Video: “Jew Watch” on YouTube
posted at 8:42 am on February 27, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Remember Jew Watch? It got some attention a few years ago when it became, temporarily, the top result on Google for the word “Jew.” (It’s number five now.) Last night I was browsing through the News & Politics videos on YouTube and, lo and behold, there was Frank Weltner, JW’s grand dragon, in at #71 on the category’s most viewed clips of the day with something called “Israel Harms Many Nations.” It’s five minutes on the influence of the Rothschilds and Israel’s alleged designs on the world’s communications and publishing industries.
I clicked over to his accout page, “cpotato2004″. It seems he’s been uploading videos for the past month, a few of which have been viewed more than 5,000 times. (“USSR Was Founded and Run by Killer Jews” has only 2,750 as of this writing.) The one that caught my eye, though, was “Eli Wiesel’s Alleged Kidnapping,” which was posted on February 23, two days after the lawyer for Wiesel’s — or, as Weltner pronounces it, “weasel’s” — alleged kidnapper told a judge he believes his client has mental problems. You’ll find the clip below. I tuned out right after Weltner accuses Wiesel of having uttered “blood libels” against the German people.
Why mention this? Because of Nick Gisburne, the UK atheist whose account was twice deleted recently by YouTube after he posted an innocuous video about violent passages in the Koran. Go see the screencaps at Gisburne’s site in which YouTube defines the offense as “inappropriate content.” Exit question, then: Why is Gisburne persona non grata at YT while Weltner’s videos are in the top 100? There are only two possibilities — either not a single person of the thousands who’ve seen the Jew Watch stuff has flagged them as inappropriate, or the Jew Watch stuff has been flagged but YouTube’s decided it’s okay. Extremely depressing, whichever it is.
I flagged this one and “Israel Harms Many Nations” last night so the ignorance excuse is disintegrating as we speak. Let’s see what happens in the next 24 hours.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I’m over there now to add my “B.S.” alert.
Ignorance, indeed.
seejanemom on February 27, 2007 at 8:45 AM
I blame the Jews.
spmat on February 27, 2007 at 8:45 AM
No worries, mate!
Simply write allah-tub’s crack management staff. This obvious inappropriate content will be dealt with faster than a herd of moonbat mouse clicks.
Hello?
Is this thing on?
locomotivebreath1901 on February 27, 2007 at 8:49 AM
I watched the whole clip, and delusional comes to mind.
He wonders why the Jews don’t want to dig up bones and “prove” that the Holocaust occurred. The evidence is overwhelming that it did occur–eyewitness accounts, etc.
He wonders why the Jews don’t ‘fess up to killing 65 million Soviets. Where’s the proof for this claim? Anyone? Anyone? Beuller?
Vanquisher on February 27, 2007 at 8:56 AM
Noticed that that clip at you tube has be favorited 3 times.
Depressing indeed.
nailinmyeye on February 27, 2007 at 9:00 AM
I think I need a shower after watching this vermin.
Hilts on February 27, 2007 at 9:05 AM
When hotair first displayed, I thought that was a picture of a gorilla!
ANYONE that denies the Holocaust is calling this man a liar. He made sure there was enough evidence collected so that people down the road could NOT say it didn’t happen.
CrimsonFisted on February 27, 2007 at 9:13 AM
Unbelievable…Unreal…
I admit, that I have been watching the Jews myself. I want to find out how they create so many Doctors, Attorneys, brilliant scientists, creative arts masters…I am watching you…I will find out your secrets.
right2bright on February 27, 2007 at 9:17 AM
So the Jews “ran the [Soviet Union] like a killing farm?” Of course! That explains why Natan Scharansky – a former Soviet refusenik – was treated like a king by his fellow “Jews”! WTH was I thinkin’?
If nothing else, when it comes to manufacturing b.s. and calling it “news,” his “Internet’s best news” site has that one down cold. He’s certainly as good at it as The New York Times.
SpartRan on February 27, 2007 at 9:18 AM
I’ve said it before: the 1930’s, Germany, and the appeasers…it’s all happening again. The “economics” of what will follow provides justifiction for another Holocaust: sieze all assets of the Jews, then redistribute them among the masses. Then use the Jews for slave labor, and the economy will hum like a well-tuned machine!
Thing is, you need the right government infrastructure to pull it off, namely, a socialist state to handle the seizure of assets, redistribution of wealth, propaganda machine, etc. Pretty much everything’s in place already, just need an Obama or Hillary in the White House.
Instead of appeasing Germans, we will be appeasing Islamists…same thing, really.
stonemeister on February 27, 2007 at 9:33 AM
The more people see this, the better. Bigotry and ignorance and stupidity are like mushrooms, you know the rest.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 9:33 AM
Ignorant people should not pass the time by sniffing glue, it turns them into cpotato’s
Wyrd on February 27, 2007 at 9:35 AM
YouTube
Google
Digg
Yahoo!
