Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Whose Side Is YouTube On? (Youtube caving into CAIR. Removing videos)
newsbusters.org ^ | October 4, 2006 | Dan Riehl

Posted on 10/04/2006 12:02:47 PM PDT by lowbridge

Posted by Dan Riehl on October 4, 2006 - 12:19.

Evidently the Little Green Footballs blog placed a video on line to address the issue discussed in this post and subsequently the Council on American Islamist Relations (CAIR) took steps to have anti-radical Islamist videos pulled from YouTube. And according to this report via Michelle Malkin, who has had one of her videos banned, some have also had their YouTube accounts closed as a result.
I asked YouTube to inform me of the exact nature of the "inappropriateness" of the video. But no response. The banning of my innocuous video is not an isolated incident. Anti-jihad YouTube users have reported having their videos yanked and accounts suspended, including Crusader18.

Update 13:05 by Matthew Sheffield. By contrast, Islamic terrorist sympathizers and possibly the terrorists themselves have been using the free hosting service to post videos.

Another point: The email YouTube sent to Malkin states that her video was pulled because it was "inappropriate" and advised her to refer to the site's terms of use. I clicked over there and found the relevant portion:

C. In connection with User Submissions, you further agree that you will not: (i) submit material that is copyrighted, protected by trade secret or otherwise subject to third party proprietary rights, including privacy and publicity rights, unless you are the owner of such rights or have permission from their rightful owner to post the material and to grant YouTube all of the license rights granted herein; (ii) publish falsehoods or misrepresentations that could damage YouTube or any third party; (iii) submit material that is unlawful, obscene, defamatory, libelous, threatening, pornographic, harassing, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive, or encourages conduct that would be considered a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, violate any law, or is otherwise inappropriate; (iv) post advertisements or solicitations of business: (v) impersonate another person.

Considering that there's nothing in the TOU about religion and that Malkin's video wasn't unlawful, obscene, defamatory, libelous, threatening, pornographic, harassing or encouraged illegal conduct, I'm guessing YouTube yanked it after it received several complaints about the clip being "hateful." Does this mean that basically any video can get yanked from YouTube?

Somehow I doubt that if it had been an anti-Republican or anti-Democrat video that it would've been pulled. It seems more likely that this is another example of Islam's special standard.



TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: cair; islam; sharia; youtube

1 posted on 10/04/2006 12:02:50 PM PDT by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

If "hateful" is reason for yanking a video, then all of Olbermann's rants should be removed post-haste.


2 posted on 10/04/2006 12:11:39 PM PDT by bolobaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bolobaby

Time to flood You Tube with emails folks. The Islamics are , little by little , getting their way with everything in the US.


3 posted on 10/04/2006 12:15:36 PM PDT by sonic109
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Apparently, you're only allowed to post "two girls kissing"... Anything critical of Islam has to go...


4 posted on 10/04/2006 12:17:15 PM PDT by Antoninus (Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonic109
Time to flood You Tube with emails folks.

Nah, just start a flagging contest.

5 posted on 10/04/2006 12:43:37 PM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Do a search on "Black Preacher" sometime on youtube..


6 posted on 10/04/2006 12:46:31 PM PDT by Michael Barnes (May Satan grip the souls of those with American blood on their hands)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Well, hell! After finding out "the industry" was going to be after them for copyright violations I was kinda hoping they would stick around.

But now that I see they are favoring the ROP, they can KMA and go down the YouTubes.


7 posted on 10/04/2006 1:04:39 PM PDT by VeniVidiVici (Be a good Democrat and turn the lights out as you leave the ME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

What is the nature of this video? Youtube has all kinds of insane political screeds from people of all types, what was so terrible about this one?


8 posted on 10/04/2006 1:08:13 PM PDT by youthgonewild
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge
Does this mean that basically any video can get yanked from YouTube?

If so, let's even the score. I suggest that any pro-Islamic video placed on YouTube be mentioned on FR, so we may express our outrage via email to the management. Two can play at this game, and YouTube will be the worse for it.

9 posted on 10/04/2006 1:10:35 PM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge
Islam is the religion of 'those-who-must-not-be-offended'.

I'm sick of all this hypersensitivity and feigned outrage over every precieved slight.

10 posted on 10/04/2006 1:21:49 PM PDT by GaltMeister (“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813

Aw3esome idea. Let's get crackin' -- Start the listing, and my site will too. Start writing to these people and either they lighten up or we close them down.


11 posted on 10/04/2006 1:40:25 PM PDT by Rick.Donaldson (http://realitycheck.blogsome.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

More caving into the Islamofascists. CAIR can put their grievances where the sun don't shine.


12 posted on 10/04/2006 2:02:08 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Hugo Chavez is the Devil! The podium still smells of sulfur...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bolobaby

actually this is stupid on their part because it makes a suit against them stronger if they DO police content.


13 posted on 10/04/2006 2:02:42 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Brilliant: if they can police content for purely thought control reasons, they most certainly ought to be able to police copyright protected content.

Fan-freakin'-tastic observation.


14 posted on 10/04/2006 3:29:24 PM PDT by bolobaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

If Youtube is only for liberals, it's time to start a competitor. Lots of money to be made being the "FoxNews" of online video...


15 posted on 10/12/2006 10:46:04 AM PDT by GOPJ ("When are we going to realize we're at war with Iran, in Iraq? " - Freeper sandbar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson