This video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by Lann.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/he-Stark-Children-Sing-the-Game-of-Thrones-Theme

http://videosift.com/video/he-Stark-Children-Sing-the-Game-of-Thrones-Theme

I want this back sooo bad. And I want Ned Stark to rise up as a Lich and lead his Army to VICTORY!

>> ^longde:

I agree with most of your points, except that a toothless UN resolution has any material affect on what is going on in Syria.>> ^bcglorf:
@longde:And I think that anyone from any country would be in a bad position if they went on a foreign broadcast and openly blasted their country and government. They may not be thrown in a gulag, but it wouldn't sit well with the neighbors and boss.
You can't honestly speak like the risk of being thrown in a gulag is equivalent and no different from something not sitting well with the neighbors and boss. If you say something in China that stirs up enough people and you keep on saying it, ending up in a jail is a very real possibility. Meanwhile in America that's exactly what guys like Michael Moore not only make a habit of, they make a very profitable career out of it.

On Taiwan, most mainland chinese consider it a province of China, as well as Tibet. Little real dissent there.
The right of the Taiwanese and Tibetan people to self determination though is in stark contrast to that of Iraqi's, Libyan's, Afghan's, and Syrians. Despite opposing military action in every one of those countries, when it comes to Taiwan and Tibet, it is unquestioningly accepted that all out war is the natural and just course against the people of Taiwan and Tibet if they were to declare independence. That's a stark contrast, and one that I believe would be unexpected by a westerner listener who had just heard the same people opposing military adventures and the global police.
What is the direct damage of voting against the UN measure?
First off, use the right terms. China and Russia didn't merely vote against the UN motion, if they had only done that the motion would have still carried with a majority in favor. China and Russia exercised their veto rights, to trump the will of the majority on the Security council. It's their right within the structure of the UN SC, but that they used it to protect Assad while he murders his own people is hardly something defensible.
As for the direct damage, Syria immediately stepped up it's offensive on Homs:
Speaking to Al Jazeera, Danny Abdul Dayem, a resident of Homs, said: "It has been terrible. There is non-stop bombing with rockets, mortar bombs and tank shells. There were more than 50 people injured in Bab Amr today.
"I saw with my own eyes kids with no legs, and a kid who lost his whole bottom jaw. It is terrible."



I'll quite readily agree that virtually everything the UN does is toothless and in that sense, completely worthless and meaningless. I would however argue that the Russian and Chinese vetoes absolutely do have a material affect on what is going on in Syria. The vetoes are sign of the depth of Russian and Chinese commitment to Assad's regime. That support is absolutely vital and essential to Assad's continued military campaign against his own people. Without that support, the combined efforts of the Arab League and the Syrian opposition would be seeing Assad forced to back down.

I agree with most of your points, except that a toothless UN resolution has any material affect on what is going on in Syria.>> ^bcglorf:

@longde:And I think that anyone from any country would be in a bad position if they went on a foreign broadcast and openly blasted their country and government. They may not be thrown in a gulag, but it wouldn't sit well with the neighbors and boss.
You can't honestly speak like the risk of being thrown in a gulag is equivalent and no different from something not sitting well with the neighbors and boss. If you say something in China that stirs up enough people and you keep on saying it, ending up in a jail is a very real possibility. Meanwhile in America that's exactly what guys like Michael Moore not only make a habit of, they make a very profitable career out of it.

On Taiwan, most mainland chinese consider it a province of China, as well as Tibet. Little real dissent there.
The right of the Taiwanese and Tibetan people to self determination though is in stark contrast to that of Iraqi's, Libyan's, Afghan's, and Syrians. Despite opposing military action in every one of those countries, when it comes to Taiwan and Tibet, it is unquestioningly accepted that all out war is the natural and just course against the people of Taiwan and Tibet if they were to declare independence. That's a stark contrast, and one that I believe would be unexpected by a westerner listener who had just heard the same people opposing military adventures and the global police.
What is the direct damage of voting against the UN measure?
First off, use the right terms. China and Russia didn't merely vote against the UN motion, if they had only done that the motion would have still carried with a majority in favor. China and Russia exercised their veto rights, to trump the will of the majority on the Security council. It's their right within the structure of the UN SC, but that they used it to protect Assad while he murders his own people is hardly something defensible.
As for the direct damage, Syria immediately stepped up it's offensive on Homs:
Speaking to Al Jazeera, Danny Abdul Dayem, a resident of Homs, said: "It has been terrible. There is non-stop bombing with rockets, mortar bombs and tank shells. There were more than 50 people injured in Bab Amr today.
"I saw with my own eyes kids with no legs, and a kid who lost his whole bottom jaw. It is terrible."

