FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


America Rising - Awesome YouTube Production





deanhills
I thought the "America Rising" message in the YouTube production below was quite powerful, wonder who created and sponsored it, as wow, what a fantastic production it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDf1pAc8HDw

Is this something to do with the Congress elections?
jwellsy
Very POWERFUL!
Did you see the comment under it?
Quote:
Download to your pc and spread like fire. Youtube is taking this video down as fast as it goes up!
ocalhoun
jwellsy wrote:
Very POWERFUL!
Did you see the comment under it?
Quote:
Download to your pc and spread like fire. Youtube is taking this video down as fast as it goes up!

I wonder if that's true... That it only has 33 views seems to support that, but the proof will be in if that link works tomorrow or not.
jwellsy
I Googled "America Rising Video deleted", there is a lot of chatter out there about it. Here's one site that claims YT freezes the hit counters to minimize its popularity.
http://hillbuzz.org/2010/01/03/america-rising-video-an-open-letter-to-democrats/
I've also seen some examples of it where the comments section has been frozen.
pampoon
Huh. Doesn't seem to be deleted yet. Though there have only been two views since ocalhoun posted..

I think it's a nice video, and I agree with with message, but I can see why it would cause so much chaos with YouTube. Since the CEO himself donated a few grand back in '08 for Obama's campaign. The whole idea is stupid, since the website is supposed to be a free place to post anything. They let 16-year-olds post videos of themselves copying jackass, but they try to put out a flare-up against Caesar Obama? Doesn't make sense to me..
deanhills
jwellsy wrote:
Very POWERFUL!
Did you see the comment under it?
Quote:
Download to your pc and spread like fire. Youtube is taking this video down as fast as it goes up!
Right! I was googling it like crazy, as right up to now I still don't know who created the movie. Any opinions on it?

And yes, whilst searching like crazy, I found plenty of dead links or "officially" discontinued links exactly like the people in the discussions said there were. I then downloaded and saved the production, just in case it should have happened to this thread as well. Apart from the content, I just thought it was so well put together, and really effective, worth keeping. Must have been a professional organization or person who created it. I wonder why the author/s decided to be anonymous? I noted some people tried to put it on Fox, but for me it was just too good a production for Fox to have been able to create it?
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
just in case it should have happened to this thread as well.

Shocked
If even Frihost is part of this 'vast left wing conspiracy', then I give up...
jwellsy
The description on this one says it's from Buckrush.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS3yAo0CXzc

Ron Paul's website says it's from Buckrush.
http://dailypaul.com/node/120796

It appears that Buckrush's YT account has been closed.
link is from the Ron Paul site.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Buckrush

From the Google cached version of youtube.com/user/Buckrush he:
joined YT jan 3rd 2010
1 video with 373,817 views in 4 days
458 suscribers
124 comments
3192 ratings with 4/5 stars total
ocalhoun
jwellsy wrote:


From the Google cached version of youtube.com/user/Buckrush he:
joined YT jan 3rd 2010
1 video with 373,817 views in 4 days
458 suscribers
124 comments
3192 ratings with 4/5 stars total

I wonder if YouTube would tell anybody the reason they banned that account?
Nick2008
Very powerful video, and supposedly the author of the video, who posted the video first on youtube had his account closed. Just another truth of what's going on these days.
jwellsy
This video deserves TV air time.
Bikerman
Powerful? Deserves air time?
Yea Gods. They say small things amuse small minds, but this is off the scale.
Try watching it again but with your critical faculties engaged this time.
Look to see how much fact and how much supposition, unsupported assertion and logical fallacy is contained.
Start with the opening:
WE <did this>
WE <did that>
Who is this 'we'? Clearly this is meant to assert that the 'we' is the US electorate but the implication that the US electorate share the message of the video is the first logical fallacy.

Homework - name the fallacy above and list other fallacies in the video.
deanhills
@Chris. Point well taken, I was really taken by the production itself though as it made for an awesome presentation and real impact. I thought all of it worked really well and got the message through. Felt as though it had been created and produced by a professional organization and that of course has me completely curious and intrigued. Who created it?

PS: Tonight found another "political" production - She Began to Lie - illustrating a theme that Frihosters have mentioned before, I seem to recall you and Ophois discussed the fact that Governments deliberately lie about terrorism and other issues in order to make people and keep people scared so that the Government can get what it wants, like support for invading Iraq. The music is from the General's Daughter and the sound recording was based on a song from Louisiana. Nice beat and vibes! The movie is one of my favourites.
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:

PS: Tonight found another "political" production - She Began to Lie - illustrating a theme that Frihosters have mentioned before, I seem to recall you and Ophois discussed the fact that Governments deliberately lie about terrorism and other issues in order to make people and keep people scared so that the Government can get what it wants, like support for invading Iraq. The music is from the General's Daughter and the sound recording was based on a song from Louisiana. Nice beat and vibes! The movie is one of my favourites.

Are we going to post all of the thousands of political videos now?
And yes, politicians find it useful to make the populace scared of things. For many decades after WWII, they used the 'reds'. Bush used terrorism. Obama is using the economy. What the next one will use, who knows?

Bikerman wrote:
Powerful? Deserves air time?

Powerful, yes. Deserves air time, no.
You can't expect too much deep thought, fact checking, and logical correctness from something that is essentially propaganda though.
I was rather put off by the almost subliminal-message-like flashes of images, myself.

The basic message, shorn of details, was more or less accurate, though: The voters put their trust in the current administration, then it didn't turn out as well as advertised.
Bikerman
ocalhoun wrote:
You can't expect too much deep thought, fact checking, and logical correctness from something that is essentially propaganda though.
Why not? It's not hard to put a really strong (way stronger than this) partisan message together that tells no lies, commits no logical fallacies and is thoroughly fact-checked. My objection to it is not the partisan nature of the message, it's the shallow, unimaginative, lazy blandness of the thing...That's why I was surprised when people said it was powerful - I thought it was just daft. It's probably cultural as much as anything - it would provoke disbelief or hilarity here (I'm not quite sure which would dominate).
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
You can't expect too much deep thought, fact checking, and logical correctness from something that is essentially propaganda though.
I was rather put off by the almost subliminal-message-like flashes of images, myself.
Right, and I imagine that all voters usually are deep thinkers? If they were, would productions like these be around, including some of the very silly advertising videos during election campaigns, that nonetheless do have an effect on voters? Check up on the Internet with regard to the impact of the YouTube video viewing (in the first posting of this thread)and I would say it has had quite a successful impact of the non-deep thinking variety? Especially when one checks out the comments in the forums where this production has been posted? So possibly non-deep thinking is more prevalent than deep thinking, and the Video was aimed at the right kind of thinking for its campaign? When elections are happening the votes that matter are mostly influenced by non-deep thinking messages?
Bikerman
But the lack of subtlety almost guarantees a self-selecting sample of strong republicans will be the only ones to make it past about 20 seconds, so I'm predicting the positive comment comes from a fairly small and pretty vocal set of what I would probably call right-wing nuts here Smile

That's no harm to Obama and actually no good to the Republicans because they need to broaden their base, not narrow it.
deanhills
Bikerman wrote:
But the lack of subtlety almost guarantees a self-selecting sample of strong republicans will be the only ones to make it past about 20 seconds, so I'm predicting the positive comment comes from a fairly small and pretty vocal set of what I would probably call right-wing nuts here Smile
I can't agree, not after checking through some of the comments. In addition, there will at least be a percentage of critical and deep-thinking viewers like yourself and Ocalhoun, who will be viewing the whole of the production. Then there are your average Joes, like myself, who enjoyed the artistic part and the creativity and professional parts of the production itself. I'm still intrigued who was responsible for creating it, how much it cost and how and why it was launched. I was hoping the discussion could be focussed on that. I viewed the production a number of times, and worked my way far and wide on the Internet in order to find who was responsible for it, and could not find the source for it. My take is that it just does not fit the profile of your right-wing nut. Just a bit too sophisticated for that. I'm hoping other Frihosters may have some knowledge/views as to the source of the production.
Afaceinthematrix
I thought this was actually pretty crappy. I hate propaganda like this that actually has no basis behind it. They didn't really talk about much - just that they're taking over. They then added some dramatic music to make it seem like it has some credibility. I would have been much more impressed if they added some actual content rather than acting like a damn conspiracy theory.
ocalhoun
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
I would have been much more impressed if they added some actual content rather than acting like a damn conspiracy theory.

