Google denies White House request to take down video, producer investigated!!!

[tonymctones]

White House officials had asked Google earlier on Friday to reconsider whether the video had violated YouTube's terms of service. The guidelines can be viewed at

.

Google said on Wednesday that the video was within its guidelines.

U.S. authorities said on Friday that they were investigating whether the film's producer, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a 55-year old Egyptian Coptic Christian living in Southern California, had violated terms of his prison release. Basseley was convicted in 2010 for bank fraud and released from prison on probation last June.

http://news.yahoo.com/google-rejects-white-house-request-pull-mohammad-film-015300781--sector.html

ABSOLUTELY FUCKING RIDICULOUS!!!

Blacken, straw, 240 Im guessing you guys support obamas moves on this?

[tonymctones]

bump for the admins lack of respect for the first amendment

[Hugo Chavez]

White House officials had asked Google earlier on Friday to reconsider whether the video had violated YouTube's terms of service. The guidelines can be viewed at

.

Google said on Wednesday that the video was within its guidelines.

U.S. authorities said on Friday that they were investigating whether the film's producer, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a 55-year old Egyptian Coptic Christian living in Southern California, had violated terms of his prison release. Basseley was convicted in 2010 for bank fraud and released from prison on probation last June.

http://news.yahoo.com/google-rejects-white-house-request-pull-mohammad-film-015300781--sector.html

ABSOLUTELY FUCKING RIDICULOUS!!!

Blacken, straw, 240 Im guessing you guys support obamas moves on this?

asked is totally different than ordered.

[Soul Crusher]

asked is totally different than ordered.

Whatever.   GMAFB.


The request itself speaks volumes. 

[tonymctones]

asked is totally different than ordered.

LOL agreed, still shows their lack of respect for the 1st amendment.

Dont see them asking any idiotic lib atheist to stop any of their antic against christians.

didnt see them condemn or ask the "artist" that made piss christ(who was given govt grants) to stop their work.

why now?

b/c some dip shits wanted an excuse to go ape shit?

so what did we learn children? to get your way with this moron all you need to do is throw a temper tantrum.

[Hugo Chavez]

I'm guessing the video is going to get pulled from youtube.  Not for free speech issues but for what a con man the film maker was.  He lied to several of the actors in the film on what it was about.  It's real nice that he knew exactly what it would be about and made sure to have a nom de plume for himself but decided to leave his hired actors in the dark on a work that could have people wanting to kill them.  He's hinding his face, the actors that worked for him don't even have that luxury.

It's well known what you are getting into if you decide to go public with shit against Islam.  This guy set shit up where he thought he would be hidden and had no problem lying to the people he hired.  Way way fucked up.

If he wanted to risk is own life, he should have put himself out as the sole person responsible, but he wanted to hide and let others take the hit.

Nobody is mentioning this but yes there are laws against doing this shit.  Even this shit violates googles terms.

[Hugo Chavez]

Whatever.   GMAFB.


The request itself speaks volumes. 

no, fucking wrong... asked is absolutely different than ordered.  I have no problem with asked.  You yourself posted a video in admiration of JFK the other day.  Did you know what he asked of the media while he was in office?  He asked them to shut the fuck up on certain shit.  And this isn't unusual in the least during a period of war.  If anything we have been given way more freedom now than any past war in American history.  I'm cool with asking.  You should be too.

[Hugo Chavez]

LOL agreed, still shows their lack of respect for the 1st amendment.

no it doesn't.  Look I am not voting for Obama. I don't support the guy, but I think you're wrong on this.  You should be happy it's a request.  Actually they have it well within their power to make it an order and shit like that has happend before.

[tonymctones]

I'm guessing the video is going to get pulled from youtube.  Not for free speech issues but for what a con man the film maker was.  He lied to several of the actors in the film on what it was about.  It's real nice that he new exactly what it would be about and made sure to have a nom de plume for himself but decided to leave his hired actors in the dark on a work that could have people wanting to kill them.  He's hinding his face, the actors that worked for don't even have that luxury.

It's well known what you are getting into if you decide to go public with shit against Islam.  This guy set shit up where he thought he would be hidden and had no problem lying to the people he hired.  Way way fucked up.

If he wanted to risk is own life, he should have put himself out as the sole person responsible, but he wanted to hide and let others take the hit.

Nobody is mentioning this but yes there are laws against doing this shit.  Even this shit violates googles terms.

I agree its a dick move, I dont see how its illegal to keep your employees in the dark as long as what they are doing isnt violating the law.

If by illegal you mean that weak ass shit you posted in the other thread then good luck. There were so many holes in that argument its not even funny.

Fact is he made a film, the feds thats right FUCKING FEDS are investigating this guy for his parole violation...WHAT THE FUCK DO THE FEDS HAVE TO DO WITH CALIFORNIAS PAROLE VIOLATION???

I can agree with you on the principle of telling the actors but the law isnt with you on this.

[tonymctones]

no it doesn't.  Look I am not voting for Obama. I don't support the guy, but I think you're wrong on this.  You should be happy it's a request.  Actually they have it well within their power to make it an order and shit like that has happend before.

so anytime we dont like something we just need to act an ass and the govt will respond?

please outline how its within their power to take it down.

[Hugo Chavez]

so anytime we dont like something we just need to act an ass and the govt will respond?

what do you mean by this?  I didn't mean to suggest anything like this.  Your statement is way broader than anything I said.

[tonymctones]

what do you mean by this?  I didn't mean to suggest anything like this.  Your statement is way broader than anything I said.

im not saying you support this but its the reality of the situation and the admins response to it, if you believe all this was really about a video and not just a pretense to act an ass.

