Congratulations! Your comment on 'Spy Monkey' Mistaken For Dead Baby And Mourned By Troop has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Your video, 'Spy Monkey' Mistaken For Dead Baby And Mourned By Troop, 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 don't remember him saying one was right and the other was wrong, but hey maybe i'm mistaken.

What i don't understand is why it's ok for you to express your opinion about his youtube video without becoming a respected youtube videographer yourself, but it's not ok for him to express his opinion about the colours in Marvel films without becoming a Marvel film maker.

Are people not allowed to express their opinions on things? And if that's the case, why did you express yours?

I think there's lots of folks out there who are mistaken on a number of matters...ignorant if you will. Some R's in PA know what's up though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

Dannym3141 is so right!

"Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?"
"No, have you?"

"I don't know which species is worse-- you don't see them fucking each other over for a percentage."

"I guess she don't like the corn bread either."

Actually I also notice it, this is the english version of this video and they remove the blood part, I watched the local version and if I am not mistaken they showed there needle and blood.

Actually I also notice it, this is the english version of this video and they remove the blood part, I watched the local version and if I am not mistaken they showed there needle and blood.

Baby deer kidnapped by well-meaning but ultimately mistaken photographer.

Mom probably got the other baby safe and waited until after the guy left the area to come back, but the baby was gone.

Nice that it worked out but that fawn was obviously imprinted on him. Could have been bad.

I don't disagree, but there is a big difference between ridiculing someone for a mistaken belief that they are talented and questioning their personal beliefs publicly and ridiculing and discriminating against them based on their answers/beliefs. I thought this crossed the line big time, not that they're know for being respectful in the first place.

Yes....that.

If I were black, I would certainly feel that the police are people to fear and avoid at all costs, not there to protect or serve me. It's incontrovertible that there is NOTHING a black man can do to be safe. There is no level of surrender, clear lack of arms, absolute lack of movement, or ANYTHING they can do to ensure they won't be 'mistaken' for a perpetrator and shot....usually shot dead. It's also clear and incontrovertible that, even when they've done absolutely nothing wrong, and the police agree they've done nothing wrong and they are in no way threatening, the police will still shoot them...and then not give them medical attention, in fact they will handcuff them and try to think of a charge they can make up to excuse their inexcusable deadly actions.
When it's a life or death situation, civilized behavior and respect for authority hardly outweigh a drive for self preservation....it does one no good to have been civilized if that causes one's death. It's for that reason that I say that I would never convict a black man of murdering a police officer...it's reasonable to think it would be self defense under any circumstance just because it was a black man and a police man, just as much as if it was an armed Klansman. They should not have to wait to be attacked before defending themselves, they don't have equipment or training to withstand an attack and respond, their only option is to shoot first if they want a chance to live, unlike police.
Clearly, that's not the situation in every instance, and not all cops are killers, but enough are that it's reasonable for a black man to assume any random officer may well act murderously, and so reasonable to protect one's self from them pre-emptively. That is a horrendous situation, but one I put squarely on the doorstep of the police, and it's up to them to change that perception with actions, not excuses and deflections. They have failed miserably thus far, which is why I have little sympathy for their recent losses. If you pick a fist fight and lose a tooth in the fight, that's YOUR fault....the same reasoning goes for gunfights, IMO.

I accept your appology. ;-)

I understand. I was not condoning it, I was decrying a situation where that is a reasonable response in self defense. I do not condone, nor do I wish for cops being shot/killed any more than I condone or wish for them to kill others...which is not at all, or barring that, only when absolutely necessary to save lives.

Not having sympathy for a group's pain is not the same thing as advocating more pain infliction. I understand the misunderstanding, I'm often unclear. I am not sympathetic for the losses of a group that causes 30 times the killings they receive....but I want them to kill fewer, not for more of them to be killed.

Yes, and no. You could say I 'dehumanize' them, but really I humanize them. Dehumanizing them would be elevating their position IMO...I have a terrible estimation of humanity, so dehumanizing someone is being nice. ;-)

No, I'm a LOT twisted. ;-)

Again, no I don't think more dead cops fixes anything....but I do see it as a likely outcome of this behavior....and understandable. If you honestly believe any member of a particular group is likely to attack and kill you without provocation, with recent evidence provided daily to reinforce that belief, any reasonable person would act in self defense.

As it turns out, according to his superior, you are correct....he intended to kill the autistic man. That makes the triple handcuffing even more curious, to put it mildly. They now admit he was NEVER a suspect, but have not offered any reasoning behind handcuffing him or not offering any medical attention for an unreasonable time.

Just so I'm clear, had you used '....' instead of "....." to paraphrase what you thought I was saying, I would not have taken offence at the misunderstanding. I only got upset because using quotation marks indicated I said exactly what you mistakenly thought I meant.

I've been pretty clear that I think it is important to understand the perspective of the police in these situations.

One could make an argument about how they are justified about having guns drawn, since they are replying to a call concerning someone walking around with a gun, and maybe the truck could be mistaken for a gun.

But, at best, that leaves the cop that shot him with a real weak ass argument: "I mistook something he was holding for a gun. I didn't get close enough to see if it was a gun, despite the standoff being very calm. I also didn't maneuver to a position that gave me a proper shooting lane on the suspect. I then accidently discharged my weapon, and hit an innocent party, who was lying on the ground in an non threatening and submissive manner." Sorry, but if that is the best argument you have, you're pretty much fucked.

I suppose it is hard for any pre-internet virus to compare in terms of damage to these 5, but one that stands out in my mind:

Form (circa 1990 or so), and its variants like Form.A would infect the boot sector of your hard drive, and from there could infect any floppy disk that you used on the computer. Most PCs at the time would try to boot from a floppy disk left in the drive, which would spread the infection.

I guess that many variants didn't really do much of anything particularly bad, but I got Form.A one time and it nuked the Master Boot Record (like virus #5 in the video) of my PC. Since DOS / Windows (3.1 at the time I think) wouldn't boot, I (mistakenly) assumed that it had formatted my hard drive, and then lost all of my data by reformatting.

I remember a span of about a year where any 3.5 inch floppy disk being passed around offices or schools in my home town had a roughly 80% chance of being infected with Form.A. So that seems like a pretty impressive infection and spread rate, without advantage of being able to spread through the internet!

D'oh.
You are correct sir. They don't make it easy to follow now. Even the websites that showed the count without the super delegates listed the 2383 number to win. I looked at 3 sites before writing my above comment, they all gave me the wrong impression.

EDIT: In my defense, they have been claiming she's the presumptive nominee since before the first primary, and again after every single primary day, so I mistakenly assumed this was just more of the same. However, it is correct that she's not the nominee yet, but she is the presumptive nominee with the votes to win, both pledged and non pledged. The actual vote won't happen until the convention.

But there is still SLIGHT hope that, now that she's the "presumptive nominee", the Republicans will jump the gun and indict her before the convention, giving the Democrats a reason to pick Sanders. Paper thin hope, tissue paper thin, but there is a single grain of hope left.

Omg. Is the mistaken ban stopping people from voting?

It's *brilliant!!!

I mean, you had me at the first domesticated wolf!