Ah ok I found the problem. The GPI thingy seems legit, I looked at their link above. What I didn't notice at first is that their webpage has nothing to do with religion (at least no statistics I could find). It is the maker of this video who has added these religious procentages. Something you notice when you read the studies are EXTREMELY ACCURATE and the huge GPI logo over everything. Looking at the youtube comment, you can find the sources to some extent, the ones I was bamboozled by earlier appear to come from here: Adherents. My problem is the first line in this link which clearly shows exactly how these procentages were rounded up to look extremely distorted. It's reasonable considering the video was made by some random anti-religion dude on youtube, but calling it a scientific study is laughable.

So I assume this means that the Army doesn't like songs about rounding up and executing military personnel?

He was obviously communicating threats, whether he was serious about them or not. "Free speech" has its limits.

Personally, I don't see anything that warrants imprisonment, but I don't know all of the details. I doubt his detention is "illegal" though.

>> ^notarobot:
Wow, $7000 in damages! Good thing this kid is now behind bars! Think of the good example it will set: Criminals Beware!
Now all those hard working Texas police have to do is round up the heads of all those major banks who effectively stole $2300 FROM EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN in that 2008 bailout handout. (No, I haven't forgotten.)
Oh, justice.

Good dude. Don't EVER fucking forget that...until the day we get paid back in full.


I think this punishment is excessive considering if he raped someone or he molested a child, he'd probably only get 5 years. I was in county jail for 2 days and it fucking sucked. 6 months of that would FUCKING SUCK. 1 year? WORST YEAR EVER! And I think that should be the maximum for that crime.

Wow, $7000 in damages! Good thing this kid is now behind bars! Think of the good example it will set: Criminals Beware!

Now all those hard working Texas police have to do is round up the heads of all those major banks who effectively stole $2300 FROM EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN in that 2008 bailout handout. (No, I haven't forgotten.)

Oh, justice.

So, before I go and read all the comments here...
My stance is a tip is something given for good service, "at my leisure!"

1). I only pay tip if the server actually takes the time give us/me good service.
2). The Tip amount depends on the level of service or amount they went out of their way.
3). Sometimes I just don't have the spare cash and can't pay a tip. they are lucky I even made it to the restaurant at all.
4). I usually tip 10-15 percent or just round-up to an even dollar amount. My choice!
5). My rule, anyone who mentions a tip, never mind demands one - GETS NOTHING!

Now, I'll go read the comments!

well, this rounded up enough votes...

*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/A-Dating-Video-Montage

Ladies and gentlemen, what we've seen speaks for itself. The city of new york has apparently been taken over -- 'conquered' if you will -- by a master race of giant sea gulls. It's difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume the city or merely enslave it. One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; the gulls will soon be here. And I for one welcome our new avian overlords. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their nests.

In my own particular idiom, I want to comment on this whole "killing innocent civilians" line of thinking that some of you are using. For example - this guy in the vid. He isn't qualifying what he defines as an 'innocent civilian'. I expect his persective is something along these lines... 1. Iraq war is unjust. 2. Threfore all American actions in it are UNjust. 3. Therefore, aggressive action against anyone in Iraq is 'killing innocent civilians'. We don't know jack-all about this guy's actual situation except what he's telling us, which is obviously filtered, slanted, and biased to the nth degree. I expect the members of his platoon would have a very different interpretation.

People use the phrase to make themselves sound angelic, and to label things they don't like as demonic. So when you trot out the phrase 'killing innocent civilians' it makes it sound like the soldiers are going around, rounding up random citizens, and blowing them away. In reality, that 'innocent civilian' could very well have been a foreign nationalist Taliban jackass with a rocket launcher. Or (more likely) he had to shoot at a Taliban guy and innocent civilians were in the vicinity caught in the crossfire. It is vitually a complete guarantee that no person at ANY level ever told this guy, "Hey - go out and start shooting innocent civilians". That's in his head.

So this guy needs a little more factual evidence before I give any credence to his wild accusations. Especially since he loses 100 points on the 'sanity scale' for being a truther. Plus his language is idiotically generic. I very much doubt there is a scrap of evidence of any kind that American soldiers were ever ordered to 'kill everyone in a crowd once there is a single shot'. It is patently ridiculous to claim that 'EVERY apartment building in Bagdhad' has been blown up by the military. This guy is clearly two cans short of a six-pack.

can somebody get the vikings rounded up here ,, commenter above needs a can for all that *spam

This is an absolutely unbearable violation of New Jerseyians' rights. Next they're going be rounding up the Jews!

Allso this woman presenter has the same long winded over dramatic way of talking as obeman where it takes 8 minutes or so to get to there piont.

what would be a far more effective way to communicate is to highlight the point first Ie coperate amerca is trying to controle things again , then go over the facts and introduce the story , then at the end round up with the message that coperate amerca is controling things again .

It anoys me how thay both over dramatisize things , maby in usa it do sent come across that way but to me first time I here one of there paces im like oh this must be serous but then because thay use the same over dramatic tone for everything I cannot help but feal they are putting it on to some existent. I find the best news casters / commentators talk about the facts and explain things in a non emotive factual fashion , emotive tones and voice should only be used in live interviews when the person thay are talking to is been a dick .

>> ^blankfist:
Here's my bill outline. A) round up all the sick old people. Kill them. B) kill the homeless. They're a drain on the productive. C) those who are without the entrepreneurial wherewithal to do for themselves (i.e., the poor) must be put into private labor camps where they can be used to build wealth for the rest of us.

No, no, your plan. I've already read the GOP plan.

>> ^blankfist:
Here's my bill outline. A) round up all the sick old people. Kill them. B) kill the homeless. They're a drain on the productive. C) those who are without the entrepreneurial wherewithal to do for themselves (i.e., the poor) must be put into private labor camps where they can be used to build wealth for the rest of us.
Wait, what were we talking about? Oh, health care. Right. [nervous laugh, backs out of the room]


The last guy who tried that had a little mustache, ended up with one testicle, and died in a bunker.

Just an F.Y.I.

Here's my bill outline. A) round up all the sick old people. Kill them. B) kill the homeless. They're a drain on the productive. C) those who are without the entrepreneurial wherewithal to do for themselves (i.e., the poor) must be put into private labor camps where they can be used to build wealth for the rest of us.

Wait, what were we talking about? Oh, health care. Right. [nervous laugh, backs out of the room]

And you're blind if you think Iraq is better off now than had we never invaded.


Then it appears you are completely ignorant of what the country was and still would be like under Saddam. Go educate yourself.


You say the Kurds are better off, but that's bullshit and you know it.


Under Saddam their villages were hit with nerve gas, the survivors were rounded up into concentration camps where the men were executed and the women were systematically raped. Saddam literally was working on breeding the Kurdish race out of existence. Today the Kurds have the most stable and productive region in all of Iraq and they are actively working to help their fellow Iraqi's to have the same benefits they do now. Yes, the Kurds are better off and nobody that has a clue about the region thinks otherwise.


Died as a result of our invasion, or killed due to it, it amounts to the same thing.

Then if you want to compare to Saddam era Iraq you have to include the millions being killed by him both directly and through starvation so he could save money to continue building himself more palaces and monuments.


their country is in such great shape thanks to our invasion and occupation.


You think it was in great shape under Saddam? You're insistence that Iraq went from paradise to nightmare solely because of the invasion simply reveals your blinding ignorance of the country's condition prior to the invasion.


All they have to do is give absurdly lucrative thirty year contracts to big oil companies and that will prove that democracy prevails.


Maybe you didn't hear. The contracts were so far from lucrative that only a single one was accepted, the rest have all been come back to the Iraqi government without any takers.