The music posted here on the sift is a good antidote to that There is a little pop music, but also a wide array of different and interesting pieces.

NPR Music's Tiny Desk Concerts are a really good example.

you had me until "i am glad the kid is dead".

you appear to be fighting a battle based on dissimilar distinctions.
you point out (rightly in my opinion) that there is evidence mike brown went for officer wilsons gun.while there is contradictory eye-witness accounts in that regard,if it had proven true,wilson would have been justified.

but...

this has zero to do with the evidence presented in this video.
which is exactly what people here on this thread have been trying to point out to you and you keep ignoring.either willingly or otherwise.

i do not understand conservatives such as yourself.you seem to adore the rule of law,but only when it is subservient to your own prejudices.

so let us break this down a bit.
if it were proven in a court of law that mike brown DID go for officer wilsons gun (which is possible).then under the current federal law wilson would be justified in this particular shooting.

then WHY did the D.A and A.D.A so obviously manipulate the grand jury?
why did they sabotage their OWN grand jury?
there are only two possibilities:
both the D.A and A.D.A are a level of epic incompetence,as to justify an immediate termination,OR their malfeasance,manipulations and LYING were intentional.

they never truly sought and indictment but rather a no-indict.which is a perversion of the system and goes against the basic principles of due process,equality and justice.

and now we will never know and neither do you bob.
this will never see the inside of a court and the rule of law has been raped by these two district attorneys.

so you can armchair lawyer all you like.it is meaningless in a system that has been so thoroughly corrupted and you cheer like a 12 yr old tween at a beiber concert.

glad someone is dead?
you should feel shame not pride.
a boy is dead and the system has been perverted.

there is nothing to be proud of...nothing.

5 more comments have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by ant.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by eric3579. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Cat-Watches-Slayer-Concert

Sorry , but a dupe of

http://videosift.com/video/Cat-Watches-Slayer-Concert

I can't dupeof it myself

My hope is that this will take the form of progressive revolutions. When the food and energy start to become scarce people might start to recognise that the ONLY people who can get us out of this mess are engineers, inventors and scientists.

Maybe we will even be smart enough to put them in charge and ditch the whole idea of politics for the sake of politics all together.

A man can hope anyway. The alternative seems to be extreme left and right wing movements fighting over metaphorical ash and bones.

Co2, methane and other undesirables in the atmosphere could probably be shifted if there was a concerted global effort, doubly so if we factor in 50-100 years of technological advancement. I'm sure the task would be herculean but it would probably also be the greatest thing we ever achieved as a species! ("screw your ancient wonders, we built an air scrubber the size of Missouri!")

@newtboy
thats why i love you brother!
it is your optimism that i absolutely adore,sincerely.

notice my wording:ideology vs reality.

in the first part of my argument i actually agree with you,though we may use different terms.

i think we may be crossing lines due to verbiage.
when i say "power" i am referring to what is my opinion,a plutocracy,so my argument flows from that perspective.

sheldon wolin makes an excellent example but uses the term "inverted totalitarianism" in his book "democracy incorporated".

you are making an ideological argument that is based on rights SHOULD be protected..in theory,but i do not see play out in reality.if you look at the history of how rights have been obtained over the past 100 years alone you will see that not ONE was ever just offered by our government.each and every one has been hard fought (and died) for.

now moving on to your texas reference,well...i totally agree with you but that is revisionism not indoctrination,at least in the manner in which i am referencing that term.

when i say this video makes a case for indoctrination i say so with my subjective AND objective understandings.
subjectively:i believe that the onus is on the very person,institution or government to prove they have a right to said authority.
objectively:this video...although extremely over-simplified..makes its case that there is a concerted effort to get very young children to tacitly submit to a centralized authority.

now when we consider what education actually IS,and this is not the thread to truly dissect such a complicated and multi-faceted subject but suffice to say,as succinct as i can:
education is the teaching of abilities,to consume data and information in order to come to informed and well-thought out conclusions,to better understand our:world,society and the reality we reside.

to be taught the skills the dissect and disseminate complex problems and the ability to formulate questions which can push boundaries and challenge pre-conceived ideologies.

so with that definition in mind.
how can we be expected to view this than anything other than a ploy to get that young mind to tacitly submit to a central authority?

and this is for 2nd graders? these kids are 8 yrs old!

education should be giving kids the tools to challenge and question not blindly submit.we might as well call the government jesus the way this thing is being taught.

so if you look at a religious family and find how they "indoctrinate" their young children into the ways of the church,then you should have the exact same problem with this tactic.

because the tactics being used are identical.

From my viewpoint, I have not seen a 'concerted campaign to deny your participation', but I have seen your comments disputed nearly every time. That's not the same thing by far.
As you noted, being a 'Christian voice' on a mostly 'secular' site is going to get you confrontation and disputes, some of them might be over the top. Please consider how an atheist posting anti-religious propaganda daily on a purely religious site might be treated, it would be FAR worse than you are treated here, they would likely be banned on day one. You on the other hand, are still 'welcome' here (if not by everyone) and have not been banned or hobbled that I know of.
Many find your 'preaching' insulting, which is why you get the replies you get. You know you are spreading unwanted proselytizing in a place it won't get much support, indeed in a place where it's unwanted by most. That is your right, I suppose, but because you do it knowingly, I feel little sympathy for you and the disputes you find yourself in, you put yourself there intentionally. No whining about it.

