Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 213 posts

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#121

Post by powertower »

coryl wrote: post #96
powertower wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ostensibly because of this video That video had nothing to do with anyone being killed. It was an excuse used by the mob to justify their desire for murder and violence, so they would not appear as complete savages. I've watched that video, and the worst I can describe it is with words: "silly" and "amateurish". It wouldn’t even pass the litmus test for the type of speech that incites violence. It’s clear that thos…

You know how as a kid, you were taught "don't believe everything you see on TV"? Context is important. Video clips rarely tell the full story.

So you're agreeing with me, since the talking heads on TV have been telling us all that the "innocence of muslims" video is responsible for all this.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#122

Post by rictic »

Steko wrote: post #106
tokenadult wrote: post #100

As I commented on this issue earlier, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4511247 "As we read news reports about violent responses to the video, from people who seem to be quite confused about who produced the video, it's important for all of us to remember the basic issue here. The basic issue is whether people in free countries, like most readers of Hacker News, are going to be able to enjoy the right of free speec…

Freedom of speech =/= freedom from consequences. You can go all Fred Phelps and tell some marine's family he's in hell now at his funeral and that they are inbred hillbillies that could never have invented the internet but don't expect shock on my part if his dad and brothers decide that would be a good time to beat the shit out of you.

... and that would be illegal for them to do, and for good reason.

The solution to bad speech is not violence. It's more speech.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#123

Post by danielweber »

stfu wrote: post #61
nostromo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAiOEV0v2RM

I was expecting some sophisticated propaganda piece. And not some crappy community theater actors doing some play for a public service television show. "Somebody" is really easy to troll.

Honestly, the first time I got linked to that video I thought it was a joke. I would swear those production values could only be that bad if done on purpose for comedic effect. Especially the random dubbing in of "Islam" or "Muslim."

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#124

Post by powertower »

tvladeck wrote: post #88
powertower wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ostensibly because of this video That video had nothing to do with anyone being killed. It was an excuse used by the mob to justify their desire for murder and violence, so they would not appear as complete savages. I've watched that video, and the worst I can describe it is with words: "silly" and "amateurish". It wouldn’t even pass the litmus test for the type of speech that incites violence. It’s clear that thos…

> It's completely unreasonable to ask the American people to throw out parts of the Constitution to try to appease clearly incompatible religious and juvenile groups half a world away. This is crazy hyperbole. Can you please explain how the Administration's request (not demand) to take down the video is even remotely similar to your description?

That's how the government has been phrasing it so far in their responses...

The first sentence of which has been that the "Innocence of Muslims" video is some type of an abomination (rather than a silly movie), and we should all try not to offend Islam.

Then they end that paragraph with "...but wait, almost forgot, we don't condone the violence either.".

And CNN is doing the same thing with their reporting... Constantly blaming or interjecting the video; one step away from suggesting that the "protesters" are the real victims here.

It's clear there is going to be some type of a discussion about freedom of speech soon and that we Americans have too much of it. That, and the maker of the movie will most likely face prosecution.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#125

Post by salimmadjd »

malandrew wrote: post #93
salimmadjd wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The makers of this video have admitted the purpose of the video was to denigrate Islam. Shouldn't that be enough in itself to classify this as hate speech. Also this issue bring a very interesting point. How google make these type of judgment. Do they have legal experts viewing these videos and making decision as such? There is a lot of important issues being brought up as a result. How do we identify hate speech, wh…

Interesting. That changes things. Do you have a citation of what the video's authors said?

"Speaking by phone from an undisclosed location....he intended his film to be a provocative political statement condemning the religion"

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/israeli-filmmaker-in...

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#126

Post by jlgreco »

stcredzero wrote: post #49
mayanksinghal wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding of how mobs work might be wrong, but I think it cannot be that that mob used it as an excuse. It could be the case that there was a political/religious leader who used the video as an excuse as masses are not eager and willing to kill anyone.

> ...masses are not eager and willing to kill anyone. Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace m…

Additionally, the effects of the anonymity that mobs naturally provide even without the influence of leadership should not be ignored.

I love anonymity, I really do. I think the ability to have it is vital in any free society. Even so, I cannot deny that it has its downsides, and lowering social inhibitions is one of the more serious ones.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#127

Post by orangecat »

salimmadjd wrote: post #125
malandrew wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. That changes things. Do you have a citation of what the video's authors said?

"Speaking by phone from an undisclosed location....he intended his film to be a provocative political statement condemning the religion" http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/israeli-filmmaker-in...

If "condemning" a religion is "hate speech", then a substantial portion of the commentary on liberal, skeptic, and atheist sites would qualify.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#128

Post by effinjames »

moskie wrote: post #53
salimmadjd wrote: post #35

YouTube should have removed the video based on their own guidelines. This can be classified as a hate speech. http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines : We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orien…

Exactly. Now, my question is, why _doesn't_ this video violate that guideline? Isn't its entire purpose to denigrate Islam?

google is run by jews, nuff said.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#129

Post by roboneal »

rdl wrote: post #91
roboneal wrote: post #12

Does the Obama administration really want to enter the business of suppressing every "inconvenient" video that might offend the sensibilities of Middle Eastern mobs?

I'm very pro free speech, but I actually wouldn't mind if the video went down for a couple of days ("under review") while security at embassies was improved, and for time for the mobs to settle down a bit. I would absolutely be against pulling it, but delaying or putting it in context wouldn't hinder free speech and would potentially save lives. I'd also like to see Google run a clickthrough redirect preroll or ads o…

"I'm very pro free speech, but...."

Let's expand on your thought process a bit....how about we just suppress all video that criticizes Islamic sensibilities just on the anniversary of 9/11? Well and maybe through Ramadan too. Just temporarily of course. Until "they" settle down and we get our security stuff straightened out.

Yeah, that's what the framers of the Constitution thought when the wrote the FIRST Amendment.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#130

Post by effinjames »

cwisecarver wrote: post #83

Google is a business and it has every right to operate as it sees fit. Being a company that is headquartered in the US, I can't believe it would censor this video at all in any jurisdiction. It's not out of character for them considering the lengths it went to appease China but I don't think that was the right decision either. I would hope that if I was ever faced with a similar situation I would choose based on my c…

moral and respect towards other religions. jews is backing google, i've said enuf.
Post reply on HN