@longde:And I think that anyone from any country would be in a bad position if they went on a foreign broadcast and openly blasted their country and government. They may not be thrown in a gulag, but it wouldn't sit well with the neighbors and boss.

You can't honestly speak like the risk of being thrown in a gulag is equivalent and no different from something not sitting well with the neighbors and boss. If you say something in China that stirs up enough people and you keep on saying it, ending up in a jail is a very real possibility. Meanwhile in America that's exactly what guys like Michael Moore not only make a habit of, they make a very profitable career out of it.


On Taiwan, most mainland chinese consider it a province of China, as well as Tibet. Little real dissent there.

The right of the Taiwanese and Tibetan people to self determination though is in stark contrast to that of Iraqi's, Libyan's, Afghan's, and Syrians. Despite opposing military action in every one of those countries, when it comes to Taiwan and Tibet, it is unquestioningly accepted that all out war is the natural and just course against the people of Taiwan and Tibet if they were to declare independence. That's a stark contrast, and one that I believe would be unexpected by a westerner listener who had just heard the same people opposing military adventures and the global police.

What is the direct damage of voting against the UN measure?

First off, use the right terms. China and Russia didn't merely vote against the UN motion, if they had only done that the motion would have still carried with a majority in favor. China and Russia exercised their veto rights, to trump the will of the majority on the Security council. It's their right within the structure of the UN SC, but that they used it to protect Assad while he murders his own people is hardly something defensible.

As for the direct damage, Syria immediately stepped up it's offensive on Homs:
Speaking to Al Jazeera, Danny Abdul Dayem, a resident of Homs, said: "It has been terrible. There is non-stop bombing with rockets, mortar bombs and tank shells. There were more than 50 people injured in Bab Amr today.

"I saw with my own eyes kids with no legs, and a kid who lost his whole bottom jaw. It is terrible."

I agree...whats his face fits tony stark perfectly....HUgh jackman though kinda sucked imo...way to PG...too clean, not believably grundgy, dark, conflicted enough for the role (although he looked the part closely enough though).


In reply to this comment by artician:
>> ^Shepppard:

Ohh, that awesome genius billionaire playboy philanthropist.


He's really the only guys I'd see this for. He fits that character so well, in the same way Wolverine was so aptly cast in the Xmen films. I really wish all of these films were handled with that level of perfection, though I know that's fantasy, it would be phenomenal for everyone to see their favorite superhero portrayed by someone who had that perfect "thing" for the role.

I figured out why I don't like this series (I love it actually but one thing I just fucking hate).


*SPOILERS* The Ned Stark murder people argue that it makes the show interesting "Oooo now anyone can die isn't that different than any other show? Doesn't that raise the tension?" The answers to those questions are YES it is different than any other show...but no it doesn't raise the tension. To me if you say everyone can die that means that I'm just waiting for when. It's like before I was in a room where I know various deadly traps exist but I can't see them. With the execution now there is a nuclear weapon just above the room waiting to drop. There's no tension for me because I know I'm screwed. Also building tension for seemingly unkillable contracted TV stars is a skill, one that some people (Joss Whedon) can master and well this show didn't even try. Just fuck it, they're all able to die it's just like real life. Don't like real life, I want a TV show instead I've been given a horror movie where nothing is fun it's only inevitable. *SPOILERS*

Yeah no one agrees with me...I don't care.

Cheers. Can't wait for Season 2... I started re-watching Season 1 tonight, thanks to your postings.

In reply to this comment by Lilithia:
I used YouTube embeds for the later parts. I changed the older parts to YouTube, too, so they all should work now.
>> ^therealblankman:

These HBO embeds suck ass. Take forever to even show up on the screen, use huge bandwidth, won't buffer properly. Finding Youtube embeds would work better.