All that said, and as much as I disagree with your viewpoint, I would not like to see you banned or leave. It would be nice if you would show a less one dimensional personality and comment on non-religious topics in a non-religious way, but to each his own. I'll just say that you are incredibly unlikely to convince anyone here, especially by the methods you use, but you are free to try. We can always hit 'ignore' if we are bothered.

I was clear from the beginning that I came to lend a Christian voice to the sift. I enjoyed videosift and had been using it for some time before I created an account. I registered an account specifically because of the number of anti-christian videos that I was noticing were hitting the top ten. I wanted to engage with the people here over the topic of Christianity because the sift was, and primarily still is, an echo chamber for the worldview of secular humanism. That's the way the sift likes it, and the sift is intolerant of any voice which challenges that viewpoint. Period, end of story.

There's nothing wrong with my coming to represent Christ, here. Have I utterly failed to do so? Yes, most definitely. However, it is up to me how I want to use this site. I have commented here almost exclusively on religious topics, either on my videos or someone elses it. Occasionally I will comment on a political video or something else, but usually only on religious topics. The point being is that, that is the way I have chosen to use this site. I don't run around and dictate to anyone else how they could or should use the sift, so why should I be singled out? I didn't cause any material harm to anyone, I wasn't off topic, I didn't flout the rules. I was on topic on the videos I commented on, and I brought a Christian viewpoint to the discussion. The sift, being inhabited primarily by atheists, agnostics and anti-theists, utterly rejects that viewpoint. It's not any different if I were to go to the comments section of any major website and say anything positive about Christianity. I would instantly get 2 to 3 comments mocking everything I said.

I stated in my post that I realized that bringing a Christian viewpoint to the sift would get me a lot of flak. I didn't always react well to that, and I acted like a jerk at times. I am sorry for that. I could have done more to build relationships here and I never put in the time. There is some truth to what you have said, that I brought the way I was treated on myself. But your rant is also a product of the simplistic and distorted lens that you view me through. I mean, you on one hand call my treatment here a persecution fantasy and on the other hand say I brought it upon myself. That's just intellectual dishonesty, pure and simply. The truth is, there was a concerted campaign to deny my participation on this site, and whatever you think the reason may be, it did happen.

As to the video, if this video was of a senior consultant from the Bush administration admitting that they systemically deceived the American people this would be #1 on the sift. You're deceiving yourself if you think that the reason this video is being suppressed is due to anything other than the ideological bent of the sift.

Sorry for the delay. I don't really remember who did it, but at least two or three people made a concerted effort to downvote everything I sifted or had sifted..I have 20 discarded videos. After all of that, and even my comments getting consistently downvoted, I pretty much gave up trying to sift videos or really participate in the community. I mentioned it to a few people but I don't think I ever filed a formal complaint.

I'm not really complaining though. I understand that this site is bent primarily towards secular thought and is intolerant of anything else. It is simply a reality that talking about the Lord Jesus Christ in such an environment brings a lot of flak in my direction. That's okay. You're free to have your opinion and I'm free to have mine, and if anyone wants to hate me for that, that's fine too. I'll love them anyway.

Moon Hooch: NPR Music Tiny Desk Concert has been added as a related post - related requested by MrFisk on that post.

Did Gorillaz ever do any of these shows? I'm wondering because they did concerts where the cartoons were projected onto a screen.

How can I show this to my neighbours and make them understand it?Timeline of this weekend - we saw some of them dressed to the nines getting into a stretched limo on Friday.

On Saturday they (as normally) loudly discussed how the person they saw could have performed for 5 more minutes whilst simultaneously stating how this performer had proven Michael Jackson's saintliness because said MJ had stayed with the performer for 4 days.

It's worth noting at this point all we knew was they went out somewhere in a stretched limo and saw someone who had MJ to visit for 4 days.

On the Sunday the normal loud talking over our fence lead to the discovery that not only did my neighbors take a stretched limo to arrive at a Michael Flatley concert. They couldn't recall the name of the long haired blonde peado with a cigar (it was Jimmy Saville - most prolific sexual predator in history) or as they roundly called him "that Australian dude" (Rolf Harris - more cherished, like painted the queens portrait, but still sent down for being a peed).

So the outcome of this is my neighbors who have a very small 4 bed house (would be 3 except they opened the loft), own 9 cars, have a 32, 26 and 18 year old still living at home. They hire a stretched limo so they go an see Michael Flatley perform live then come home and discuss loudly how Michael Jackson was obviously a good person because he stayed with Michael Flatley. Shortly afterwards they then totally struggled to remember the names of the biggest sex offender ever known in the uk and the most treasured letdown of all time.

This is almost par with them discussing a new flavor of chips/crisps for 45 min or that time 4 of them tried to count the same amount of change for >20 mins and none of them could agree the same amount.

Sorry had to rant - I'd love to confront them over the noise/cars/stupidity etc but I'm a mildly tough 40 year old. Their highly violent and the 26 year is a goddamn cagefighter.

I honestly can't vent enough - literally I could write a novel on how much my neighbors suck. Just as a final point to carry things across - I recently needed to cut back some ivy in my backgarden. During the hour this took they played Natasha Beddingfield's "These Words" 5 times. Yes I'm a Maggot, Yes I'm a 40 year old who probably needs to stop jumping into moshpits. But Natasha Beddingfield??? 5 times?? Really????