Tags for this video have been changed from 'russia, truck, lada, extortion' to 'russia, truck, lada, extortion, attempted, highway robbery' - edited by calvados

In Soviet Russia, extortion victim beats you.

Ya, I would have thought "extortion".

Brutus
Wimpy
Olive
Chris
Popeye

Brutus- Because he's extorting sex from Olive, effectively raping her.
Wimpy- Because he knows what Brutus has planned, and can stop it but does nothing.
Olive- She should have trust that Popeye (a sailor man) can get a boat to come to her. She betrays him by not trusting him.
Chris- Jumps to violence rather than trying to solve the problem peacefully.
Popeye- He should have gone to see Olive before she sold herself, or broken off the relationship before it got to that point.

Jesus Christ! I hired American movers once. First, they extorted me for extra insurance by the "We're not responsible for shit we break" line, then half my stuff went missing and finally, after they were paid, they kicked me in the balls and ran off laughing. I'll betcha if I'd hired those guys, they probably only woulda chortled!

His definition of "Corrupt" is kind of skewed, but in many ways I could see this. I don't think it's a legitimate criticism of the US being corrupt because you have to see it through a very thing perspective, but when you look at the whole, the US *IS* getting away with the most bullshit en-mass compared to every other country in the world. Corruption does not equate to chaos. There are more obviously fucked countries in the world in terms of murder, extortion and fascist control, but through that very thin perspective you can't disagree that any other country controls as much of the entire planet with as large a proportion of those in power benefiting illegitimately.
Another way of looking at it is: there are the same number of corrupt assholes in the US as any other country, but the level of control and influence over the rest of the world those in the US have simply makes them more at fault than others.
Whatever. NONE OF THIS MATTERS!

Dude how hard is it to follow this guy and hit him in the back of the legs with a baseball bat. Yeah it's wrong to commit violence on people, it is absolutely wrong. That is exactly what happens when cops don't do their job and stop this bastard from extorting people. I can't believe you put up with this for 2 and a half years without making threats or following through with them on your own. Heck even a warning brick through the window would force the cops to at least come around there and have more of a presence, thus stopping this practice.

Look we're not as evolved as we would like to believe, the level of morality is no greater than it was when Genghis Khan was about. Step the fuck up, if you don't want to hurt anyone fine but you should do something if the police don't step up.

>> ^bobknight33:

Muslim are the most dangerous. They subject their women as property. Dogs get more respect. They are fighting and killing in more countries around the world. All to force their religion onto free people. Convert, Extort and murder is their way of life.
Obama likes this Muslim upheaval. It helps upset the world balance of American influence around the world. Only 3 1/2 years ago the American presence was well established in the region. In another 4 years this Muslim muck will solidify across the region.
Obama is against America as a super power and will destroy the country via destructive policies, foreign and domestic. He snubs Israel and backs the Palestine. He has done nothing about Iran or the "new " Egypt who both publicly stated that it is their desire to wipe Israel off the map. Argentina over England on the Falkland islands issue.

Amazing how something we so strongly agree on can lead us to conclusions we so strongly disagree on.

Muslim are the most dangerous. They subject their women as property. Dogs get more respect. They are fighting and killing in more countries around the world. All to force their religion onto free people. Convert, Extort and murder is their way of life.

Obama likes this Muslim upheaval. It helps upset the world balance of American influence around the world. Only 3 1/2 years ago the American presence was well established in the region. In another 4 years this Muslim muck will solidify across the region.

Obama is against America as a super power and will destroy the country via destructive policies, foreign and domestic. He snubs Israel and backs the Palestine. He has done nothing about Iran or the "new " Egypt who both publicly stated that it is their desire to wipe Israel off the map. Argentina over England on the Falkland islands issue.

It's like a bad mob extortion scene: "gee, this looks expensive, whoops!" <crash> "Oh dear, what have I done?"

>> ^messenger:

I have a feeling we're going to disagree on this one, but you might be interested in hearing my take.
I agree that giving in and letting it go would have been a bad choice on his part. However, I don't think the father communicated anything useful to the daughter. I don't think she was capable of receiving the intended message in her condition. An adult would have understood it. Maybe after a nap she would have understood it, but that girl there was beyond learning at that point. This is not a teaching moment.
To me, this scene shows disrespect for the kid's feelings. For her own reasons, not the least of which is being overly-tired, she very strongly doesn't want to put the bowl in the sink. For all the effort she's making to avoid moving the bowl, the parent is making as much effort to make her move the bowl. Both sides are working harder now than it would take to move the bowl. It has ceased to be about the bowl, or about chores, and now it's a battle of wills. The kid is learning that daddy is more powerful than her and his seemingly random orders are more important than how she feels. She's 3 years old and exhausted, so that's all she's internalizing. She isn't learning anything about responsibility, or cleanliness, or aesthetics or feelings. She's not learning why she should put the bowl away instead of her dad. Her dad's avoiding the task just as much as she is. The only difference is he's smarter and more powerful.
This is a common stance of parents, but not a necessary one. The first part of my answer is I would not tell my kids to do any chores, but instead ask them to do things, just like I would ask an adult, giving them as much autonomy as possible. If they didn't do them, I would explain my feelings about why I wanted them done, explain how it made me feel to see those things not done and how it felt to do those things myself without their help. I would hear their side about it and compare it with my own. If they still refused, I would establish consequences that don't require their cooperation (like I choose not to serve any dessert, rather than grounding). If you're doubtful it could work, this is what my sister did with her two. The result? By age six they were arguing with the parents over who got to do the dishes. Contributing felt like a reward for them because they understood the consequences of their choice either way.
The second part of my answer is about this exact situation. Let's say I forgot about my position on not telling my kids to do things, and accidentally got into a stupid win-lose (or even lose-lose) battle of wills with my 3-year-old daughter. Once I realized I was in a situation I had wanted to avoid and it was my fault (you can't fault the 3-year-old), I would change the dialogue to resolve it in such a way that both of us felt good -- or as good as we could, considering. First, I would never pretend that I believed the lie that it's too heavy. This just encourages the behaviour. I would start off by acknowledging her feelings (upset, tired, angry, frustrated, ...) and eliciting confirmation. I would aim for some sort of compromise, like she goes for her nap now, and we agree to talk about the bowl after. The goal would be her understanding the point, not getting her to move the bowl.
When she left, I would put the bowl away, and after her nap, I'd explain like I said in the first part about my feelings around chipping in. If she's too young to understand the connection between my feelings and her doing chores, then she's too young to be expected to do meaningful chores.


