Beetlejuice - Shake Shake Shake Senora has been added as a related post - related requested by cricket.

*dead again... sort of... (damn you private mode *shakes tiny fist*)

Shake ya ass, show me what you workin' with...

*quality

Annotation reads "While watching this video press 6,6,6,8,5,6,8,5,6,3,3,3,2,5,6,8,5,6"

Why didn't I just include that in the video description earlier? *gives head a shake*

And its all those questions that made me enjoy it. I'm pretty sure this is what the video creators were going for. A big wtf. Also the video is from ClickHole (http://www.clickhole.com/video/watch-comedian-perfectly-shut-down-heckler-3891). ClickHole is a satirical website from The Onion (wiki).

watch it here for a better resolution. https://vimeo.com/153944874 I was quite focussed on the audience (specificly a pattern in blinking) and was wondering if this was all edited. Looping the footage and adding in finger lengthening and camera shake(to hide small movements which would expose looping) after the fact. The comedian also doesn't budge after he starts pointing (even after the crowd starts to clap at the end). Also it's possible the audience was just in on it and was asked to not move, but id put money on lots of editing to make the video.

Some kids seem to get much more shaking than others. Like the priest was announcing how bad or good that particular child was.

I'll bet he is not the only one doing this.

Yuck.

What?!

This is a CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corp) program, I am Canadian in Canada and I get the message when trying to play the video:

"The uploader has not made this video available in your country"

/shakes head

Playing devil's advocate...
Even where it's legal, it's usually not legal to smoke in public. It's certainly not responsible to smoke in public where kids are nearby...or others that might be drug tested. You could be doing them great harm. (As a legal smoker, I think about these things). Also, if you're caught and go to jail, you won't be at work, that is direct harm to the company and why most have clauses in the employment contract that criminal activity at any time is grounds for termination.
Sleeping with a 'lady of the evening' is incredibly risky behavior...and illegal. Many people are harmed by STDs, not just the one that contracts them first. Many are easily spread by normal social behaviors, so having someone in the office with, say, a massive herpes outbreak who wipes their face then shakes hands/shares drinks/sneezes/etc is a real safety/health issue. Also, your company is harmed if you're caught and go to jail because you won't be at work.

To the religion example, there's little to be done if people lie and cheat to get around the agreed on rules....but I'll go out on a limb and say that it's wrong, and they'll all burn in hell forever for bearing false witness. ;-)

@SDGundamX:

If that's the case then it's sort of a game of chicken. If they don't play Star Wars in a lot of theatres, they'll lose a lot of box office sales.

I wonder how it'll shake out.

@ChaosEngine

Just like with religion, there is no point in trying to get a point across to someone who doesn't want to hear..

I think I am listening to you. You think you are listening to me.

I KNOW you aren't listening to me.

I'm not that interested anymore in attempting to get my point across to you, dear Chaos. You want perfection in the world, which is a zealot's point of view. I can live with the horrible imperfection of humanity -- because I have no other choice. I have all of human history as support for my point of view.

The suffering of the idealist. I know it well. I have it in certain areas of my life. I can't stand seeing office systems that can be improved but human need for fiefdom's block efforts to make things better. I suffer and suffer and rail and shake my fist as I know in my ideal world things can run more smoothly. I've been in the same office for 30 years and have made some progress, but I am finally realizing I have to stop and just let it be. As an idealist, it drives me crazy.

But it's all good.

This. Is. The. Human. Condition.

OK, you're clearly not reading anything I write.

My point is NOT that "they shouldn't be in a church you don't approve of".

My issue is with your assertion that some people NEED the church. It's not cherry picking, it's the central point.

And I never used the word "shouldn't".

Once again, I have no problem calling out someone for belonging to an awful organisation, anymore than I would for a clan member or boko haram.

And clearly, at least 1500 people decided they don't "need" the church any more.

Just because people like a thing, doesn't mean they "need" it and it doesn't mean it isn't bad for them.

As for it being none of my business, well, you posted the video, I'm entitled to comment. And when the religions stop forcing their bullshit on everyone else and actively harming others, then it'll stop being my business.