I used YouTube embeds for the later parts. I changed the older parts to YouTube, too, so they all should work now.
>> ^therealblankman:

These HBO embeds suck ass. Take forever to even show up on the screen, use huge bandwidth, won't buffer properly. Finding Youtube embeds would work better.

>> ^kevingrr:

@conan
I'm no lawyer, but the camera is on his property and mostly for the security of his property. Cameras are everywhere on private property that have a view of public alleys and roadways.
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy here - the fedex guy is in public on a sidewalk. So there is no "invasion of privacy".
I am not familiar with German law at ALL, but if someone takes your photograph while you are in a public place is that a crime?
That is all secondary to the fact that his job is to safely deliver goods/packages.


Funny but 100% true: Yes, it is against German law to take a picture of a person in public space without their consent. You can however take pictures of "sceneries", i.e. without the main picture content being a single person. Say you take a picture of a roller coaster at Oktoberfest, there most probably will be several persons on that picture but that's perfectly okay. But if you take a picture of the good looking waitress you fancy, that's illegal. Yes that sounds strange and yes it is highly impractical but the law is the law.

And if you install a camera on your property to watch over your driveway it must not film the street or sidewalk. If it does (and anyone finds out) you'll be fined.

German law in this context does not focus on the surroundings (i.e. public / private) but on the privacy of persons. But anyhow: German privacy laws are extremely strict (therefore B2C telemarketing is illegal for example, i could name tons of other examples...).

I never dealt with US laws regarding privacy in detail, i only knew there nearly is no such thing as privacy outside your own home in the US. I just read up some details and the difference between these two countries is pretty stark.

Does it work if you open it directly on the HBO Website?

>> ^Xax:

Presumably blocked - all I see is white.

Arya's in for quite a time in season 2. All the Starks, actually. They'd have been better off had they stayed in Winterfell.

Peacefull protest demonstrated in a video giving a happy feeling is not *happy. Fuck off.

>> ^bcglorf:

This is not HAPPY.
I am Canadian and this is an underlying conflict that is simmering away waiting to explode.
This was a single border crossing that happens to be on a Mohawk reserve. The federal government decided to arm the border guards at all crossings across the country. The argument against arming the guards in this particular crossing was that it would lead to an armed conflict between some of the people there and the border guards. That means absolutely crazy tensions already exist.
The conflict in Canada that has been brewing for awhile now is that the Mohawk people on this reserve, and many natives on other reserves across the country do NOT recognize themselves as Canadian citizens. They do not recognize Canada as their nation. There are treaties that lend legal weight to that interpretation, so they are in many/most cases right on this too. The trouble comes in when large portions of Canadian tax dollars are still being distributed to these non-Canadian reserves. Again, there is legal precedent in the treaties for this too, but it is becoming a major point of tension.
The most damaging tension in this is that the leaders of the reserves are nominally the leaders of their own independent nation, but it is a nation that is nearly 100% reliant and dependent on a much larger nation. When something goes wrong on a reserve, like the housing falling apart or the water supply failing, who gets blamed? The reserve leaders demand it's Canada's fault for not funding them. Canada says it's the reserve leaders fault because they DID fund them. The reserves are nominally independent so they largely refuse to allow any input or support from Canada except cold cash. The victims in all this are the people living on the reserves with corrupt or incompetent leaders and/or the ones living on reserves that aren't adequately funded by Canada. Those poor residents are pawned off between the two with both the reserve leaders and Canada's leaders declaring it's not their fault the housing and water there are no good.
The situation on reserves as a whole in Canada today is horrible. The conditions on any given reserve compared to it's neighboring 'Canadian' towns are stark and shameful. It's the fault of both the local leaders and Canada's leaders for their failures to workout a solution for the people's problems.
What it's created is a system that segregates people based on race, generally leaves the segregated communities in underprivileged conditions and assesses and distributes tax dollars differently, again dependent upon race. It's a system tailor made to create racist resentment and tension. What's worse, fixing it ultimately means revisiting ancient treaties which is inevitably going to open up yet more racist resentment and tension.
This is SAD.