Wikipedia
…all turned to the Dark Side.
You guys suck at the internet.I mean I hate to say it so bluntly, but clearly other than the right wing blogs you’ve got nothing. It might be hopeless, you may just want to get to work on a new set of tubes.
Did I say nothing, my mistake, you’ve got Conservapedia, and trust me, it’s hours and hours of fun.
JaHerer22 on February 27, 2007 at 9:41 AM
On the other hand, I like to take pride in all the things we don’t have:
YouTube
Google
Digg
Yahoo!
Wikipedia
Not to mention that you’re welcome to moveon.org, the kos kidz, Democratic Underground, Cindy Sheehan, Hillary, Al Sharpton, Al Gore, ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, Hollywood… enjoy.
saint kansas on February 27, 2007 at 9:49 AM
Man, Santa Clause is a raging Anti-Semite.
Nethicus on February 27, 2007 at 9:50 AM
Great experiment. Let’s see what happens.
Valiant on February 27, 2007 at 9:56 AM
While I actually agree with you that the best cure for this sort of bigotry and ignorance, to use your words, is bright sunshine, the problem is that while YouTube is more than willing to expose this guy and his ilk to the disinfecting sunlight, it seems that it is going out of its way to keep that same bright exposing sunshine away from militant Islam and the jihadis–that it fact, YouTube is acting as an apparently willing propaganda tool of militant Islam and the jihadis by allowing their content to remain while removing any opposing views. You see the problem? For the sunlight to work, it has to be allowed to shine everywhere. It’s easy to censor or attack Christians or Jews because you don’t have to worry about mobs of either religious group threatening to behead you. But criticize Islam and see what happens. And that is because our press and information services are moral cowards. Horace Greeley, Ernie Pyle, Edward R. Murrow, Voltaire, Diderot, Thomas Paine, Mary Wollstonecroft, Olympe de Gouges, and countless other brave individuals are now spinning in their grave because of the spinelessness of our intellectuals and journalists.
Matt Helm on February 27, 2007 at 9:58 AM
Hey if you take pride in not using the most visted, most lucrative, and most innovative sites on the internets more power to you. I enjoy them all (except Cindy Sheehan) and will continue too, especially if my Google stock just keeps climbing…
JaHerer22 on February 27, 2007 at 10:04 AM
JaHerer22, you just want to be on the side that’s whining.
mymanpotsandpans on February 27, 2007 at 10:13 AM
So, Jaherer22, you wanna tell us about all those “successful” Dem/whackjob sites? And yet, you can’t seem to stay ON them and off of this one.
Oh, and by the way, “most visited, most lucrative and most innovative” doesn’t equal “right.” I mean, that’s like saying a movie is good because people go see it. Well, TRIUMPH OF WILLS was pretty damn popular (look it up). But you’re a sheep, you keep thinking that way.
tickleddragon on February 27, 2007 at 10:18 AM
And Nethicus..you beat me to the punch…I was gonna comment on how angry Santa seems.
tickleddragon on February 27, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Actually, this is not something of which I would be proud, given what the left is doing with their net dominance. Using the net to promote your viewpoint is one thing – using it to actively silence your critics is another.
Slublog on February 27, 2007 at 10:25 AM
Obviously. Do you think this uneven approach, i.e. not showing anti-Islam stuff, is a result of fear in the oh shit another anthrax letter sense or fear in the bending over backwards to be PC sense?
I go 75/25 myself.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 10:32 AM
If the left has dominance on the net and the right has dominance on talk radio: who is getting the best deal?
honora on February 27, 2007 at 10:35 AM
kinda feel like at the oscars; you hate me, you really truly hate me
Defector01 on February 27, 2007 at 10:48 AM
I agree with you, Slublog. If you step back and take a look at what’s going on with the supression of info out there, it looks very Orwellian right now.
Imagine being proud of helping to usher in and promote what amounts to a totalitarian tool to control and influence what passes for the thinking of the masses.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 10:49 AM
Whom do you consider “the masses”?
honora on February 27, 2007 at 10:53 AM
So, Jaherer22, on a thread about a raving anti-Semite “Jew Watch”, you snigger that your side is winning on the internet.
I think your slip is showing.
a4g on February 27, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Actually, Slu, JaHerer22 is pretty proud of how the left uses the net – like Digg aggressively burying every article of Michelle’s. You see, the right suffers from “false consciousness”, so working to limit their presence on the net, and also bringing back the Fairness Doctrine to make it financially impossible for talk radio to survive, that helps purify society of the right’s false thinking.
eeyore on February 27, 2007 at 10:58 AM
Well it certainly isn’t freedom.Freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom that we fight and die for. The libs and the left shut it down , not too dissimilar to the Nazis.