[Hugo Chavez]

Tony, why don't you start by agreeing that this guy is a con artist who tricked people into doing something they might not have done if they were not lied to?

it's so sick that this guy had a nom de plume set up for himself and didn't want people knowing his identity but he had no problem tossing other lives into potential danger...  As soon as this is shown it does violate google's tos.

[tonymctones]

Tony, why don't you start by agreeing that this guy is a con artist who tricked people into doing something they might not have done if they were not lied to?

it's so sick that this guy had a nom de plume set up for himself and didn't want people knowing his identity but he had no problem tossing other lives into potential danger...  As soon as this is shown it does violate google's tos.

I thought I did that already...

I agree its a dick move, I dont see how its illegal to keep your employees in the dark as long as what they are doing isnt violating the law.

I can agree with you on the principle of telling the actors but the law isnt with you on this.

[Hugo Chavez]

im not saying you support this but its the reality of the situation and the admins response to it, if you believe all this was really about a video and not just a pretense to act an ass.

I never have a problem with the government asking something of the people.  I have no idea why you would.  It doesn't show disrespect, it shows respect for the first.  And they're doing this for a con man on probation.  And you're bitching?  come on man.

[tonymctones]

Tony, why don't you start by agreeing that this guy is a con artist who tricked people into doing something they might not have done if they were not lied to?

it's so sick that this guy had a nom de plume set up for himself and didn't want people knowing his identity but he had no problem tossing other lives into potential danger...  As soon as this is shown it does violate google's tos.

I agree with the fact he is a dick for not telling the actors but again if they werent doing anything illegal then they were just his employees being instructed on their job. I dont know the exact ins and outs of every request from my boss at work but I fill them as best I can.

The issue is that by removing this video we send the message that the problem is with the video and not the nut job pyschos who need to be put in their place...WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE

[Hugo Chavez]

I thought I did that already...

Sorry, I get use to your I agree then disagree statements like you just posted I get confussed at what the fuck you mean.  You do that so often I don't know when you really agree or not.

[tonymctones]

I never have a problem with the government asking something of the people.  I have no idea why you would.  It doesn't show disrespect, it shows respect for the first.  And they're doing this for a con man on probation.  And you're bitching?  come on man.

The issue is that by removing this video we send the message that the problem is with the video and not the nut job pyschos who need to be put in their place...WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE

[tonymctones]

Sorry, I get use to your I agree then disagree statements like you just posted I get confussed at what the fuck you mean.  You do that so often I don't know when you really agree or not.

LOL it means I agree on certain aspects of an argument but disagree with others.

[Hugo Chavez]

I agree with the fact he is a dick for not telling the actors but again if they werent doing anything illegal then they were just his employees being instructed on their job. I dont know the exact ins and outs of every request from my boss at work but I feel them as best I can.

Oh fucking this is such bullshit.  He's not a "dick" for doing this, he's a fucking con for doing this.  A con that's already estabished as a con.  And yea there are laws against doing this kind of shit.  I don't know why this shit is not being talked about.  They're actually playing nice with this guy and they don't have to.  This guy is going to end back up in prison after the ashes fall.  I see plenty they can nail him on.  If they don't, it will be political because of people crying him a river.

[Hugo Chavez]

LOL it means I agree on certain aspects of an argument but disagree with others.

dude, you have so many posts in the past that you start with, "I agree" and then proceed to disagree... don't even pull this shit with me.  It does get confusing with you.  Fine, you want to post like that, cool but don't get pissed when people don't know for sure what you're saying or not.

[tonymctones]

Oh fucking this is such bullshit.  He's not a "dick" for doing this, he's a fucking con for doing this.  A con that's already estabished as a con.  And yea there are laws against doing this kind of shit.  I don't know why this shit is not being talked about.  They're actually playing nice with this guy and they don't have to.  This guy is going to end back up in prison after the ashes fall.  I see plenty they can nail him on.  If they don't, it will be political because of people crying him a river.

what laws are you referring to hugo?

please tell me how this man broke the law outside of his potential parole violation which I agree he will probably be convicted of as I dont see how he could have made the video without using a computer unless he had someone else do it.

You as an employer do not need to spell out all aspects of a task to your employee. Im curious as to what specific laws you think this man broke.

[tonymctones]

dude, you have so many posts in the past that you start with, "I agree" and then proceed to disagree... don't even pull this shit with me.  It does get confusing with you.  Fine, you want to post like that, cool but don't get pissed when people don't know for sure what you're saying or not.

Im not getting pissed I can see how it could confuse ppl. You dont generally agree with someone 100% so I agree but I disagree about such and such....maybe I should be more specific and say I agree on this but disagree on this

[tonymctones]

Do you agree that by asking them to take the video down that they are sending the message that the problem is with the video and not the ass backward thinking of these morons protesting?

[Hugo Chavez]

what laws are you referring to hugo?

please tell me how this man broke the law outside of his potential parole violation which I agree he will probably be convicted of as I dont see how he could have made the video without using a computer unless he had someone else do it.

You as an employer do not need to spell out all aspects of a task to your employee. Im curious as to what specific laws you think this man broke.

Here is where I think you're going wrong.  You say that the employer doesn't need to spell out all aspects of the job to employees.  Normally that would be true... but..  If I decide to lie to those I'm employing where the lie puts their lives in danger and I knew about that danger but didn't disclose it, there is obviously a major problem happening and there are laws against this type of conspiring.