But 'actual content' doesn't hold the attention of the dumb masses. In just about any form of government, you can get what you want by influencing the 90% of people who are just plain 'stoopid'.

Are they going to demand fact checking when a significant percentage of them probably couldn't even locate America on a map?

Say something loud enough and often enough, and it becomes true in the eyes of the idiotic majority.
An ad that ignores that will only affect the intelligent 10%, and a politician who ignores that will not be elected.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:

But 'actual content' doesn't hold the attention of the dumb masses. In just about any form of government, you can get what you want by influencing the 90% of people who are just plain 'stoopid'.

Are they going to demand fact checking when a significant percentage of them probably couldn't even locate America on a map?

Say something loud enough and often enough, and it becomes true in the eyes of the idiotic majority.
An ad that ignores that will only affect the intelligent 10%, and a politician who ignores that will not be elected.
I'm totally with you on this one Ocalhoun. You could not have said it any better. If one read all the comments in forums where the Video was shown, that would underline it as well. I'm almost certain support and polling went along the same way where people did not really understand what the Government's healthcare reforms were about, yet thought they did and in one poll it was shown that they got their interpretation of Obama's proposal wrong and were actually thinking Obama was going to create a British style NHS in the United States. I'm almost certain the poll questions are to blame for that as they detracted from what the healthcare reforms were really about and what the US would be getting from it. There is no deep thinking involved at all. Also not by their representatives in Government either. Viz the bail-out bill at the beginning of last year that got passed without being given a sufficient opportunity for Congress to read it through completely. The 10% runs through the whole of the system.

Afaceinthematrix wrote:
I thought this was actually pretty crappy. I hate propaganda like this that actually has no basis behind it. They didn't really talk about much - just that they're taking over. They then added some dramatic music to make it seem like it has some credibility. I would have been much more impressed if they added some actual content rather than acting like a damn conspiracy theory.
I did not think the production was crappy. It was very well put together with a very effective message for Ocalhoun's 90% of non-thinking people. It appealed to the emotions. I was entertained by it. It is obvious too that someone really professional, possibly a professional media company put it together. I am still wondering who was responsible for creating and circulating it, as no one knows who it was.
Bikerman
My my, what an elitist little bunch we are.
90% stupid?
Isn't it interesting how we always put ourselves in the 10% ?
It is a bit like the survey results which show that 77% of men think their driving is much better than average. Somewhere out there are 23% of the car owning population who are left, but guess what? If the 77% are above average....then......hang on...nah....

Now is this possible,. I ask? Obviously not, I hear you say. How can 77% be better than average - makes no sense.

Well, this is statistics so why don't we fiddle it (oops, I mean use a different statistical tool).
technically there are three measures we could use and still get away with calling it 'average'.
This is allowed, in both a statistical sense and in the sense that your claims could be aired on natioonal media without major problems (at worst you might have to put a warning sign flashing across the screen in small type).
Actually switching the type of average is a common trick used to fool people, because most people have a gut feeling for average meaning in the middle.

the three measures are mean (the normal one we use), median (the middle value if you line them up in order) and mode (the most common value). Clearly mean is out. Clearly median is out (you cant have 77% scoring more than the score of the chap or chaps in the middle. Mode might work though. Can this work?

Lets standardise to 100 people and score them out of 100.
77 people have to score above the most common score then we can say they are 'above mode' and by twisting words also we can say above average.

Posit : modal value is 1% and 23 drivers achieve that score. The other 77 are above that score and so 'above mode'. We can't have more than 22 of them on any single score (otherwise the mode changes) so it is quite possible for all 77 to get a score of less than 6% and for the statement to be technically correct.

So the brag is worthless in terms of actually saying anything about the real facts and it could be that all 77% of them are idiots themselves, just slightly higher scoring idiots.

Moral of the story - the point I'm trying to make is that one shouldn't be too quick to either put yourself in a very small elite at the top because, guess what, most people play that game so a large number of people have themselves there and you not. You are someone else's idiot.

Have you ever noticed how these idiots don't tend to be the ones you meet in the pub, or at the shops. Most of them (to me anyway) seem pretty normal regular people. Maybe the 90% idiots are actually buried deep underground (a bit fanciful?) OK..maybe they all live in (substitute country, state or town you dislike to suit).

Seriously chaps - far far too ready to declare yourselves geniuses and other people morons...honestly.....you gotta catch that now before it gets seriously infected....
ocalhoun
Bikerman wrote:

Have you ever noticed how these idiots don't tend to be the ones you meet in the pub, or at the shops. Most of them (to me anyway) seem pretty normal regular people. Maybe the 90% idiots are actually buried deep underground (a bit fanciful?) OK..maybe they all live in (substitute country, state or town you dislike to suit).

Well, actually, my idea of that comes mainly from people I meet. They seem intelligent enough as long as they're doing something they've been taught how to do (kind of like trained monkeys), but try to engage them in deep thought, explain something unfamiliar, or ask easy questions they haven't memorized the answers to... and it becomes obvious.

Of course, most of the people I meet are Americans... and rural Americans at that. That might skew the sample a bit ^.^
When I used to work at a restaurant that often served European visitors, I didn't notice any improvement, but they were out of their element, and I myself might also appear much dimmer if I were traveling in a foreign country.
deanhills
Bikerman wrote:
My my, what an elitist little bunch we are.
90% stupid?
When Ocalhoun mentioned 90% I did not understand them to actually be "stoopid" even when he said that. The message I got was exactly the same as that in your comment below, i.e. people who do not "engage their critical faculties". And, by the way, I regard myself in that 90% category. I believe there are a small percentage, perhaps 10% of human beings who can look at anything dispassionately, emotions turned off, and all the wheels turning in their heads. Scientists are very much like that. Your posting below shows that as well. Then you find your average Joe in the 90% (me included) who get impressed by productions like the one I opened this thread with. I must have played it over a few times. I played it again a day ago, just to see whether any of the discussion would have changed how I looked at it. I still think it is good. Perhaps I'm more tuned into the visible stuff, the artistic parts, the very good quality of the soundtrack etc etc. The message was everything you said it was, but it impacted me much more as I was looking at it with different parts of me turned on? Bottomline, perhaps that message was directed at the 90% more than the 10% and part of a very well thought out media campaign. Along similar lines of the rule that if you write for the media, you need to write short sentences with short words so that everyone can understand and absorb the message?

Bikerman wrote:
Powerful? Deserves air time?
Yea Gods. They say small things amuse small minds, but this is off the scale.
Try watching it again but with your critical faculties engaged this time.
Look to see how much fact and how much supposition, unsupported assertion and logical fallacy is contained.
Start with the opening:
WE <did this>
WE <did that>
Who is this 'we'? Clearly this is meant to assert that the 'we' is the US electorate but the implication that the US electorate share the message of the video is the first logical fallacy.

Homework - name the fallacy above and list other fallacies in the video.
Afaceinthematrix
Bikerman wrote:
Homework - name the fallacy above and list other fallacies in the video.


Ahhh... Teachers never stop giving homework, do they? I don't really have the ambition to go through and name all of the logical fallacies, but I did spot them left and right. The most annoying one was the "we" statements.

That's why I gave the video such a bad rating in my previous post. This video didn't impress me for a second. Basically, the creator put a bunch of crappy statements with pictures in Windows Movie Maker and then added dramatic background music because to many, the dramatic music counts for more than any of the actual content in the video. I do not know if that's a logical fallacy in itself - but it's certainly annoying.

By the way, I take offense to me being considered an elitist. That reminds me of one time when my girlfriend called me arrogant, and I was forced to remind her that I'm not arrogant - I just know that I'm better than everyone else.*


*That was a joke. She, and the rest of my friends that were around, are used to my dry sense of humor.
deanhills
Afaceinthematrix wrote:
By the way, I take offense to me being considered an elitist. That reminds me of one time when my girlfriend called me arrogant, and I was forced to remind her that I'm not arrogant - I just know that I'm better than everyone else.**That was a joke. She, and the rest of my friends that were around, are used to my dry sense of humor.
I heard exactly the same from someone who was from England. Without the sense of humour however. I don't think I used the word "arrogant", but I did jokingly refer to "British superiority", and he seriously came up with "but we are superior". That was in South Africa. I guess these stereotype labels can easily trip us up though. I would imagine however that the media has us completely stereotyped and categorized. I'm still wondering who was responsible for the video production, but probably will never know. Interesting though that none of the online newspapers mentioned anything about the video. Bizarre!
jwellsy
Over a million views in a week in spite of being blocked from the YT home page recommended lists. The 'WE' in the video reflects a lot of people I know that do feel duped by the progressives. The disenfranchised are directly measurable by the declining poll numbers.
deanhills
jwellsy wrote:
Over a million views in a week in spite of being blocked from the YT home page recommended lists. The 'WE' in the video reflects a lot of people I know that do feel duped by the progressives. The disenfranchised are directly measurable by the declining poll numbers.
Any idea who would have been responsible for creating the video?
azoundria
Epic soundtrack!

Open 3 at once, and just listen. Smile
jwellsy
There's a new one called America Rising Part 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apQukuaXGs4&feature=PlayList&p=E9D6328554935D25&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=56

The part 2 looks like it was made by Michael Savage. I would be surprised if he did the original part 1 without taking credit.
deanhills
jwellsy wrote:
There's a new one called America Rising Part 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apQukuaXGs4&feature=PlayList&p=E9D6328554935D25&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=56

The part 2 looks like it was made by Michael Savage. I would be surprised if he did the original part 1 without taking credit.
I get the flavour of someone who has taken the original and created a 1-minute variation out of it. I can't imagine Savage would have created the original, there are too many things missing in the original such as Savage's focus on an all English country and anti-immigration. It is also much too subdued for the intensity and depth of Michael Savage's usual tantrums and shouting matches.
jwellsy
deanhills wrote:
I get the flavour of someone who has taken the original and created a 1-minute variation out of it. I can't imagine Savage would have created the original, there are too many things missing in the original such as Savage's focus on an all English country and anti-immigration. It is also much too subdued for the intensity and depth of Michael Savage's usual tantrums and shouting matches.


You left out anti-Muslim and a host of other views. Plus, Savage is too narcissistic not to take credit for it.
deanhills
jwellsy wrote:
deanhills wrote:
I get the flavour of someone who has taken the original and created a 1-minute variation out of it. I can't imagine Savage would have created the original, there are too many things missing in the original such as Savage's focus on an all English country and anti-immigration. It is also much too subdued for the intensity and depth of Michael Savage's usual tantrums and shouting matches.


You left out anti-Muslim and a host of other views. Plus, Savage is too narcissistic not to take credit for it.
Very unsavoury character, would hate to be in his company. Amazing that he is still alive as there must be a long list of people who would want to even out scores with him.
jwellsy
It looks like YT has deleted all of America Rising videos that have over 100,000 views. The highest view count I see right now is about 40,000. There were several over 100,000 and a couple that were 300,000 - 500,000 views. Now there is an army of them with under a dozen views.
deanhills
jwellsy wrote:
It looks like YT has deleted all of America Rising videos that have over 100,000 views. The highest view count I see right now is about 40,000. There were several over 100,000 and a couple that were 300,000 - 500,000 views. Now there is an army of them with under a dozen views.
The Video for this thread only has 300 plus views, so probably then has a long life ahead of it. I have also saved it to my hard disk at home. Was wondering about the Video when Scott Brown was winning his election in Massachusetts. Still curious who sponsored/created it.
jwellsy
Some of the higher count rates are back, momentarily anyway.

Diomedia7 320,000 views
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZs8k4pJcyk&feature=related

jmp5749 163,000 views
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_mEzQVWDIc

gizgreen 843,000 views
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=662R2awSwPQ

I captured some screen shots of these view counts too.
deanhills
@ jwellsy. I came across another YouTube Production about curtailment of "free speech" by the Federal Election Commission during election time. Do you think this could be the reason why we do not know who the author/sponsors are of the movie in the opening thread and why it has not been shown as a clip anywhere in the media? Would appear that there is no real "free speech" during election time? Silenced
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeGlzEavpTM
jwellsy
That video is a pretty good background for the Supreme Court decision made yesterday on that very issue.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0122-burns-campaign-finance--20100121,0,3503257.column

Obama hates this ruling.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jSN3xSumJclESKz3GPMpcIgvnUNg

