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

41–50 of 213 posts

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

#41

Post by protomyth »

vacri wrote: post #14
spindritf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not religious appeasement, you don't see them appeasing Buddhists or even Christians.

As a non-American, I see religious appeasement of Christians all the time when I see US politics.

You haven't followed some of the news from the health care debate and pressure on family services from the government. The rule making would not be described as "appeasement".

People don't see how much groups like Catholic Family Services or ELCA help in a lot of places the government has ignored. They don't advertise how much they do.

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

#42

Post by housel »

vacri wrote: post #14
spindritf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not religious appeasement, you don't see them appeasing Buddhists or even Christians.

As a non-American, I see religious appeasement of Christians all the time when I see US politics.

Appeasement is different from addressing the concerns of constituents in a democracy.

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

#43

Post by protomyth »

rayiner wrote: post #37
spindritf wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not religious appeasement, you don't see them appeasing Buddhists or even Christians.

Appeasement is the policy we've adopted towards trying to keep Israel and the Islamic countries from fighting. Do you remember the shitstorm at the DNC when they forgot to put "and Jeruselem shall be the capital of Israel" on the platform? What is that if not appeasement?

I think that is a perfect example of what jat850 is saying. It was pandering not appeasement, which backfired quite a lot with the booing.

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

#44

Post by Steko »

roboneal wrote: post #38
Steko wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you mean "could" because you said "should" which makes the whole thing read like nonsense.

Not sure what confused you. It's a rhetorical question using essentially the White Houses "incitement" argument.

So just because you ate X for lunch today you should eat X for lunch everyday? See it makes sense with could but with should it's a nonsense claim.

The WH, just like you me, the GOP, ze Germans, Al Qaeda, whoever are all free to request that YT review any video. Is this the end of the world? Does making such a request ever attach a weak compulsion to review and request the same of any other video that might weakly overlap the criteria claimed in the first video? That's laughable. That's not how logic or anything in the world works.

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

#45

Post by [deleted] »

powertower wrote: post #33
nostromo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was just a request. A request they are free to make and Google is free to decline. One (edit: four) of Obama's civilian employees was killed by an angry mob, ostensibly because of this video, so I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. I'm also glad Google declined.

> 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…

[deleted]

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

#46

Post by roboneal »

mef wrote: post #31
xanados wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not appropriate for the Executive branch to make requests to remove content that is political for political reasons. This has a chilling effect[1] and can thus be rightly judged by the populace as being against our shared reckoning on free speech. 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect_%28law%29

The WP article specifies that there must be threat of legal sanction. There was no threat in this case, only a request.

They could have quietly clicked "Flag as inappropriate" as anyone else.

Instead, they made a public "request" whose intent was to put pressure on Google outside it's normal "review process".

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

#47

Post by protomyth »

nostromo wrote: post #17
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?

It was just a request. A request they are free to make and Google is free to decline. One (edit: four) of Obama's civilian employees was killed by an angry mob, ostensibly because of this video, so I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. I'm also glad Google declined.

"It was just a request"

And one that not only shouldn't have been made, but one that shouldn't even of crossed the mind of anyone in the White House. The oath is to protect the Constitution.

The video is not the cause of the deaths. The actions of people who made personal decisions to be murderous killed people. The world would be a better place if we started blaming people instead of some stimulus or tool.

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

#48

Post by kzrdude »

nostromo wrote: post #17
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?

It was just a request. A request they are free to make and Google is free to decline. One (edit: four) of Obama's civilian employees was killed by an angry mob, ostensibly because of this video, so I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. I'm also glad Google declined.

> Obama's civilian employees

A strange way to put it. One of USA's civilian employees was killed.

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

#49

Post by stcredzero »

mayanksinghal wrote: post #39
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…

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 makers for lack of patriotism and 
    exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

    ― Herman Goering
Many think that you can make the masses eager to kill.

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

#50

Post by [deleted] »

nostromo wrote: post #17
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?

It was just a request. A request they are free to make and Google is free to decline. One (edit: four) of Obama's civilian employees was killed by an angry mob, ostensibly because of this video, so I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. I'm also glad Google declined.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN