Tags for this video have been changed from 'usc, student body, vp, humor, prank' to 'Ryan, Holt, Ryan Holt, balloon, usc, office, student body, vp, humor, prank' - edited by burdturgler

Here's the transcript for posterity.

super: On Sunday, April 2, 2006, USC Vice President Ryan Holt traveled to Washington, DC to voice students' concerns to Congress. On Monday, April 2, 2006, members of the Student Senate purchased $80 worth of balloons. What you are about to see may be disturbing to people without a sense of humor.

Ryan: This is the kind of unprofessionalism that characterized student government years ago, and it's not going to happen now. If I have to there's gonna be-- okay that's it. Email to Ann, and people getting keys taken away and everything. Because this is not a joke.

[OPENS DOORS TO BALLOONS, POPS ARE HEARD]

Ryan: Okay, look, this is a waste of student activity [unintelligible]... and the people who did this are gonna pay for every single one of these! It's not a joke! It's not a joke, Alex!

Alex: Chill.

Ryan: Look at me being serious! We were off doing good work and you come to do something like this!

Alex: Okay. Alright. Geez.

Ryan: And I want to go to bed, and you've come and fucked up my office!

Alex: Calm down.

Ryan: NO ALEX! I am not going to calm down, because this is inappropriate! I am disappointed with you!

Alex: It's a joke.

Ryan: No this is not a joke. Who is going to pay for these balloons?! Out of your pocket?

Alex: We paid for them. Yes, we paid for them out of our pocket.

Ryan: Where did the air come from?

Alex: [befuddled] Wha-- the air? Over there.

Ryan: You used the air that costs money for us to do that stuff.

Alex: No.

Ryan: No, that's not appropriate, Alex.

Alex: [SIGHS]

Ryan: It's not appropriate. And this is not cleaned up [BALLOON POPS] by eight in the morning [ANOTHER POP] I'm going to come in here, take pictures, and there's gonna be hell to pay!

Almost 3 years later and now they file a DMCA complaint?

Question .. are you responsible under DMCA for embeds members put in their comments?





edit .. these aren't extra google tags for Ryan Holt balloon prank usc office or the balloon prank that was done at Ryan Holt's office at USC

Tags for this video have been changed from 'hitchens, palin, religion, science, genetics' to 'hitchens, palin, religion, science, genetics, fruit fly, autism, terry holt, larry king' - edited by burdturgler

This is great. Terry Holt calling the fruit fly thing "unconsequential". And is he arguing that science is a belief?
Let's put all of Palin's belief's aside. What does it say of their ability to organize and administrate when their speech writers are able to make such incredible blunders. No one catches it! They just let her go out there and say the craziest shit.

Criticizing research for autism. You can't make this shit up.

Thanks for uploading. I remember watching this on Cable. Do you know where they pulled the music from for this documentary? It sounds familiar (like Holts 'The Planets). Is it from the Disney film "The Black Hole"?
thanks

resurrected. (easter humor)

In reply to this comment by doogle:
*dead?

Regarding the couple of comments about whether the war in Iraq was about oil. 9/11 gave exactly what the PNAC report was looking for (and spelled out in their report “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”) to mobilize public outrage and direct it towards a military invasion of the Middle East. “Crossing the Rubicon” is an investigation that creates a nice picture for the motives of certain people to be involved in 9/11. But aside from those questions, there is one question that many people think they already know the answer to:

Is the Iraq war is a failure?

Whether something is a failure or a success depends on your goals.

If the goal was to bring democracy to a random nation (i.e. nothing to do with reasons given for the war) in the Middle East, then Iraq is a disaster. Just like Cheney told the press it would be when discussing why the previous President Bush's (Bush I, for skimmers) administration didn't overthrown Saddam the first time. So what changed for Cheney between that time and when the current President Bush (Bush II) invaded Iraq? Some hidden knowledge about a region that has been unstable for a thousand plus years? Or perhaps different goals?

Now if the goal was oil-centric, then Iraq is easily a success. Under the draft that the US gave Iraq for its constitution, the Iraq National Oil Company would control 17 of the 80 current oil fields. Foreign corporations would control the other 63 oil fields AND any future finds for the next 30 years. Pretty sweet deal, eh?

Here's a quote from Jim Holt's book, "It's the Oil, Stupid."

**** BEGIN QUOTE ****
The occupation may seem horribly botched on the face of it, but the Bush administration's cavalier attitude towards 'nation-building' has all but ensured that Iraq will end up as an American protectorate for the next few decades - a necessary condition for the extraction of its oil wealth. If the US had managed to create a strong, democratic government in an Iraq effectively secured by its own army and police force, and had then departed, what would have stopped that government from taking control of its own oil, like every other regime in the Middle East? On the assumption that the Bush-Cheney strategy is oil-centred, the tactics - dissolving the army, de-Baathification, a final 'surge' that has hastened internal migration - could scarcely have been more effective. The costs - a few billion dollars a month plus a few dozen American fatalities (a figure which will probably diminish, and which is in any case comparable to the number of US motorcyclists killed because of repealed helmet laws) - are negligible compared to $30 trillion in oil wealth, assured American geopolitical supremacy and cheap gas for voters. In terms of realpolitik, the invasion of Iraq is not a fiasco, it is a resounding success.
**** END QUOTE ****


Also are two videos to add a counterpoint about WTC7 for this sift (please read post below also):
http://www.stage6.com/LoneWolf/video/2201611/9/11-WTC7
http://www.stage6.com/LoneWolf/video/2201336/9/11-Official-Pancake-Theory-Debunked

Rush D. Holt Jr.

the Restore Act

the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)

the (so-called-) Protect America Act

I've got to admit when I saw the "milk rushing into a cubicle" effect, my first thought was Ryan Holt asking "Who's going to pay for this!?"

This movie is a good introduction to the topic of electronic voting. but it is quite dated and leaves some wrong impressions with the viewer. Since its release (prior to the 2004 elections) there have been several elections as well as numerous studies (to name a few: the Conyers Report, GAO Report of Sept 2005, the Carter-Baker Commission, the Princeton Center Report)which have unanimously found fault with electronic voting accuracy and security. This film leaves the impression that Rep. Holt's bill (then 550, now 811) is the answer to our prayers. Unfortunately, this is not true. In fact, in its reincarnation, its good features are matched by far more dangerous ones which assure that elections will stay out of the reach or supervision of the voters.

After the movie's release, I spent eighteen months distributing it through my free lending library project. In that time, almost 3200 copies of "Invisible Ballots" were distributed.

I no longer send it out, although I still have a thousand copies left. I prefer that people see newer and more up-to-date documentaries on the subject: among them, "Commander "N Thief", "Stealing America: Vote by Vote", "Swing State Ohio", "No Umbrella", "American Blackout", "Eternal Vigilance" and "The Right To Count". (Don't forget the HBO documentary "Stealing Democracy".) If you would like to read a review of any or all of these, you are welcome to visit www.OpEdNews.com and go to the writers archives where the reviews are listed among the other articles and reviews that I have written.

I welcome any correspondence on this topic. It is near and dear to me. Without free, fair, secure and transparent elections, with full citizen oversight we are justifying lowering voter confidence and making democracy nothing more than an ill-fitting hat.

Joan Brunwasser, Voting Integrity Editor, OpEdNews
joan@OpEdNews.com

ant posted the Ryan Holt vid almost 332 days ago.

http://www.videosift.com/video/A-harmless-prank-on-the-USC-Student-Body-Vice-President-goes-horribly-wrong

It seems that the majority of the more visible members of this community are atheists. Would that be fair to say?

If so, for those of you who are atheists, would you say that it is irrational to believe in a god of some sort?

As far as Dawkins goes, while he is obviously a good biologist/zoologist, a philosopher of religion he is not, and his book, The God Delusion, fails in so far as it attempts to do philosophy/theology. See here, here, and here for reviews.

For some good atheistic philosophy of religion, see William Rowe, J.L. Mackie, Richard Gale, Michael Martin, et al.