The White house Chief of Staff Rahm Emanual said 3 days ago that the the First Amendment is highly over rated.
http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2010/01/18/rahm-emanuel-the-first-amendment-is-highly-overrated/
deanhills
jwellsy wrote:
Obama hates this ruling.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jSN3xSumJclESKz3GPMpcIgvnUNg
I can imagine he would hate this ruling, but not for the reason that he said he hated it. More because of this reason:
Quote:
But the court retained restrictions prohibiting corporations from doling out cash from company treasuries direct to candidates themselves, in the ruling which could change the landscape ahead of November's mid-term elections.
jwellsy
You may be interested in recording this show that's going to air today 1/22/10 at 5pm EST. It's called 'The Revolutionary Holocaust - Live Free or Die'. It's an hour long show on the history of the progressive agenda.
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/34922/

You can watch the show stream live at:
http://www.foxnewsunderground.com/

You can use a something like camstudio to record it from your desktop.
deanhills
Thanks for posting this jwellsy. I managed to retrieve it in six episodes in YouTube, that I viewed partially. This is Episode 1 out of the 6:


What did you think about it? I was disappointed, as for me it was a programme with a political message, not a history lesson, I also don't agree with the factual content either. For example I cannot agree that Hitler had a secret preference for Communism after National Socialism. He was a relentlessly anti-communist person. If the propaganda materials for Stalin and Hitler's Governments looked the same, it would be the equivalent of the same generation coming up with the same artistic and creative technology. Is Fox now going for an anti communism and anti socialism type messages, using Hitler, Stalin and Che Guevara as examples and reasons to be fearful of as "lessons" of history? It is a pity, as it could have been a really good programme. The political bias in it and transparent propoganda however ruined it for me.
Bikerman
This is the third time I've come across this meme in as many weeks.
Hitler was a communist - seems to be the latest right wing mantra.
It is difficult to put the Nazi party on any traditional right-left scale, but it should be borne in mind that Nazi party was:
nationalist, racist, totalitarian, anti-parliamentary democracy, opposition to economic and social liberalism. violently anti-communist.
Hold the press - Marx was anti-semitic....well, no, I don't think he was - or, maybe he was in some senses, it is complex. He was anti-religious - including Christianity, Judaism, Islam etc. The book that arouses more ire is his 'On the Jewish Question' which many commentators regard as deeply anti-semitic. Maybe it was, anti-semitism was pretty common - but it certainly isn't cut and dried - Marx spoke and wrote in strong support of jewish emancipation - the comparison with Hitler's Nazi party is superficial and doesn't really hold up.

I wonder why the right feel the need to do this now? Most people on the left, like me, don't seriously regard Hitler as in any way 'right wing' in a modern sense, but to say he was communist is, if anything, even wider of the mark.
ocalhoun
Bikerman wrote:

I wonder why the right feel the need to do this now? Most people on the left, like me, don't seriously regard Hitler as in any way 'right wing' in a modern sense, but to say he was communist is, if anything, even wider of the mark.

Why is it difficult to classify him as right or left?
He was an extreme populist.

(This looks like a job for the Nolan chart!)

(I like this particular chart... not only does it conveniently (for this discussion) place Hitler, but it also highlights the disparity between liberty and security.)

Germany's political problems began with socialism, but only became truly serious when that led to totalitarianism. (As full-blown socialism has a tendency to do.)
jwellsy
Here's the transcript.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583732,00.html?test=latestnews

It was not produced to placate the progressive left agenda.

Supposedly, it received over 4 million live viewers. That's huge.

I had never heard of the term 'HOLODOMOR' before.
Bikerman
Well, I think Ocal's chart basically says what I did - notice that Hitler is slightly to the right, but so far 'down' that left-right is pretty meaningless.
I suppose it must be OK with US viewers - I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work with a UK audience - it would be considered highly offensive by most and daft nonsense by most of the rest I think....
jeremywhittaker
See the breakdown of inaccuracies of this video here - http://www.jeremywhittaker.com/2010/09/09/open-letter-to-democrat-pols-or-america-rising-video-is-filled-with-inaccuracies/
Related topics
And so it begins???
Why is the USA in Iraq?
America and guns,
Anime for those who aren't quite old fogies but aren't n00bs
Why is Bush pressuring China to raise its currency?
What is the American Education Sytem like?
America
Rising carbon dioxide levels altering rangelands
What's the most awe-inspiring monument you've seen?
The 'iceman' trail. Intense 4x4 fun!
[EV] Awesome Video's - Part 1
US Foreign Policy - Middle East - Quo Vadis?
Stuff in London
Come See This Creation!
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.