The method described that your sister uses is guilt tripping and extortion. Using emotional guilt as a lever and the threat of no dessert (carrot and stick) is hardly more enlightened then flat out requiring that the job be done. And every parent uses it at some point.

And as for 'you can't fault a 3 year old', are you fucking stoned? Talk about arrogance, 'oh, their precious little intellects aren't developed enough to understand what's going on'. Bullshit. 2-3 year olds learn things very very fast (I call it 'velociraptoring'), and they're a lot brighter than you give them credit for. Isn't that the point of your whole parenting by negotiation schtick?

Constitutional or not? Forget the constitution for a moment.
Ask yourself if the Mafiosi during prohibition (or now for that matter) who exacted payments from business owners in neighborhoods in Chicago under promise of either protection or retribution for non-compliance were protected under any laws save those of corruption, graft, extortion, and thuggery.

No difference here simply an emperor in new clothes. Rather than allowing such insanity to continue why don't we all pull our collective heads from our asses and wake up to the crime being perpetrated in just about every piece of legislation set forth from now on?

Let's suggest a solution to the health problem in the United States: Train the next two generations of TV-Addicted robots to stop putting poison in their bodies and place serious limitations on adverts for crap food. Dismember the Agri-lobby crowd inside the beltway. Dismantle Monsanto and other poisonous corporations dead-set on CREATING the health problems of the U.S. , etc. Ban advertising of a battery of staple products, fast-foods, etc.

Charge MORE money for crap food instead of making deep-fried roadkill from MC D's, Pizza Hut, etc. dirt, fucking cheap. Make the Mayo clinic's power foods list the most affordable stuff on the planet.

Reprogramming of dysfunctional habits is what is needed. Not some crap president's evil plan to keep the statusquo. He's a tool, his plan is bound to add to his legacy of shit. Fuck, the man is FROM the most corrupt city in the country!?? Can't those with an IQ over 110 get the gist?

With a name like chaosEngine , I would have assumed you knew why people do things like this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^spoco2:
Um, yeah, he did explain the motive:
a) You get heaps of traffic to your sites in the first place to get the file sharing software etc.
but mostly
b) You can then go to the law makers and go 'Look how many people are illegally downloading our content, you MUST allow these hugely heavy handed and insanely over the top punishments to go through'... 'Well, before we thought it was just those 'fringe' elements, but you bring forth a compelling case of this becoming mainstream... yes, let's give you these insane powers'.
It does make sense. They didn't like these people pirating their stuff, but it seemed to be too 'small time' and 'limited'. So, let it slide, and even actively encourage it, until it becomes mainstream enough that you can start jumping up and down and get laws passed that give you far greater powers than you otherwise would have had.
He is annoying to listen to though, I'll give you that.
He also has an over-inflated sense of himself if he thinks that his video will single-handedly bring about a stop to SOPA

Fair enough, as I said, I didn't get that far, but thank you for suffering through it and explaining it.
That said, I'm still not sure I buy that explanation. It pre-supposes that being given "insane powers" is the end game for these corporations. It all seems a little too "bond villain" to me (ya know, let's spend billions on a nuclear shark so we can extort the world for a 1% profit).
I could very well be wrong, but it still sets off my bullshit radar.

>> ^spoco2:


Um, yeah, he did explain the motive:
a) You get heaps of traffic to your sites in the first place to get the file sharing software etc.
but mostly
b) You can then go to the law makers and go 'Look how many people are illegally downloading our content, you MUST allow these hugely heavy handed and insanely over the top punishments to go through'... 'Well, before we thought it was just those 'fringe' elements, but you bring forth a compelling case of this becoming mainstream... yes, let's give you these insane powers'.
It does make sense. They didn't like these people pirating their stuff, but it seemed to be too 'small time' and 'limited'. So, let it slide, and even actively encourage it, until it becomes mainstream enough that you can start jumping up and down and get laws passed that give you far greater powers than you otherwise would have had.
He is annoying to listen to though, I'll give you that.
He also has an over-inflated sense of himself if he thinks that his video will single-handedly bring about a stop to SOPA


Fair enough, as I said, I didn't get that far, but thank you for suffering through it and explaining it.

That said, I'm still not sure I buy that explanation. It pre-supposes that being given "insane powers" is the end game for these corporations. It all seems a little too "bond villain" to me (ya know, let's spend billions on a nuclear shark so we can extort the world for a 1% profit).

I could very well be wrong, but it still sets off my bullshit radar.

I'm not advocating censorship or anything of the sort. Just saying that if you want an alternative news agency, RT isn't the best source out there due to their reactionary style.

I'm all about alternate news sources, but Russia Today always goes to the far extreme, which is often transparently propagandistic in its nature, much like the hyperbole on this one.

There was no 'threat', just the usual pro-business propaganda that is spewed out by, well, business men. This is hardly blackmailing or extortion on the White House.

Just about anyone can see that, too, as other sifters have quickly pointed out. Does it do you any favors to post news sources that are so quickly analyzed and debunked?