will make a prediction. You won't answer the question again and you will reply with an insult and/or a diversionary topic.

Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. I think that says it all ,its funny how these sayings ring so true.Freedom of speech forever, accept nothing less!
Im out
DWT

[edit on 12-10-2007 by dntwastetime]

Can someone please tell me what in particular the conservatives said that was considered "Hate Speech"?

If it was purely about economics, then I agree with the OP.

If it had to do with anti-secularism, condemnation of homosexuality etc, then I view it as hate speech and I have no problem with what they did.

But I cannot make a valid judgment without knowing what they are talking about.

I'm a lawyer and I have no idea what hate speech is. Oh, I can repeat the definition but it's highly subjective. Basically, it's an infringement on free speech, as is gun control on the second amendment and endless other laws are on other aspects of the constitution (brought to us by both Democratic and Republican pols). It's time we stopped limiting our freedom and left people alone.

It always amazes me to see haters refer to others as haters as if they themselves are above such things. :shk:

Certain member's complaints in this thread would carry more weight if they had not themselves succumbed to the radical left/right, liberal/conservative fake divide that seems to short circuit all attempts to use reason in this day and age.

Shameful really, and a perfect demonstration of the state of affairs in society.
.

Originally posted by Gools
It always amazes me to see haters refer to others as haters as if they themselves are above such things. :shk:

Certain member's complaints in this thread would carry more weight if they had not themselves succumbed to the radical left/right, liberal/conservative fake divide that seems to short circuit all attempts to use reason in this day and age.

Shameful really, and a perfect demonstration of the state of affairs in society.

.

Are you implying people posting on this thread are "haters?"

If so, I think you need to clarify and/or apologize. I think it's shameful that as a mod, you would even imply such a thing.

And what fake divide do you think exists between liberal and conservative philosophy? It's about as real as a divide as there is, sort of like night and day.

I would imagine that you could never find a conservative to support hate speech censorship because speech, no matter how distasteful, is protected by the 1st Amendment.

reply to post by jjohns


Thank you for so aptly demonstrating my point for me.

By the way, I see your new around here.

You will come to understand that the staff (there are over 50 of us) is made up of people from all over the world with a wide variety of opinions.

On this forum mods have opinions and are free to express them.

You know... that whole free speech thing.
.

It would be nice to actually see this alleged video. I did a search on youtube and there seems to be a lot of conservative videos and there are also anti-terrorism videos. What did this video have it that these other videos do not? I guess that's why I would like to see it before calling YouTube a nazi.

Originally posted by Kacen

If it had to do with anti-secularism, condemnation of homosexuality etc, then I view it as hate speech and I have no problem with what they did.

What?!?!?

Freedom of speech is freedom of speech! Subject matter should never be censored, only swearing can be a considered when something is censored.

I can condemn homosexuality or be anti-secular and should not be silenced!

By the way has anyone gone to this persons website? Misunderestimated is full of you know what. This person has videos of mercenary snipers and all kinds of inhuman cold blooded mindless crap.

Should she be censored by the government? Heck no! Dos you tube as a private corporation have the right to take down her/his account for something they deem as hate? I would have to say yes, they are a private company and have a right to do as they will.

Originally posted by LoneGunMan

Freedom of speech is freedom of speech! Subject matter should never be censored, only swearing can be a considered when something is censored.

I can condemn homosexuality or be anti-secular and should not be silenced!

By the way has anyone gone to this persons website? Misunderestimated is full of you know what. This person has videos of mercenary snipers and all kinds of inhuman cold blooded mindless crap.

Should she be censored by the government? Heck no! Dos you tube as a private corporation have the right to take down her/his account for something they deem as hate? I would have to say yes, they are a private company and have a right to do as they will.

Yes they have the right to take something down they deem hate speach. Just as ATS does. You agree to a service agreement or the rules of the website before you post material. You do not have the right to log onto youtube or ATS call different races or sexual orientations vulgar names and then yell that your rights were violated when the material gets pulled and your account banned. You can say whatever you want but these companies do not have to give you an open forum. Go get your own website.


[edit on 12-10-2007 by zerotime]

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
Should she be censored by the government? Heck no! Dos you tube as a private corporation have the right to take down her/his account for something they deem as hate? I would have to say yes, they are a private company and have a right to do as they will.

Bravo!

It amazes me every time someone claims constitutional rights vis-a-vis a private citizen or company.

Way too many people fail to realise that constitutions and bill of rights (or any other "rights document") in most if not all countries are there to protect against the actions of governments and government agents and institutions toward the private citizen and have absolutely no legal force between private parties.
.

Originally posted by Gools
reply to post by jjohns

 

Thank you for so aptly demonstrating my point for me.

Which point did I demonstrate for you? Was there anything hateful in my post?

By the way, I see your new around here.

You will come to understand that the staff (there are over 50 of us) is made up of people from all over the world with a wide variety of opinions.

On this forum mods have opinions and are free to express them.

You know... that whole free speech thing.

.

Mods expressing unfounded opinions that forum members are haters is shameful, however free you are to express those opinions.

