Google keeps film up.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

So you think the movie should be blocked by Google because members of the Religion of Love, Peace and Tolerance will go on a murderous rampage if some one makes fun of them... Uhh ..come on really ?

That is the same logic Christian wing nuts use to defend abotion clinic bombings. In their opinion it's murder and murder is wrong so they blow up a building.

I cited 2 particular issues from the article - the concept of "fighting words" and the concept of "equal rights guaranteed to all." You haven't responded to either one.

[Dakine10 5,452]

So if group "A" wants a certain video down, the best course of action is to present an climate of danger?

If you were on Googles censor board, exactly how would you write up these new TOS?

Perhaps Utube should incorporate an new metric next to the "thumbs up, thumbs down" rating system..... Sure, this one would be "threat-level" before a movie is removed.

This way various groups know how close they are to getting a movie they don't like removed.

I don't care what googles TOS is. We already know the government has the power to take down websites.

I'll say one more time, I have no problem with the White House taking a stronger approach with google if they determine that the video is going to put more Americans at risk. It has nothing to do with what group A wants or appeasing terrorists.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

BUt WOM did give one prime example of how when it comes to offending Jews and safeguarding the Holocaust , Utube has done this very thing and apparently with less to work with.

I may check later to see if there are any denier type vids up.

Hundreds of videos attacking the Holocaust as a hoax including this one by the Number one Muslim wing nut in the world. So if the Prime minister of Israel had gone on TV and criticized all Muslims or called something that important to them a lie, how many people do you think would have died.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Hundreds of videos attacking the Holocaust as a hoax including this one by the Number one Muslim wing nut in the world. So if the Prime minister of Israel had gone on TV and criticized all Muslims or called something that important to them a lie, how many people do you think would have died.

So you are denying that any Holocaust-denying videos have been taken down ? Or just saying that not enough of them have been taken down ?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

1347735783[/url]' post='5689756']

So you are denying that any Holocaust-denying videos have been taken down ? Or just saying that not enough of them have been taken down ?

I am saying there are lots and lots of them ans as far as I know of no Jews have stormed embassies ans killed people over it

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

I am saying there are lots and lots of them ans as far as I know of no Jews have stormed embassies ans killed people over it

There are still plenty of anti-Muslim clips up as well. The issue was: does taking down Holocaust denial clips violate the principles of free speech, which you use to defend the IoM clip ? And if so, how many posts have you made complaining about it ?

[Robby999 1,024]

Guess some of the liberals are worried about the White House's "request " also!

Activists troubled by White House call to YouTube

By JOSH GERSTEIN |

9/14/12 4:49 PM EDT

Prominent civil liberties groups expressed concern on Friday over news that the White House urged YouTube to review whether an anti-Muslim video posted on the video sharing site violated the firm's policies.

"There's no indication that the government is questioning the right of these idiots to make that repellent film. On the other hand, it does make us nervous when the government throws its weight behind any requests for censorship," the American Civil Liberties Union's Ben Wizner said in an interview Friday.

"I am actually kind of distressed by this," said Eva Galperin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Even though there are all these great quotes from inside the White House saying they support free speech....by calling YouTube from the White House, they were sending a message no matter how much they say we don't want them to take it down, when the White House calls and asks you to review it, it sends a message and has a certain chilling effect."

The White House confirmed the request on Friday, but insisted that YouTube was not asked to take down the video, which paints the Prophet Mohammed as sex-crazed and has led to violent protests at U.S. diplomatic posts across North Africa.

"The White House asked YouTube to review the video to see if it was in compliance with their terms of use," White House press secretary Jay Carney told POLITICO in an e-mail.

Both Wizner and Galperin said they'd like to know more details about precisely who contacted YouTube, why, and what was asked of the firm.

A White House spokesman wouldn't offer much additional detail to POLITICO Friday, but said the request took place on Tuesday and was made by a member of the National Security Council staff.

Galperin told POLITICO it was pretty clear the White House wanted the video taken down. "They were not calling in support of keeping the video up," she said. "The fact they called at all is highly problematic...I don't think anyone at the White House genuinely thought YouTube had not revewied this video. It is simply ludicrous to say so."

Wizner said he was not troubled by figures like President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly condemning the video, so long as they made clear that it was protected by the First Amendment.

"It's staggeringly offensive," Wizner said of the video. "There's nothing inappropriate about government officials expressing strongly held views about speech so long as they understand where the line is," he added, noting that the Supreme Court ruled last year, 8-1, in favor of the right of anti-gay religious protesters to demonstrate at military funerals. "It's hard to imagine speech more repellent, more offensive and more painful than that....It's not sandbox out there."

Obama did not mention free speech rights in his first remarks Wednesday on the controversy and the possibly related attack that killed four U.S. State Department staffers at a diplomatic post in Libya, including the U.S. ambassador to that country. However, during a press interview a short time later, the president did vow to protect First Amendment rights.

"We believe in the First Amendment. It is one of the hallmarks of our Constitution that I'm sworn to uphold. And so we are always going to uphold the rights for individuals to speak their mind. On the other hand, this film is not representative of who we are and our values, and I think it's important for us to communicate that," Obama told CBS's "60 Minutes" later Wednesday.

YouTube has blocked access to the video on its site by users in Egypt, Libya and India. Afghanistan's government has reportedly blocked all access to YouTube in order to prevent access to the offending video.

Spokespeople for YouTube, which is owned by Google, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the White House's contact with the company. However, in a statement Wednesday—a day after the White House request, the firm said the video was "clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube."

On Wednesday, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Gen. Martin Dempsey, called a controversial Christian pastor in Florida to ask him not to screen or promote the film. Dempsey, who was seeking to prevent violence against U.S. military personnel abroad, acted "on his own initiative," a Pentagon spokesman said.

[Danno 1,228]

So you think the movie should be blocked by Google because members of the Religion of Love, Peace and Tolerance will go on a murderous rampage if some one makes fun of them... Uhh ..come on really ?

That is the same logic Christian wing nuts use to defend abotion clinic bombings. In their opinion it's murder and murder is wrong so they blow up a building.

While your point is well founded it should also be noted that there is no similarity when you consider: This is the most Christianized Western country yet these Abortion bombers are so few in number and have almost no support among CHristians... at best a segemnt of Christians (like me) are indifferent to it. I neither mourn nor celebrate such acts.

I think too often we try to find a cross faith parallel when in todays world there just is not much to go on.

Especially when we try to mirror the destruction of human life in the womb to .. cartoons or obscure youtube vids.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

There are still plenty of anti-Muslim clips up as well. The issue was: does taking down Holocaust denial clips violate the principles of free speech, which you use to defend the IoM clip ? And if so, how many posts have you made complaining about it ?

Yes taking down anti-holocaust clips is censorship and I am against it,as in taking down any clip. However You tube is free to post whatever they wish in a free country. The censorship comes in when the government tries do it.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

While your point is well founded it should also be noted that there is no similarity when you consider: This is the most Christianized Western country yet these Abortion bombers are so few in number and have almost no support among CHristians... at best a segemnt of Christians (like me) are indifferent to it. I neither mourn nor celebrate such acts.

I think too often we try to find a cross faith parallel when in todays world there just is not much to go on.

Especially when we try to mirror the destruction of human life in the womb to .. cartoons or obscure youtube vids.

I agree that the extreme Christian right like Westboro are just a handful. Bombing abortion clinics is wrong period. No justification. People that do that are terrorist scum just like 9--11 hijackers, the people who killed the ambassador in Egypt, Arafat and the rest of them.

[Danno 1,228]

I agree that the extreme Christian right like Westboro are just a handful. Bombing abortion clinics is wrong period. No justification. People that do that are terrorist scum just like 9--11 hijackers, the people who killed the ambassador in Egypt, Arafat and the rest of them.

Yeah bombing is just a bad idea because innocent people could be killed!

IF your objective is to stop someone from killing, (an abortionist in this case) use a more direct approach (if you must).

[james&olya 1,121]

Good decision. Its not the movie's fault that the brain-dead need a reason to resort to violence any moment in their sorry lives. I would love to watch this movie now and have a few good laughs too!!

Proving once again the wisdom and accuracy you have shown in your choice of on-line identifier!

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Yes taking down anti-holocaust clips is censorship and I am against it,as in taking down any clip. However You tube is free to post whatever they wish in a free country. The censorship comes in when the government tries do it.

Actually, no, YouTube is not free to post whatever they wish - they are subject to the rule of law.

You didn't answer about how much time you've spent defending the rights of free speech in regard to videos that were actually taken down (unlike the IoM clip.)

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

I am saying there are lots and lots of them ans as far as I know of no Jews have stormed embassies ans killed people over it

No they file lawsuit after lawsuit in federal court and they get injunctions. Google knows this and pulls down the videos before they reach court.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

I am amazed that in this country we are even having this conversation. Have we lost our mind ? To me the very idea that we would even contemplate removing a Movie, because it might offend Muslims and that might incite violence is clear signal that that Terrorism is winning. So Islam is a Religion of Love, Peace and Tolerance ? They very people that are arguing that statement to be true are the same ones that are advocating censorship of the Movie, because criticism of Islam might incite members of it's own religion to go on murderous rampages.

The Logic of that is mind blowing !

Thank you...