I have been to concentration camps, at Dachau you can still see the ovens, the barracks, the smoke stacks, and they have posted hundreds of pictures from the day we found the camps….it is truly an indescribable horror.
And for ANYONE to come to this post and spout BS like JaHerer22 on February 27, 2007 at 9:41 AM, you can kiss my ass. Go away herrera, go to your friends and play, we don’t like you. You’re the type person I tell my kid to stay away from, you sound like the Nazis. Despicable.
shooter on February 27, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Comparing JaHerer22 and “libs and the left” to Nazis is an incredible insult to those who suffered and died under the Nazis, as well as those who fought and defeated them.
What is wrong with you? It’s horrible to throw this sort of draconian comparison around so glibly. Shame on you.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 11:28 AM
Eh, left wings blogs bore me. I’m not insecure enough to need to read comment after comment reinforcing what I already believe. It’s much more fun to come over here and read some good conservative arguments, laugh at some crazy conservative arguments, and stir up trouble along the way. That’s how I roll.
Oh, and shooter a few points:
1)Get your story straight, if I spout BS, that would mean Digg, Google, etc. aren’t controlled by liberals. But all week thread of thread has been devoted to whining about how they are. So which is?
2) Nazi is the best you insult you could come up with? So overused and uncreative, you could do better, try again.
3) I’m more scared of your kid than he is of me, you have nothing worry about.
JaHerer22 on February 27, 2007 at 11:39 AM
… whoops! Hit Enter before I was finished.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 11:45 AM
I disagree with you, honora. It is exactly the control and suppression of ‘unpure’ information and the shaping of the thought of the masses through propaganda that led to the horrors of concentration camps and gas chambers and ovens.
It’s no wonder you’re outraged. Your support of this and the denial on the left that it’s even happening is telling. Clearly it’s making you uncomfortable. You might ask yourself why.
And earlier, when I referred to ‘the masses’ I specifically meant those who live their lives without ever doing any research for themselves, blindly accepting everything they’re fed. It wasn’t a dig at you. You think. I don’t agree with you on almost everything, but I do believe you believe in what you believe.
Ummm… too many ‘believes’, baby.
//lame Austin Powers reference.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 11:55 AM
Both actually. Part of it is motivated from fear of retaliation–violent and otherwise; but part of it also stems from what could best be called ‘Western Guilt Syndrome’ or ‘one-way multiculturalism’ or PC if you will. This is the notion that the ‘Other’ purely on the basis of having been ‘oppressed’, gets a pass, while it is not only permissible, but required for the ‘dominant’ culture to be humbled. This notion stems partly from Marcuse, partly from Said, and partly from Chomsky and other thinkers of the New Left. This is an incredibly dangerous–and self destructive notion. Ayaan Hirsi Ali called it in a recent interview: Western cultural and political elites must get over their feelings of ‘colonial guilt’. Should we face up to our past and our errors and learn from them? Most definitely. The worst thing we can do is fail to learn from history. But by the same token, we must not fall into the trap of indulging ourselves in an orgy of self flagellation that can only succeed in our own self destruction.
As regards YouTube and other media’s fear of violent retribution: Again, I have to ask myself what Edward R. Murrow would have said about that. What about Thomas Paine? He faced threats to life and freedom for publishing Common Sense and Age of Reason. Olympe de Gouges lost her life at the guillotine for speaking out for women’s rights during the Terror. As free and open access to information is vital to the preservation of freedom, the failure of YouTube and similar organizations to provide that endanger us. By the way, this also applies to sites such as DIGG that do nothing to stop the burying of conservative DIGGS. If the left is so sure of the rightness of its ideas, then it should not be intimidated by conservative arguments. On the contrary, it should welcome open and honest debate. So, I have to ask myself, what is the Left so scared of? Is the left that ideologically bankrupt that it cannot compete on the battlefield of ideas?
Sorry…wandered off topic for a moment. Getting back to the discussion: If YouTube and other media outlets truly see themselves as bastions of free thought, then they should live up to that. Stop the censorship of works such as Obsession and writers such as Michelle and Robert Spencer and others and allow their thoughts and ideas equal access.
Matt Helm on February 27, 2007 at 11:59 AM
What God has to say about His chosen people
NKJV Gen 29:27
Cursed be everyone who curses you, And blessed be those who bless you
abinitioadinfinitum on February 27, 2007 at 12:00 PM
We shall have to agree to disagree. Assuming there is suppression of “unpure” information today, it seems to me a HUGE point of differentiation that in Nazi Germany this was practiced by the government. In this case, it’s YouTube. Do you not see how ridiculous the comparison is? (If it were at all the same, you would now be on your way to being interogated by the Huffington Post Gestopo. Which, let’s be honest, is laughable on several levels!!)
