Damn it. I even would have gone to see you in DC if you somehow got invited to the White House, that way I could brag that I've actually met a Slovene. Let's face it: there aren't very many of you. It would almost be like meeting a leprechaun.

Hey dude, long time no talk. I know this is coming out of left field, but by chance have you ever met Melania Trump? I just learned today that she is from Slovenia, and I immediately thought of you. Now don't get me wrong; I know that Slovenia is a nation of 2,000,000+ people, so I certainly don't expect you to know every soul in your homeland. I also know she hasn't lived there for 20 years. But she is around your age, and she briefly attended university, and you attended university too, right? I don't know what school you attended, but maybe you went to the same school?

I remember you saying that you were friends with one of those dudes from Perpetuum Jazzile in that 'Africa' video, so I thought, well, you might know someone else from Slovenia? I know it sounds stupid, but anyway it would be cool if you did know her so that you could brag on Videosift that you know the wife of the prick who might be the next US president and could potentially destroy the world. Maybe you could even get invited to the White House. And then you could leave an upper decker. Google it. Do it for all of of us, you beautiful son of a bitch.

You can in Washington and a couple other places. It's a new service.

Oh and by the way, Uber claims this is "ride sharing" so he's NOT a businessman, his car is NOT a place of business. The woman has been "invited" to "share" the ride.

...or are you claiming Uber is lying about its services?

As the owner of the vehicle, he can turf her any time he pleases. In fact, in more than a few places, there is a concept called "assault by trespass". It's how people shoot an unarmed burglar and it's still considered self-defence. Also, inviting someone into your property is meaningless if you want them to leave. There's no "but he said I could be here a minute ago" right to stay. The only people who can't be removed from your property after you let them in are vampires.

Wow, didn't expect to see the comments section explode like this. Seems like some people took what he was saying seriously in spite of the multiple disclaimers he gives the audience that this whole bit is a joke.

I could absolutely see why someone who is an actual Cosby rape victim and takes Jefferies's words seriously would be offended. I could absolutely see someone not being able to transcend their own personal pain in order to see the irony in this bit. But this seems like a wholly different kind of joke from the one Dave Tosh allegedly made in which it was really unclear whether he was joking or not about inviting audience members to rape a woman for daring to heckle him during a set. I don't see any malice in this routine whatsoever.

If you don't find it funny, that's fine. Every joke doesn't have to be funny to every single person on the planet. And if you don't approve of rape jokes, that's fine too. Like Reginald D. Hunter says, go ahead and withhold your laughter. "But take it from the rest of us who did laugh--it was fuckin' funny."

Huh, guess I was one of the few that saw a porno before I ever saw a horror movie. Guess I was about 9 or 10, older friend's dad was out of town, and said friend had found his Betamax porn stash so he invited all the kids in the neighborhood (boys and girls both) ranging in age from 8-17 to watch. The teens laughed their assess off when all us kids were completely grossed out by the first moneyshot we saw. Seriously, it may as well have been a horror movie for all the kids screaming "What the hell IS that?!?"

Learned a lot that day from the older kids, but mostly learned that 70s porn is cheesy beyond belief. Baum-chika-baum-baum!

Then you end up with people taping mags together and reloading within a second or so.
Even faster if they count shots and stop firing at capacity-1 before reloading.
There are work-arounds...




Realistically, the end game of the political left is a gun ban + confiscation. The end game of the political right is total gun deregulation.
Each side needs something to argue to excuse their existence, so they will argue in their direction so long as there is anything left to argue, and those are the natural consequences.
Gridlock is literally the best thing that can happen for folks in the middle.




Syria isn't the best example. The people were not armed, and they turned to foreign auxiliaries to fight for them. They invited and gave shelter to all sorts of foreign militants to fight against their government, and made a mess of things. They would have been better off with a home-grown insurgency.

Not like a home grown insurgency would have done much good either way. The Syrian Arab spring was a democratic call for ... Islamic law. It originated in Hama, where an earlier Islamic insurgency was put down (the muslim brotherhood) by Assad's father. Half the country didn't support the insurgency against Assad, and anyone who is non-muslim or secular, or even moderate, is sitting on Assad's side of the country hoping he holds out.

But generally speaking, insurgency with small arms is what defeats occupiers over time. Not in pitched battles, but by making occupation so expensive and tedious that the occupier loses interest over time.


-schehearazde

And WHY didn't you invite the Slo-Mo guys to do the filming?

What I don't like...

The painful videos...I always put them off until last when they bubble on the sift.

I don't hate the Young Turks as much as I appreciate their new perspective. That being said I can't watch their videos to finish.

You will hate me for trying to change direction....but what do you LOVE on the YouTube. I have been loving the Vox recently. It gives me the feeling that news and reporting is coming back.

Sorry if I didn't play well...someone invited me.

I agree that you didn't intend to use the click-bait title.
You used the YouTube name - Their title was a click-bait title (unfortunately.)

"British Farmer's Son Shocks Meat Farmer Dad with this video"

---At no point did his son(?), not mentioned in the video, shock his dad.
There was no shocking being done at all. The old guy was not shocked in any way. From the sounds of the poem, the dad wasn't even a meat farmer as he's clearly not a meat eater. Most likely a dairy farmer? It was merely an old guy voicing a cool poem. (which was well done, by the way.) ---

See how the title sensationalizes the video and causes invite to watch a video that clearly doesn't describe the video at all?

Anyway, I was merely inviting you to see the comments already being made, bringing it to your attention.

hoping you have a great day

The thing about this is that they are going down a hill and travelling between 40-60 kph on a 1 lane road with no shoulder. The cars behind should have no expectation that they should do anything other than they did because to 'invite' a car to pass in a situation like that is to put yourself in mortal danger. as you'd have no idea what will happen once that car is next to you. It's much safer to ride in a group for this very reason, and the whole group should be treated as one vehicle. The cars should do exactly as this girl did and hold back until she could pass safely in the other lane. Just without all the rage;) If a slow moving vehicle like a tractor was driving down the highway, it would be the same deal.