You see as a mod you volunteer to make sure members comply with the TOS of a private business. One of the TOS is not to insult or denigrate other members. Implying members who posted on this thread are "haters" is an back-door violation of the TOS, and really quite offensive.

While you are free to express this opinion, it reflects poorly on you personally and on ATS for having you as a mod.

Originally posted by jjohns
Which point did I demonstrate for you? Was there anything hateful in my post?

No. You demonstrated the other point.

Mods expressing unfounded opinions ...

Unfounded?
I think not.

When people who obviously hate one group come here to claim that same group is hating them, then the hypocrisy is too rich not to point out.

As for your allegation that I am violating the T&C, which member did I attack?

If you feel justified in you accusation please fell free to use the complaint button in your member center to submit a complaint so that it can be reviewed by the entire staff/admin/owners of the site. We don't take kindly to public displays of drama.

Please, let's get back to the topic of this thread.
.

The pendulum will swing back to center, even right.

Now the pendulum is almost at the extreme left. With Islamic Jihadist being simphatized by the likes of Rosie O'donnell, and many other outreageous views that would be treason, now, it's the PC way.

It's only a matter of time when the right comes out swinging, and we will hold no punches.

Originally posted by Gool
It amazes me every time someone claims constitutional rights vis-a-vis a private citizen or company.

Way too many people fail to realise that constitutions and bill of rights (or any other "rights document") in most if not all countries are there to protect against the actions of governments and government agents and institutions toward the private citizen and have absolutely no legal force between private parties.

I'm not sure if that was directed at me but I was talking about the laws against hate speech not google's action. I have no problem with google's actions as I have no issue with people disagreeing with their actions publicly.

reply to post by jjohns


hate

verb [ trans. ]
feel intense or passionate dislike for (someone) :
• have a strong aversion to (something) :

noun
intense or passionate dislike : feelings of hate and revenge.
• [as adj. ] denoting hostile actions motivated by intense dislike or prejudice



Thesaurus
verb

hate loathe, detest, despise, dislike, abhor, execrate; be repelled by, be unable to bear/stand, find intolerable, recoil from, shrink from; formal abominate.

noun
feelings of hate hatred, loathing, detestation, dislike, distaste, abhorrence, abomination, execration, aversion; hostility, enmity, animosity, antipathy, revulsion, disgust, contempt, odium.



speech
noun
1 the expression of or the ability to express thoughts and feelings by articulate sounds
• a person's style of speaking
• the language of a nation, region, or group : the distinctive rhythms of their speech.
2 a formal address or discourse delivered to an audience


Thesaurus
speech
noun

speaking, talking, verbal expression, verbal communication.
talk, address, lecture, discourse, oration, disquisition, peroration, deliverance, presentation; sermon, homily; monologue, soliloquy; informal spiel.
tongue, parlance, idiom, dialect, vernacular, patois; informal lingo, patter, -speak, -ese.



Now try and put the two together. Its so easy a cave man can do it.

Here let me help...specifically hate speech is to PUBLICLY deride, insult or threaten someone soley because of their differences... I.E. being gay or being a foreigner or of a different race, religion or political party, gender etc. Or to incite or suggest violence against people because of their differences.

Hitler deriding the Jews at party rallies is the most egregious example because it led to acts such as the night of broken glass and ultimately to the gas chamber.

The KKK burning crosses in peoples yard is a more local example.

Need I go on?

[edit on 12-10-2007 by grover]

Originally posted by niv
I'm not sure if that was directed at me...

Well... did you claim constitutional rights vis-a-vis a private company?



The post was not aimed at you or anyone in particular, just a general statement about people who demonstrate a certain behaviour.




Is there something in the water today? Full moon? Not everything is a personal attack up on the reader you know.
.

Valhall does not speak for me as a liberal, nor does that other guy... and I do not speak for them so don't try and confuse the issue.

Louis Farrakkan is NOT a liberal by any stretch of the imagination and Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson speak for their supporters and no one else.

We don't need to have people speak for us because most liberals are smart enough to speak for themselves so don't lump us all together.

[edit on 12-10-2007 by grover]

Youtube censors "liberal" stuff as well.

And I don't care if a kid mentions God in a commencement speech.

I don't care if people make fun of others (I'm a HUGE fan of South Park), but I draw the line at targeting kids or private citizens.

I looked at your link and it doesn't say at all what was contained in the video. For all we know it could have been gross violations of their T&C. Just the one side of her saying it wasn't doesn't mean a thing if I we don't know.

The other thing is this. Now listen closely as this is important. This isn't infringing on freedom of speech. OMG! I can hear so many people already tapping their keyboards "HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT?! BLAH BLAH BLAH" but it's true. The fact of the matter is YouTube is a private corporation. If you don't understand the delineation between private and public then stop now. YouTube is not under any requirement to show ANYTHING. A private company with a public forum is still regulated privately and not governmentally period. If you don't like how they operate you have the freedom to go elsewheres. That's the truth of it.

With that said, I personally, wish they wouldn't regulate but again it's a private company and they can do what they please.