I didn’t think you were calling me out as one of the “masses”. I do think that is a very loaded word though. Implies (or at least I infer) a degree of scorn for one’s fellow citizens. How elitist…..
;^)
honora on February 27, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Thats exactly my point. The fact the herrera comes here and defends his love sites, Digg and youtube makes him a part of the problem. The very thing the Nazis did. SHUT DOWN ALL who disagree. Would you prefer to be associated with the islamofascists? Same ideology. They too kill those who don’t wish to believe as ‘ordered’.
And herrera, your BS isn’t just limited to todays drive by, it’s your history. I’ll give you the fact I jumped on you here. I don’t know if you went OT out of ignorance or total foolishness and disrespect for Jews. But what you did was an insult to many.
And Ms H.
I left you out, cause you seemed to be on track:
Although I dont ‘know the rest’ of the mushroom story.
But then you defend the idiocy?
Like techno said:
You’ve become kind of a Dr. Jeckyl and Mrs.Hyde around here.
shooter on February 27, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Terrific post. I agree with you, although I do have an issue with the inverse of what you describe as the knee jerk pass to anyone who ever was oppressed or had a meal with someone that was oppressed–that is the blanket condemnation of Islam and the notion that Mohammed was a pedophile–all the tripe which with I am sure you are familiar. The same but different.
Are you aware that there was once a really bad TV show called “Matt Helm”?
honora on February 27, 2007 at 12:20 PM
…where are those meds. Consider for a moment that most people have a relatively broad mix of view. Yes, yes they do. You probably do as well but won’t give me the satisfaction of saying so!
Mushrooms: there’s a saying that I will butcher here: mushrooms can only thrive in the dark and with plenty of uh, compost.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Not at all. This conscious control was (and is) practiced by people who controlled the media. Governments are made up of people. That you do not see this strikes me as odd.
As for the HuffPo Gestopo… reading some of the comments there and on the other leftie sites about the naked, open longing for the death of our Vice President in the attack this morning would argue in favor of my point. Not accusing you. Just making a point based on their publicly published words.
As for my comment on the masses… The inference of derrision, as you yourself say, comes from your words. Mine was not intended to be derogatory. More of a lament, actually.
Might want to look in the mirror about that elitist thing.
;^)
So who’s the elitist?
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I can totally dig that scene, you crazy cat. Keep on truckin’ so we conservatives can get hip to that groovy word jazz you’re droppin’.
saint kansas on February 27, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Outstanding post, Matt! Well done!
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Brilliant!!!
JaHerer22, your humanitarian and heartfelt take is needed on the “Pakistani elders…” thread. Also, I’m shocked to know of your blatant capitalistic afinities. Don’t tell your kind…they’re all running on the opposite for 2008.
Entelechy on February 27, 2007 at 12:44 PM
While I’m aware of the old TV show, starring Tony Franciosa I believe, I drew the inspiration for my handle from the older Dean Martin movies–I admit to being something of a fan of ol’ Deano’s.
Getting to the gist of your post: I’ve found that there is a tendency amongst members of the three Abrahamic monotheistic faiths to view each of the other two as monolithic blocs when all three faiths each have plenty of widely varying sects, theologies, philosophical outlooks, and strains of belief. However, this does not let Muslims off the hook. It is the duty of moderate Muslims to take a real stand against the jihadis and their violence until they do so, the perception that Islam is not a faith that is ready to ‘work and play well with others’ will continue to exist. And yes, to do so will call for Muslims and Islam to accept that those of other religions have the right to exist in peace and equality with them–and that does mean that there there will have to be some rethinking and reinterpretation of certain elements of the Quran and also a willingness to accept the notions of Ibn Rushd and other Muslim thinkers who argued against a literal interpretation of the Quran as well as an acceptance of the principle that Islam has to share the world with everyone else and not try to dominate it. While many Muslims are willing to do so, they are going to have to take a more active role than they have been so far in convincing those who are not to learn to ‘work and play well with others’.
Matt Helm on February 27, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Honora
Ummm… as uncomfortable as it may be to bring up in polite company, mo really was a ped. Look it up. Right there in the book. Her name was Aisha. She was 6 when he married her, but he waited until she was the ripe old age of 9 before consumating that marriage.
The koran and islamic scholars report, you decide.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 12:52 PM
You get a knock on your door. It’s the Gestopo. They are very, very unhappy with somethings you have written.
OR
You get a knock on your door. It’s YouTube. They are very, very unhappy with somethings you have written.
Given a choice, which one would you prefer. Yes, I now it’s hard as they are so similiar, but try.
Ok, I can’t talk about this anymore, I have (God willing) used up my allotment of crazy Nazi talk for the year.
Well I am of course. But for good reason, there’s the rub…
;^)
honora on February 27, 2007 at 12:53 PM
So…who’s going to invoke Godwin?