I believe that you are correct, and Carr was not actually fined or otherwise legally penalized for his remarks.

However, it *was* a possibility that he would be, according to the first line in the article I linked to in my first post in this thread:
"Jimmy Carr could face sanctions for making a joke about dwarves during an appearance on BBC1’s The One Show."

I believe that I read other news articles that suggested that was a possibility at the time it happened, but I can't find anything with a real quick search now.

Going outside of the scope of that single incident, I definitely have seen quite a few reports of things that I would consider to be fairly trivial incidents like this being looked at by the UK government as "hate speech" and therefore potentially subject to "fines, imprisonment, or both" (according to that wikipedia article).

Samples from a quick search include a politician being arrested for quoting a passage about Islam from a book by Winston Churchill, a young man who was jailed for 12 weeks because of "some offensive Facebook posts making derogatory comments about a missing child" (it doesn't say what the posts were exactly; I am not saying I would defend his posts but I don't think anyone should go to jail for being an idiot and running their mouth on the internet), and another young man who was fined for saying that "all soldiers should die and go to hell". Plenty more incidents beyond those as well, it seems.

So while Jimmy Carr didn't end up actually facing any legal repercussions for his joke, I think it is not far fetched at all to suggest that he might have (and there seems to be some evidence that legal repercussions enacted by the government were being considered in that particular incident).

That is what seems crazy / wrong to me. That is NOT freedom of speech; it is freedom of benign speech, with an increasingly narrow view of what speech is benign.

I'm 100% OK with their being "consequences" for Jimmy Carr for his joke. But the government shouldn't be involved in that (and again, to be fair they DID end up staying out of it in that case). The consequences that I think are fine include:

* Ofcom or the BBC passing on some/all of any fines that the government levels against them on to Carr (ie., IF they get fined for breaking broadcast decency standards, make Carr foot the some or all of the bill for that).

* Ofcom or the BBC electing not to invite Carr to appear on any more programs if they are concerned about preventing fines / protecting their image / whatever. They are a business, they gotta look out for themselves.

* Individual people who were offended by Carr's joke boycotting programs that he appears on, refusing to pay to attend his live performances, etc. Obviously. If you don't like what he has to say, you are are of course not obliged to continue to listen to him.

Anything beyond those consequences is going too far in a society that claims it is democratic and free, in my opinion.

The kid was spamming forums inviting people to play with them. When they showed up he would trap them so they can't get out killing them and taking all their stuff. The disturbing part was he was taking their heads and hanging them on his wall as we see in the fifty second mark. When the admin started destroying his chests they were also full of other player's heads.

Wait for it...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-17/priest-says-tim-minchin-song-hurting-abuse-survivors/7178606

"A Jesuit priest and human rights lawyer has accused Tim Minchin of endangering the integrity of the royal commission into sexual abuse after the comedian penned a song describing George Pell as "scum" and inviting the Cardinal to "come home and frickin' sue [me]".

Father Frank Brennan has warned that turning the commission into a "laughing stock" runs the risk of derailing proceedings.

"I don't think it's altogether helped by having songs about a key witness, calling him scum, and a buffoon, and a coward and that sort of thing before the commission does its task," Father Brennan told ABC's the Drum program.

"Because if we turn it into a laughing stock, then the big losers ... will be the victims themselves.""

Yeah, it's Minchin's song that's disturbing, not covering up child rape...

Not really. Griefing is basically causing trouble for other players. It's not so much about berating them as it is about ruining their experience. Typical examples are spawn camping (killing players as soon as they appear) or deliberately sabotaging your own team while pretending to be incompetent.

In this case, the clearly unhinged kid invited the guy making the video into the hole expressly to kill him and steal his shit.

Excellent propaganda. 40 seconds of radical muslim horror - in German, Belgian, French, Swedish cities possibly near you, a real present day danger which we need to do something about .

And then they start using the words refugee and Arab.

Of the current wave of people uncontrollably and iresponsibly invited by Angela Merkel and company to Germany estimates are (because real official numbers apparently will not be available before mid 2016) about 40% are refugees from war zones, mostly Syria, families, many educated people, several irrelevant religions (including a few flavors of muslim) some Arabs. We can keep these and try to help them. Educational videos and money will keep them warm and fed, Afghan families will eventually learn to use flushing toilets. They will find jobs and start kebab joints and go to school. Refugees.

Which leaves 60% of north african, balkan, middle eastern immigrants, overwhelmingly men 18-25, muslim, many illiterate (some Arab but that is irrelevant). Who join the masses of crazy radical muslims already living here in Europe previously. Not refugees. Not running away from something but running to the social systems and muslim ghettos of western Europe. Not easily separable from the above mentioned refugees. Protected by the insane political correctness of German and Swedish and Belgian politicians. Educational videos will entertain them and keep them warm. No amount of welfare will ever be enough for them. Very few will get an education and jobs, lots of trouble ahead. How do we get rid of these people now? Radical muslim immigrants.

Meanwhile we also have lots of regular immigrants in Europe, like Ukrainians, Russians, varieties of asians, and generally from all over the world as the trend is that jobs are available in parts of Europe and overall its a nice safe place to live in.

Problem is if we dont get rid of the stupid radical muslims its not going to stay that way, as jews and now women have found out in some large European cities. Hopefully the refugees can stay, but our inability to react in the face of danger at least according to previously agreed measures (Schengen border protection) will make it difficult for us to help real refugees in the face of public opinion damaged by these idiots (radical muslims and politically correct politicians).