According to this video, very skillfully put together on Youtube....

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Fws4RxWtnOg&feature=related

President Bush admits to

-An Addiction to weapons of mass destruction
-An Intention to kill multitudes of US citizens.
-Resolve to bring sudden Terror
-being a tyrant.

etc..

This is not a difficult thing for anyone with an audio/Video mixing software package to achieve... and clearly it is a hotch potch of soundbites taken from many sources and spliced together.

I can think of a few OLO contributors who would be inclined to believe this video at face value because it fits like a glove to their pre-existing prejudices.

The problem is... this can only occur because of freedom.... but where could such things lead?

Along the same lines, is this one.

Reported in Snopes, Augustin Cebada allegedly says:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hw1CzOhnis

Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets;(Aztlan political/militant movement)

"Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You are old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people. It is your duty to die . . . Through love of having children, we are going to take over."

REALITY.. if one listens to the vid closely, you can see it was not Cebada who said part of that..it was (apparently) a woman among the Mexicans.....

If the video is genuine, which is a best questionable at this point, as video is much more difficult to splice believably than audio, and this 'video' uses still images like the Bush one....but if true, then it would indeed be great cause for alarm and concern.

Then again.. it remains unclear.

Here is an image of population breakdown of the South Western USA..
http://web.stratfor.com/images/northamerica/map/4_4_latino_us_978.jpg

Demographically, it has a rather strong message. But if pushed beyond a certain limit.. the situation could provoke a very ugly reaction.

Historical wounds to ethnic nationalistic pride, through battles which are vividly remembered, will, if exploited, stir trouble of an enourmous scale.

The interesting factor in most of this is the close invovlement and connection of the Marxist/Communist/Socialist element....

This is not unexpected, as they seek to raise their profile on the back of any issue of grievance.. just as in Australia with the RMIT protest.(Mosque)
http://www.sa.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1694&Itemid=1

Uh-oh, another keyboard soaked in coffee.

Boaz, you are truly astounding sometimes.

>>I can think of a few OLO contributors who would be inclined to believe this video at face value because it fits like a glove to their pre-existing prejudices.<<

On occasions too numerous to mention, you have used YouTube videos to buttress a tottering argument.

Not just on the odd occasion, but so often that it has been specifically brought to your attention.

Now you tell us that they might not be all they pretend to be.

Well hallebleedin'luia.

Would you now like to apologize to us all for your many previous sins of YouTube-related commission, or shall we simply take it for granted?

I just had a bit of splutter myself.

Duh Boazy - why do you think that most of us have always regarded your YouTube evidence as dubious at best? Not that I'm surprised that you get sucked in, given your predilection for posting "deceptive" information, even after its incorrectness has been pointed out to you - e.g. the homophobic pastor you are fixated by.

Clearly it's only a problem for you if the deception doesn't fit your screwy ideas.

Pericles & CJ

Boazycarp clearly uses the same powers of deduction with Youtube as he does religious texts.

I'll know that the world is indeed in crisis, when Boazy actually posts something that is honest, straight forward, sincere and no hidden agendas.

I guess that would be the OLO equivalent of 'pigs flying'.

Polycarp “The problem is... this can only occur because of freedom.... but where could such things lead?”

We have rules for libel and slander.

Problem, it is almost impossible for a person in one country to sue for libel in another country (which may not even have similar laws).

This is the downside of a ‘freedom’ without responsibility of accountability.

It is one of those indicators of when something crosses the line from libertarianism to become anarchy.

Since many people take to themselves the anarchistic right to illegally and immorally defame others with impunity, the responsibility needs to be placed back on the operators of youtube (or who ever administers the particular service) by making them jointly responsible for the slanders or libels their service promotes, regardless that they are not the originators, unless they remove it with urgency.

In this way the freedom of speech we all take as sacrosanct is unimpaired but the responsibility and accountability for the libel is not left as a blemish on that freedom of speech.

You tube stuff aside (everyone knows it's just home made doctored video with no authenticity) I have often wondered with the technology available what mischeif could be done by government controlled media.

You can make some pretty realistic things with video these days, and a populace with but one source of information could be hoodwinked by all sorts of propaganda.

Indeed Col
I hate to think how much time it would involve to vet each video before it's been out there for a while.

I think they rely on flagging for the trigger.

But the Bush vid illustrates very clearly how low and how far some people will go to deliberately misprepresent a world leader. It would have taken quite a bit of time for them to splice Bush's soundbites together.

At the same time, I think good use can be made of real situations, such as Jacuqi Smith (UK Home Sec) in her 'wilder' moments wearing a hijab.

Col.. regarding the little visit we did to a certain educational institution the other day... I gave them a ring to find out who owns the property.. and also searched .. found out that it was established by an Act of Parliament, and the land is 'Crown Land'.. thus, they come very much under the constitution about promoting or hindering religion.
It seems to me that the protest is seeking something which is contitutionally invalid.. which is why the insitution backed down on its promise.

In terms of this topic.. 'deception'.. the Institution is being portrayed as the 'bad guy' for renegging, but the articles should be pointing out how they simply decided to act consitutionally.

CJ and PERICLES....

there is a difference.. a major and important one.. between moving images of real people speaking real words...about particular subjects in verifiable contexts.. and a simple well chosen image of a man in an angry moment and a whole lot of soundbites spliced together.

It seems you mob throw the baby out with the bathwater.

You all know that world leaders now use Youtube to communicate policy and views.. and that their video's are not in the first instance 'manipulated'.. of course..once activists get hold of them, different points are made.. some legitimate others not so.

If you can't see that then poor you.

You've never told me things I don't know about the tube.. but I have the sense to distinguish between the blatant falsehood and the genuine article.
There are so many 'types' of vids there.. here is a good one where real footage is used to try to smear and blacken McCain.. guilt by association
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFHKLUAWAOo

Now.. who is going to say Falwell's footage was 'made up' ? No one is.. the point is how it's used.
That 'Bush speech' is far more insideous than this kind of thing.

The problem with some of you is, you seem to regard even 'real' footage as sus.. specially if it is used to make a point 'contra' your own views.

Hi Col.. the laws about libel and slander are easily enforcable in the country where they are made.. but I doubt that the US administration would be sending a CIA hit squad after the moron who made that video :)

But of course.. if it were an Author writing 'Jewell of Medina' hmm it might be a different story from Al Qaeda .....Random house deciding 'not' to publish it at the last minute due to fear of reprisal from 'some of a small group' of the community concerned. And stone the crows..that is for what is purported to be a POSITIVE examination of the life of the girl. Though, one wonders how you can fill 400 pages with 'fiction' when it's based only on a couple of pages max of quotes from the person concerned.

This kind of intimidation is the same as that of the Gangsters and Organized Criminal gangs.. so.. it proves one point.. if you want to assert your opinion and view over millions of others.. just call in the 'violence/deaththreat' trump card...

I suggest that when any group of people in society are identified so closely to threats and violence.. even when it is a smallish group of them..... we have a serious problem which must be addressed.

It is estimated by Mohammad Rafiq, a UK government advisor that up to 20% of the Islamic community is at least 'empathetic' to the 'blow up dolls' mob.. this translates in over 100,000 people. His research shows that the time to go from Empathizing to 'action' can be as short as 1.5 weeks!... when the appropriate 'stimuli' such as this Bush Speech and a few gory images of dismembered Muslim children are provided.

Polycarp: "But the Bush vid illustrates very clearly how low and how far some people will go to deliberately misprepresent a world leader. It would have taken quite a bit of time for them to splice Bush's soundbites together."

Actually, there are many, many people out there in internet land with the required skills, and it's just as likely they did it for a joke.
Frankly, you take this too seriously. Misrepresentation occurs at all levels, for many reasons. Sometimes it's for the reasons you describe, sometimes it is just satire, other times it's for political gain.

You state: "The problem with some of you is, you seem to regard even 'real' footage as sus.. specially if it is used to make a point 'contra' your own views."

Actually, it's when footage is used to make a point while glossing over the deceitful bits. That's called propaganda.

Insidious: "Producing serious harm in a stealthy, often gradual, manner; Intending to entrap; Treacherous."

Remember that keyword - stealthy.

You say you think the Bush speech is far more insidious - on that, I disagree entirely.

Cont'd.

It's the work of one crank among the multitude, though this wouldn't be the first time you've taken the work of one crank and inflated it to a conspiratorial level. I tend to think that's one example of something 'insidious.'

Most people with any involvement in politics can see videos such as this as what they are. It's crap. The moment anyone tries to use such a video and is found out, their credibility is shot to pieces.
On the other hand, taking videos out of context without alteration, and using them to back up a prejudice is far more subtle, and much more difficult to detect. It's also more likely to fool people, so for those reasons, it's far more insidious.

Your point in this thread could be summarised as stating it's all about the source material, right? How reliable it is and whether it's fabricated?

So consider this: "http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1596"

Logan the Sky Angel Cowboy.

This was put forth as an example of the beauty of religion, without considering the likelihood that it was as acting piece, most likely coached. Even if it wasn't (which I find highly unlikely), this boy is a young child, so if it was true, then it raises the question of how credible this boy is and whether or not he has the capability to critically evaluate his beliefs - or more simply, is he being manipulated into zealotry.

It's far more subtle. Stealthy, even.

There's many ways to splice together things to make a point, but it doesn't necessarily require audio equipment.

If the topic is the reliability of source information and unknown motivations, it raises the question as to the reliability of individuals with multiple monikers which remain unexplained.

On a lighter note, I think that this is a much better use of YouTube than for propaganda:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNF_P281Uu4

Wonderful stuff.

Ooooh loved that video, CJ.

Also well the hell can I find Matt? - a man who loves travel AND dances.

Soul mate, I'm sure.

I wonder what our intrepid scholars of OLO will make of this one.

DISCLOSURE.. "It comes from the BNP"..thus...no matter what is said, even by those who are 'obviously coached' and 'most likely an acting job'.... it has no credibility whatsoever.... right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uB4BpyF4gY&feature=related

I'll reference this also on the Powell thread.

I wonder how Griffin will go in the election....?

Usual Suspect: "I have often wondered with the technology available what mischeif could be done by government controlled media."

No need to wonder US. Russia has already done it; most here have already seen it and made up their minds. So what did you think of their claim on the Artic Sea bed?

Speaking of propaganda.. Boazy, you really are beyond redemption.

<< I wonder how Griffin will go in the election....? >>

He might just about get his deposit back, if he can attract enough hateful idiots like you in his electorate. I hope he does his dough, and that his daughter takes up with a Muslim boyfriend.

CJ.. all that anthropology has got to you old son :) now you have resorted to...*pointing bones and curses*

Don't worry.. Nick will suffer no ill effect.. he being of good Celtic stock I trust 0_^

Intriguing addition to your list of friends, Boaz.

Nick Griffin, eh? Fascinating choice.

Do you perchance share his views on the Holocaust?

Do tell.

What, may I ask, do you imagine that he stands for? Politically speaking, that is.

And - given his history - how long do you believe that he will continue to hold these views?

Considering that you usually "pick 'n stick" with men of firm views and committed stances, this is a very strange choice of hero indeed!

I'd dearly love to hear your rationale on this one... but I won't hold my breath.

I know that really it was just a throwaway line on a YouTube video that caught your eye.

Incidentally, where do you find all this stuff? you must trawl for them for hours...