Slublog on February 27, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Mo??? Oh dear. I am not a big expert on the sexual deviances of major religious figures, but (you knew there would be a “but”) we were taught that Mary was 12 when she conceived and married Joseph. Which would make who a pedophile…
Watch out for that lightening strike!!!!
honora on February 27, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Honora
Nope. You don’t get a knock at the door. Because they never let your information out to the masses. Same effect. Much less of that nasty bloodshed thing. But I’d be lying if I said I didn’t think that many of those on the radical left weren’t starting to goosestep even further left.
Stunningly forthright, as usual. Wrong, of course, but at least forthright.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Wow. That you would even attempt to justify and morally equiviliate the two…
Surely you, a woman of enlightenment, would agree that there’s a huge difference between 9 and 12. If not on a purely emotional level then surely on a physical.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 1:02 PM
I haven’t come across any ages given for either Mary or Joseph in any translations of the Bible that I’ve used in my work–and at one time or another I’ve used most: KJV, ISV, the Vulgate, etc. although as I don’t have reading knowledge of Greek or Aramaic I cannot read those translations of course. While it has been a while, I also can’t recall any mention of their ages in the Apocrypha. If someone can prove me wrong, I’d greatly appreciate it, but I think it’s safe to say that there is no canonical statement regarding their ages.
Now, tradition, popular religion, and folklore is another matter as can be seen in the cult of the saints and relics, etc. Or, there might have been a mention in Gnostic works or other noncanonical literature that has not been historically verified. Now, concerning Mary and Joseph’s probable ages at marriage: Going by general demographic tendencies of preindustrial societies, I would hazard a guess that Joseph was probably in his mid to late twenties with Mary being in her late teens (17/18) at the youngest and most likely in her early twenties. It was probably an arranged family marriage, possibly with an early betrothal (here she might well have been betrothed at twelve; with the couple finding the arrangement mutually acceptable. Odds are they knew each other since childhood. Joseph would have been able to have supported a family on his own and Mary would have received the proper training in how to handle a household. As they’re living in a time of relative peace and security and there was no real population or other pressures encouraging late marriage, a marriage with the couple in their twenties would have been most likely.
Of course, this is strictly a hypothesis on my part, albeit one backed up by similar demographic trends noted in other preindustrial cultures.
Matt Helm on February 27, 2007 at 1:16 PM
I was thinking about Godwins Law also…
But lets look at 1930’s Germany. The Nazi party was not in power. They were mostly a grass roots organisation that worked its way into the government. The early Nazi’s were controlling the flow of information long before Hitler was elected as chancelor.
One could compare that to the burrying and suppressing of information and opinion prevalant in todays MSM, youtube, and the rest of the net.
It does appear that, on the average, hard core liberals are trying to suppress information and limit all conversation to only their view point, and conservatives are actually trying to hold a dialogue.
Wyrd on February 27, 2007 at 1:20 PM
You cant be saying that the Nazis materialized overnight, can you? That one day they became the government? It took time and some publication, biased and restricted publication, not too unlike youtube today. The similarity is quite scary.
Your other comparison is very telling that you have become bitter and vengeful. There is no honor in living that type of character. You must be miserable.
Good Bye.
shooter on February 27, 2007 at 1:31 PM
Not sure about that. In order for your comparison to be relevant, YouTube would have to be run by people with a very well-defined ideology and specific goals. The Nazi Party took very specific action to gain power. YouTube seems a bit too diffuse.
Slublog on February 27, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Agreed. But, as you can see, they really don’t want to talk about that. I have no problem with lefties promoting stories that they find interesting and relevant. It’s the outright suppression I find worrisome. And weak, actually.
If their ideas are so unassailable and correct, why suppress an alternative viewpoint and halt any chance at rational debate? The answer is fear. They’re afraid they might be wrong. And that would mean they’ve been duped.
Personally, I’d prefer to put all ideas on the table and see which ones stand on their own over others using logic, facts, and intellectually honest debate.
But then I’m not arrogant or elitist either.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 1:37 PM
I usually agree with you, Slublog, but given some of the stories covered here on HA and other blogs regarding the open bias of exactly which stories get buried and which submitters get suppressed and banned, I’d have to say that someone in the YouTube and digg heirarchies, pretty high up actually, is cultivating some of that very well-defined ideology you mentioned.