In the meantime, you're goddamn right I will shake my fist at "millions of people" and tell them they're wrong. So what? Millions of people believe in creationism. Millions of people still think women are second class citizens. Millions of people are dying because some fucking morons told them not to use a condom.

Millions of people are wrong.

@ChaosEngine

I'm not missing your point. Your point is that you think they shouldn't be in a church you don't approve of. I say it is none of your business.

You can cherry pick a word or two out of what I say. Doesn't change the fact that you say they "shouldn't" be in a church you don't approve of.

It is judgement coming from you about someone else's life choice. And that is what religious people do towards others.

Bottom line -- humans aren't 100% rational beings. Including yourself, in my opinion.

I look at the facts. And the facts are there are people who "need" religion and there are people who don't. How do I know these are the facts? Because the world is full of religious and non-religious people, and a multitude of churches, some of whom kill each other over tiny differences. As it has always been, so it shall be, until we stop being human.

And yet, as a purportedly rational person, you shake your fist at millions of people and tell them they are wrong.

Nope. They "need" these religions, or they wouldn't exist.

Period.

I feel exactly the same way as you, including the angry way you present it as though you've just been nearly killed by someone on a mobile phone.

These people clearly have a cartoon-like understanding of how a thousand lbs of metal and accelerant behave in a collision. As though you get out of the wreck with a few stars whizzing round your head and you shake your head and feel great again. Stuff like that can cost lives - and if you say that to the guilty party they'll laugh at you as though it's impossible, as though no one has ever negligently killed someone in a car crash. It can cause life-changing medical complications, take away people's livelihoods.

I'm also a defensive driver, and i've still been in many near misses. What i don't understand is why aren't all these reckless distracted drivers in more accidents? Do they have some sort of idiot's immunity?

A guy I went to school with was one of the survivors of the Cave Creek tragedy in the 90's (also in NZ) which had 14 deaths. It apparently was an issue of a poorly constructed platform, and the students shaking the platform.

Four people survived the fall of about 30m, I heard one of them was able to use their partner as a 'taboggan' pretty much, which cushioned their descent, allowing them to survive. The ultimate sacrifice. Pretty horrifying stuff, you wouldn't be the same person after.

I take issue with the part about birth rates and the 35-year population forecast.

Firstly, the premise that we (Germany) need to stabilise our population level stems primarily from the depopulation of parts of the country, the north-east most of all. However, the cause is not low birth rates. It's urbanisation, which is part and parcel of capitalism. Everything gravitates towards the centres while the rest becomes hinterland to be exploited for resources.

Secondly, population forecasts turn into horseshit real fast. If we were to look at a 35-year forecast created in 1980, we'd miss the reunification, the breakup of Yugoslavia by NATO, about a dozen wars in the Middle East and the destabilisation/desolation in large parts of Southern Europe. Nevermind the EU with all its freedom of movement agreements that were recently suspended.

If we had made a 35-year forecast in 1910... well, you get my point.

Thirdly, Europe is not a singular unity. Our ongoing assault on the economies of Southern Europe (aka austerity) lead to a mass exodus already, Same for the Baltic countries. Unfortunatly, those countries who lost a significant portion of their young and educated over the last years are also the countries who are least equipped to deal with mass immigration in an orderly fashion.

Which brings me to my fourth point: many folks make the argument that we cannot possibly pay for the integration of 800k refugees, much less for 400k a year. Well, we payed for reunification in the most inefficient, corruption-inducing and anti-social way imaginable by piling the cost exclusively on our version of social security. And you know what? It still fucking worked. If Germany can shoulder the cost of reunification, the EU can pay for 2-3 million refugees. End of story.

Finally, we need immigration. Not to maintain population levels, not to even out low birth rates. We need it to not become too homogenous, especially Germany. Too much consensus, too much group think, not enough confrontation and cultural diversity. Shake things up before people start believing their own bullshit again about their own superiority. We've seen it already vis-a-vis Greece.

@eric3579

Does the Polish Six Flags guy look familiar? It's the very same racist imbecile who described the plan to create a unified driver's license across Europe as "Ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Ticket" while doing the Nazi salute.

I'd rather have a thousand Syrian refugees than people like him.