Why is he censoring "fuck" on HBO show uploaded to internet?

Hi leebowman- As I just commented, you weren't being censored, nor will you ever be on VideoSift.

We have tons of automated measures in place to combat our never-ending influx of spam, and unfortunately you got caught in our net. (That's also why, as you noticed, your first comment's URL was automatically redacted.)

Please don't feel as if you aren't allowed to have a dissenting voice here. One of VideoSift's most treasured assets is its quality debates between intelligent people.

Welcome to VideoSift!

@leebowman - Apologies. We never censor anyone on VideoSift, except for spam, and that is the case here. The system mistakenly detected your high level of activity immediately after sign-up as being from a possible spammer, and it tried to redact any potential spam.

All your comments have been restored and you've been white-listed so the system will never again mistake you for a spammer. Obviously, we encourage new users to participate, but being inundated by spammers over the years has required our automated spam-detection thresholds to be rather strict. (This kind of false positive has happened maybe twice before in eight years.)

I'm with @robbersdog49. WTF? @dag, @lucky760 can you elaborate as to what's happening here?

I read those comments and while I didn't agree, they represented one of the better attempts from ID at something approaching science.

Who actually censored these posts?

I agree with Yogi. This is actually the US's fault. When Japan started trading with the Western powers (starting with the US), a lot of what was previously thought of as perfectly normal to talk about (like sex) was instead turned into taboo. That is why they have tentacle porn, because penises were censored due to Western Christian influences, so they had to use something to depict penetration.

Australia for arguments sake, but your assumption that my post was about one upping the US is incorrect.

I find the situation sad when so many people are so poorly treated by a system and yet still perpetuate that system. You mention not being able to play a game due to a lack of freedom, but how is that an issue compared to not getting medical or dental care for a child? Access to life saving drugs without mortgaging not only your own future, but the future of your kids. Oh woo-fucking-hoo, you can buy the handful of games our censors knocked on the head, but you can't feed your homeless or pay your retired police/firefighters pensions. You can't guarantee a living wage for huge swathes of the population so a few people can have even larger money vaults. Your security apparatus crawls through your vaunted rights at will, and convinces the populace that the guy shining a light on just how undermined US freedom really is, is a traitor...

If all I was concerned about is feeling superior, I could stop right there, mission accomplished.

But it's not. It's fucking sick that so many people eek out shitty existences for the protection and perpetuation of a tiny portion of the population. Feudalism at least was honest, you were born in the dirt and you died in the dirt.

American's are, from my experience, just people like everyone else. For the most part, wonderful people. I've met so many great people on my travels to the US. They deserve better, they fought and bled and worked for better. So how is it most never even get close?

It's not about who's better, or more fortunate, or who's national dick is collectively longer. It's about giving good people a fair chance rather than the so called 'representatives' conspiring to stack the game against them.

@bareboards2 I am utterly stupefied by your ability to dismiss my argument whilst at the same time not addressing any single part of it. Without so much as questioning my reasoning, you've labelled me, stuck me in a box and judged me, calling on others to hear of your sadness at.....what? Detailed, thoughtful and politely delivered criticism?

The worst thing here is that if i were to suggest that your reply, or the content of this video, was "femscaping" or something similarly derogatory then you would have lynched me up on the nearest tree for sexism - the thing you want to stop. Yet when you dismiss a comment i make as something equally sexist and based entirely on my gender (because you sure as shit never once mentioned any part of my argument), that's absolutely fine.

Is it really beneficial to your cause to attempt to censor people who question the content of the message; label them, dismiss them and profess your sadness for the human tragedy of ignorance like a scientologist? A good conclusion with good evidence would not need your protection from my scrutiny.

If you think i'm on some sort of misogynist bandwagon, then you're dead wrong about me. I've criticised a couple of videos recently because i considered them to be supplying dodgy data or trickery. Whenever a video wants to make evidence based claims, i reserve the right to question their methodology and that is fundamental to any kind of evidence. The topic is entirely coincidental.

If you have a problem with my argument then by all means i welcome your criticism, but criticise the argument rather than calling me sexist names. What you did to me is no different to if i had simply commented "militant-feminist bullshit" without addressing any of the video, at which point you would have highlighted your plight and appealed to sympathy. But no, i offered a thorough explanation of my feelings, and i'm still the horrible mansplainer. No - i'm analytical, and i make no apologies for the damage that does to your cause.

Of all the people who offered detailed criticism of this video, one of them sided with you and the other didn't. Guess which one you engaged in discussion? I even offered you examples and reasoning, but no, i get just sexism.

Congratulations! Your video, NBC Censors Snowden's Critical 9/11 Comments from Interview, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 9 Badge!

Your video, NBC Censors Snowden's Critical 9/11 Comments from Interview, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I agree that what Snowden is saying here is important -- and I personally agree with the concept fully. BUT, that being said, I don't necessarily think that NBC is guilty of "censoring" him here as a result of some hidden nefarious agenda.

The whole interview posted here is 43 minutes long. I'd guess that it is has been trimmed of some comments from Greenwald and probably the other journalist that it was mentioned made the trip to Russia with NBC. Tack commercials on top of that and you have what I'd assume is a 1 hour show on TV.

I'm sure that NBC recorded *way* more interview footage than could be crammed into a single hour, and I'd wager that his comments here didn't make the cut not because of censorship or in an effort to alter the thrust of his message, but rather simply in an effort to fill the time allotment of the show with the most interesting and relevant content possible (as judged by NBC).

So, while I'd jump at a chance to legitimately criticize the media in general and NBC specifically here, I don't think that accusing them of censorship is particularly fair. On the other hand, I might disagree with NBC's choice to cut this particular content because I do find it very interesting and relevant personally... And that in turn makes me wonder what *other* interesting stuff didn't make the 1 hour cut!

NBC Censors Snowden's Critical 9/11 Comments from Interview has been added as a related post - related requested by Trancecoach.

Intentionally or not, I think Snowden nails it here as far as why these mass surveillance programs exist:

"or are we trying to throw money at a magic solution..."

The key here being "throw money," not the search for a magic solution. Who stands on the receiving end of the money "thrown?" Identify them and you identify the source and purpose of these programs.

Very funny. Its always "scientists" who bring that up and who first brought that up. Do you even read those reports? Scientists and their studies (more like very flawed simulations) are always quoted. First they said (Mojib Latif and others) that there wont be any hard winters anymore due to AGW. After it became evident that those utterings were utter bullshit, they said that hard winters will be very often due to AGW (PIK and others) and after we got a normal winter again, they said that this is typical for AGW too (PIK and others again).
If it wasnt for them, this hype wouldnt be nearly where it is.

They just say what is convenient and what fits into their agenda. Its all about money and personal security. Nothing more nothing less, they just think its something different due to their indoctrination. AGW has become a huge self-sustaining (thanks to those corrupt "scientists") economic booster where insurances, scientists, politicians and many many companies (even oil companies - yes, check the global warming lobby) and their lobbies are benefiting from. Its simply not possible to talk about it objectively anymore. And if you try, people like you will come up and defend it like a religion, and prove this fact very quickly. Just look at "bio" fuels. Its a HUGE part of economy already, but it simply isnt eco-friendly at all. Instead people are starving because mono cultures are used instead of different plants for food, so much water is used for producing bio fuels that people have to suffer. The rain forest and others are cleared to be able to put more mono cultures up. Companies like Monsanto are becoming more and more powerful because of it and studies that bio fuels are bad for lots of engines are being censored or simply not funded since even car manufacturers profit from it when engines blow up sooner.

More extreme weather? Bullshit aswell. Thats simply not true, as quite a few (ignored by the "consensus") studies have shown. Its just the reports about even the tiniest things that have bloated up in the globalized and interconnected world of today and untold truths that are fooling you and of course the agendas that need to be kept upright with even the tiniest happenings that fit into it. Next time when you see a report, ask yourself if something like that would have been mentioned globally 20 or 30 years ago.

Take the flood in Pakistan for example. Oh, it was soooo bad and soooo AGW caused, oh the horror, we will all see the same thing and worse in our own countries if we continue to sin in the face of our go-- err scientists!
No, it wasnt. It was as normal as all the very common floods there before. It just wasnt mentioned that since the 70s Pakistans population has tripled and the vast majority of those people have settled down on the fertile lands around the (straightened!!!) rivers.

If that wasnt enough, people like you even completely ignore the fact, even if all their claims were true, that warm periods were ALWAYS much much better for this planet and its inhabitants than cold ones and colder ones than we have right now (we live in an ice age after all) were always bad, if not catastrophic.

And because of that fact I wont be that stupid and waste my time here with more replies, since you guys have made it very obvious already where you are coming from.

Just one little thing to think about for you guys (yeah I still have hope, though its prolly not very realistic), since the rest of my posts will get marginalized by your ignorance anyway:
Just because most scientists are pro-AGW doesnt prove crap. It was always only very few if not only a single scientist who tried to prove many other scientists wrong in their assumptions and most scientists were wrong and very arrogant, especially if they formed something like a society. But like before, there are thankfully still a few of them left who treat science as science and not as their religion or extension of their ego.

The censored one, for the squeamish.

Thanks - agreed - much better! Replaced the video and added a nsfw tag. I'll just put the censored one as a backup.