Directly on topic, as a matter of fact. Not saying it isn’t correctable, but the apparent bias needs to be subjected to scrutiny. Right now, it’s looking intentional to me.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 1:44 PM
A knock on the door, and a liberal comes in and kicks the sh*t out of a conservative. A conservative gives a speech (on most campuses lately) and the liberal storm the stage and attack the speaker. The liberals march and defile national monuments that stand for free speech and free enterprise. The liberals attack their own self, and blame it on conservatives (professor at Claremont Colleges). The liberals want a re-distribution of wealth. The liberals want social health care. The liberals are Socialists, and the Nazi’s were what politically…oh yeah, socialists, and intolerant of other ideas. Liberals are heading, not there yet, but it is a well traveled and documented road.
right2bright on February 27, 2007 at 2:05 PM
Since this guy only works a couple months a year (Christmas season) I guess he needs something to occupy himself the rest of the time.
That he is on YT doesn’t bother me, Hotair and others being deleted from YT, THAT bothers me.
Speakup on February 27, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Yep. Well put.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Speakup on February 27, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Ta da!!!!
Opposite day at Calvin and Hobbes. Dear God.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 2:33 PM
I didn’t know Santa
ClausKook was a MuslimKini on February 27, 2007 at 2:37 PM
Sorry. I’m too stupid to get what you’re saying. Please explain.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 2:44 PM
I am referrring to the statement that Fascism is Socialism. Surely you are familiar with Opposite Day in Calvin and Hobbes? When everything you say means the opposite of what it actually is???
honora on February 27, 2007 at 2:51 PM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nazi
The nazis were socialists. Liberals demonstrably favor and embrace socialistic ideologies. Where’s the ‘opposite day’ thing come in?
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 2:52 PM
The nazis moved inexorably into fascism. That was the point. Accurate one too.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 2:56 PM
The one facilitated the other. Hence the concern.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 3:01 PM
From the same website you link to:
American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition – Cite This Source
fascism [(fash-iz-uhm)]
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
A system of government that flourished in Europe from the 1920s to the end of World War II. Germany under Adolf Hitler, Italy under Mussolini, and Spain under Franco were all fascist states. As a rule, fascist governments are dominated by a dictator, who usually possesses a magnetic personality, wears a showy uniform, and rallies his followers by mass parades; appeals to strident nationalism; and promotes suspicion or hatred of both foreigners and “impure” people within his own nation, such as the Jews in Germany. Although both communism and fascism are forms of totalitarianism, fascism does not demand state ownership of the means of production, nor is fascism committed to the achievement of economic equality. In theory, communism opposes the identification of government with a single charismatic leader (the “cult of personality”), which is the cornerstone of fascism. Whereas communists are considered left-wing, fascists are usually described as right-wing.
so·cial·ism (sō’shə-lĭz’əm) Pronunciation Key
n.
Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
If you are going to point out to me that Nazi is short for National Socialist party, I will be forced to point out to you that China is officially the Peoples Republic.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 3:02 PM
Ummm… ok. But how does that make them any less oppressively communist? Or the nazi party any less fascist? And either one of them inherently less oppressive and antithetical to ideologies of free republics?
Or was that your intended money quote? A little clarity please?
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 3:11 PM
Honora,
Are you denying that the nazis were socialist before becoming fascist under hitler? Not sure how you can do that, and be factually accurate anyway.
The point was the path and the possiblity that it could happen again. Especially now, since the communications mediums are so pervasive. And so overwhelmingly slanted left.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 3:17 PM
Oh yeah, Hitler did not nationalize any of the manufacturing, he did not institute any socialist ideas.
American Heritage Dictionary:
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
Webster:
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
Notice the social and economic centralized government.
Once again, you look for one minor exception, try using a real dictionary.
This pretty much defines what I posted. Power through intimidation. Congrad on belonging to a Fascist organization…the leftist, liberal party.
right2bright on February 27, 2007 at 3:25 PM
I think she’s ‘moved on’, right2bright. It’s like nailing pudding to a wall with that one. ;)
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 3:35 PM
If memory serves, although the Nazis did leave property ownership in private hands, they did centrally dictate exactly what and how much would be produced.
eeyore on February 27, 2007 at 3:36 PM
This is the most pointless argument ever. Let’s cherrypick parts of a definition in order to justify calling poltical opponets facists. To me, it sounds like if we combine our powers Capt. Planet style we would be great fascists.
Fascim: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual (sounds like flagwaving right-wingers) and that stands for a centralized autocratic government(the left) headed by a dictatorial leader,(Bush, obvi) severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition (netroots)
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control (Bush again)
JaHerer22 on February 27, 2007 at 3:53 PM
No JaHerer22,
The definitions were a distraction brought on by honora.
Or rabidly clicking little lefties actively burying anything that disagrees with their mindset?
Dictatorial? Hell, my biggest problem with him is that he’s not agressive ENOUGH.
Again, delusion on your part. That the left exists in the openly traitorous state it’s actually in right now is living proof of that. Sheesh.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 4:02 PM
I fixed it for you.
right2bright on February 27, 2007 at 4:06 PM
Allahpundit wrote: “Why is Gisburne persona non grata at YT while Weltner’s videos are in the top 100?”
We all know the reason for that. It’s that the totalitarian left, of which JaHerer22 is a PROUD member, is anti-Semitic as well as anti-conservative.
Look at who founded YouTube, Google, Digg, Yahoo!, and Wikipedia and you have a who’s-who list of major liberal Democratic donors. Every one of them either came from the ranks of, or was influenced (i.e., brainwashed) by, the “campus left.”
Writer John Leo identifies the source of this phenomena in an article titled Free Inquiry? Not on Campus.
He wrote:
As Leo also notes: “Marcuse’s thinking has influenced a generation of influential radical scholars.” And some of their disciples who have gone on to found YouTube, Google, Digg, etc.
It is no accident that our point of view is suppressed at these web sites. It is deliberate. Because to people like JaHerer22 (and the founders of Youtube, et. al.) our opinions are not worthy of discussion, much less presentation to the masses. Thus spaketh Marcuse.
These people, like Marcuse, know that the marketplace of ideas, if allowed to operate freely on “their” websites, would destroy them. Holocaust denial is just one symptom. Purity of ideas is the end game for the followers of Marcuse, and any marketplace of ideas that isn’t controlled by them will defeat them.
Is it any wonder that Google (the new owners of YouTube) COOPERATED with China in censoring their search engine to block “unapproved” websites?
The great irony is that in the Internet in general, as in talk radio, the marketplace of ideas IS working freely. The “blogs” that JaHerer22 is so comtemptuous of, is proof that conservative ideas and ideals are popular. Contrary to what some have said here (and what the intolerant left wants us to believe), the Internet is NOT owned by the left. It is a paradigm of communication that was designed to be inherently free and open. The existence of Hot Air, Drudge, Townhall, WorldnetDaily, and so on, proves that, as does the existence of DKOS, and so on.
The irony is utterly delicious that while Hot Air allows him and Honora and others like them to post here, DKOS, DU, and YouTube, etc. will not allow conservatives to post there.
An even greater irony is the ascendancy of conservative voices in talk radio — and the utter failure of repeated attempts for leftist talk radio in the marketplace of ideas — which is leading Democrats (in ever increasing thrall to the left) to apply another Marcusian idea: the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” which is a thinly concealed plan to drive our voices off of the radio spectrum. After all, Marcuse says that toleration must not be tolerated for opinions not of the left.
If the left (i.e., the Democrats) gets their so-called “Fairness Doctrine” for radio, the behavior of the intolerant and totalitarian left running YouTube, Google, Digg, et. al., may become the wave of the future because they WILL attempt to drive conservative voices off of the Internet right after they silence conservative talk radio. Just as they tried to drive an Eagle Scout color guard off the stage at the 2000 National Democratic Party convention in Los Angeles by booing at them.
They won’t succeed any more than the old Soviet Union did when the fax machine and copier became available to their people. Even Google couldn’t stop resourceful Chinese from finding “liberty” on the Net.
Everybody who is not a liberal should read John Leo’s City Journal article I cited above. Why? Because the seeds to how to take back the campuses (and the next generation of “YouTube” inventors) from the left are found there.
Which leads to the next question: What happens when the totalitarian brownshirted and intolerant left fails to silence us; when Marcuse if finally overthrown on campus? That’s when the left will start our next Civil War…..
georgej on February 27, 2007 at 4:11 PM
It is amusing to watch Honora and JaHerer22 pretend that Fascism and Communism (”socialism’s” designed end-goal) are two different things, given that the leftists have murdered over 150 million people since 1917 as opposed to the mere 11 million by the fascists.
They can insist on the differences all they want (even though THEIR side looks worse). But it doesn’t change the essential fact that there is little difference in either system in outlook or behavior. Brownshirt or redshirt. They’re still both murderous ideologies.
georgej on February 27, 2007 at 4:22 PM
Good catch, AP. I flagged it too. Do we know how long it took for Gisburne’s videos to be taken down?
starflyer on February 27, 2007 at 4:23 PM
The Nazis (a name which they never used) aka the National Socialist German Workers Party came into being under Hitler in 1920. So I don’t understand your question–there was no “Nazi” party prior to Hitler.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 3:17 PM
honora on February 27, 2007 at 4:34 PM
Hey, if the meaning is not clear, take it up with the folks at the American Heritage. I mean really, one expects clarity from a dictionary….LOL
honora on February 27, 2007 at 4:37 PM
Not true. The National Socialist German Workers Party began in 1920. Hitler took the party over in 1933.
Yeah, you’re right. Clarity just isn’t your strong suit, is it… LOL.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 4:42 PM
your question–there was no “Nazi” party prior to Hitler.
Wrong. Ever hear of the Munich Putsch? When was that exactly? Jesus you can be dense. From Britannica.com:
Clarity indeed.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 4:55 PM
techno: I assume you are confusing the date when Hitler became Chancellor.
Oh history, all those dates…
honora on February 27, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Ok eeyore, you just can’t waltz into this and start being reasonable. Jeez!!
The issue here is simple: the political spectrum is generally thought to go from far left (communist) thru socialist and other isms to the far right (fascism). That definition simply doesn’t align with the POV of some folks on this blog who insist that if it’s bad, it’s left, decades of political science be damned.
The end result being this ludicrous attempt to maintain that Nazis were socialists, when in fact everyone knows (ok, I stand corrected, everyone nominally lucid) that Hitler and Mussolini were virulently anti-Communist/Socialist.
honora on February 27, 2007 at 5:12 PM
Easy there, little liberal. My my my, but you can be condescending, can’t you?
Hey honora, watch this. I was mistaken about hitler taking the party over in 1933. That’s when the third reich started. He rose to become the leader of the very small group that was formed in 1919.
All this is just a distraction from the main point, which you stubbornly refuse to address, that the nazis were socialists before they were fascists, but that’s your MO. We’re used to it.
The party was socialist before it became fascist. That’s the only point I was trying to make. I think the liberals are going down the same path at the moment.
Here’s another link
From it:
Stop tapdancing, get off the cross, and address the point.
I contend the left is making its way toward fascism. From your own definition, all that’s missing is that charismatic leader. And there’s no shortage of demagogues vying for that title, is there?
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 5:20 PM
Hey look guys, I’m apparently not ‘nominally lucid’.
Elitist in the extreme. Not at all becoming, either.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 5:21 PM
Please, honora, show me where you got the info that Mary was 12. An outright fabrication, one of your typical “examples” that will turn out to be a lie.
And Webster trumps your little dictionary.
Liberals, Leftists, Fascists, Nazi’s, Socialists, Marxists, all pretty much the same family. Some taller, some fatter, but they all share the same DNA.
Poor girl.
right2bright on February 27, 2007 at 5:25 PM
Not at ALL the point being made. You’re arguing that the nazi party was not socialist before it went fascist. I have no problem with the fact they changed and were against the communists. But again, we go ’round and ’round and you tapdance around the real topic of discussion and rail against pointless minutae that really hasn’t a great deal to do with the original discussion.
But done like a good little leftie, I suppose.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 5:27 PM
I should have another post come in from the aether here pretty quick.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 5:28 PM
Nope… they’re all in now. Man is that annoying.
Your serve honora.
techno_barbarian on February 27, 2007 at 5:40 PM
Yea, that’s the way I learned it a few eons ago. But lately it seems a possibly more useful descripiton is running the spectrum from a centralized, collectivized, socialist left [which would include both Communism and the various fascisms - thus Hitler and Stalins's emnity not being doctrinal, but rather territorial and even to some degree personal] over to a more individualized, free-market right.
I think “right-wing” was frequently applied to military dictatorships, no matter what the social organization / economic stripe.
I think I like the collectivist – free market description of the spectrum better, especially in describing the division on the American political scene.
eeyore on February 27, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Um…yeah, OK (slowly backing out of room). Uh…I’ll be, um, right back.
John from WuzzaDem on February 27, 2007 at 6:30 PM
okay – here’s a little Frank Weltner Watch
Wow Franky, what a faaabulous garden you have
uptight on February 27, 2007 at 6:36 PM
[emphasis mine]
Um, one of these things is not like the other.
John from WuzzaDem on February 27, 2007 at 6:38 PM
If Frank Weltner wants evidence of the Holocaust, he should pop on down to Washington DC. I went to the Holocaust museum years ago and the displays are hard to argue with;the sight of all those shoes collected from the dead has been permanently etched into my mind.
bookwurm322 on February 27, 2007 at 8:35 PM
As usuall, caught again shading the truth. American Heritage dictionary is what I posted, and Webster is what I posted. You posted a dictionary that is a social commentary dictionary, not an actual dictionary. You just can’t be honest.
Hitler controlled the economy, was bent on re-distribution of wealth, had social control. The Fascism came from the military complex he built up. But use whatever you want to define your party’s actions.
The irony is you do not refute your party and its physically aggressive response to conservatives. The attacks, on people and objects that reflect a free and open society.
What we are talking about is the intimidation of race, physical attacks, stopping of free speech and assembly that the party that you support thrusts upon conservatives.
You can call it the DNC, that may be more accurate.
right2bright on February 27, 2007 at 8:46 PM
Its clearly an anti-semitic crowd in charge over at YouTube, but that’s to be expected of leftist.
Maxx on February 27, 2007 at 8:51 PM
This guy’s like a bigoted version of Art Bell. Clearly you have a dizzying intellect.
Mojave Mark on February 27, 2007 at 11:44 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »