Your video, More Evidence Trump Can't, Or At Least Won't Read, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

radical islamic terrorism is the usage of a rigid fundamentalist interpretation as a justification predicated on abysmal politics.

ill-thought and short sighted politics is the tinder.
hyper-extremist fundamentalism is the match.

ISIS would never even have existed without al qeada,who themselves would not have existed without US interventionism into:iran,egypt and saudi arabia.

and this is going back almost 70 years.

so lets cut the shit with apologetics towards americas horrific blunders in regards to foreign policy.actions have consequences,there is a cause and effect,and when even in the 50's the CIA KNEW,and have stated as much,that there would be "blowback" from americas persistent interventionism in those regions.which stated goals (in more honest times) was to destabilize,dethrone (remove leaders not friendly to american business) and install leaders more pliant and easily manipulated (often times deposing democratically elected leaders to install despots.the shah and sadam come to mind).

see:chalmers johnson-blowback
see: Zbigniew Brzezinski-the grand chessboard.

or read this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-created-al-qaeda-and-the-isis-terror-group/5402881

so to act like islamic radicals just fell from the fucking sky,and popped out from thin air,due to something that has been boiling for almost 70 years is fucking ludicrous.

radicalization of certain groups in populations have long been understood,and well documented.

and religion,though the most popular,and easiest tool to motivate and justify heinous acts of violence for a political goal,is not the SOLE tool.

nationalism is another tool used to radicalize a population.
see:the nazi party.

but it always comes down to:tribalism of one kind or another.

@transmorpher

so when you use this "ISIS themselves, in their own magazine (Dabiq) go out of their way to explain that they are not motivated by the xenophobia or the US fighting wars in their countries. They make specifically state that their motivation is simply because you aren't muslim. You can go an read it for yourself. They are self confessed fanatics that need to kill you to go to heaven. "

to solidify your argument,all i see is someone ignoring the history and pertinent reasons why that group even exists.

you may recall that ISIS was once Al qeada,and they were SO radical,SO fanatical and SO violent in their execution of religious zeal..that even al qeada had to distance themselves.

because,again...
religion is used as the justification to enact terrorism due to bad politics.
but the GOAL is always political.

you may remember that in the early 90's the twin towers were attacked and it was the first time americans heard of al qeada,and osama bil laden.

who made a statement back in 1993 and then reiterated in 2001 after 9/11 that the stated goal (one of them at least) was for the removal of ALL american military presence in saudi arabia (there was more,but it mostly dealt with american military presence in the middle east).

but where did this osama dude come from?
why was he so pissed at america?
just what was this dudes deal?

turns out he was already on the road to radicalization during the 80's.coming from an extremely wealthy saudi arabian family but had become extremely religious,and he saw western interventionism as a plague,and western culture as a disease.

he left the comforts of his extremely wealthy family to fight against this western incursion into his religious homeland.he traveled to afghanistan to join the mujahideen to combat the russians,who were actually fighting the americans in a proxy war.and WE trained osama.WE armed him and trained him in the tactics of warfare to,behind the scenes,slowly drain russia of resources in our 50 year long cold war.

how's that for irony.

osama was not,as american media like to paint the picture "anti-democratic or anti-freedom".he saw the culture of consumerism,greed and sexual liberation as an affront to his religious understandings.

this attitude can be directly linked to sayyid qtib from egypt.who visited the united states as an exchange student in 1954.now he wasnt radicalized yet,but when he returned to egypt he didnt recognize his own country.

he saw coco cola signs everywhere,and women wearing shorts skirts,and jukeboxs playing that devils music "rock and roll".

he feared for his country,his neighbors,his community.
just like a southern baptist fears for your soul,sayyid feared for the soul of his country and that this new "westernization" was a direct threat to the tenants laid down by islam.

so he began to speak out.
he began to hold rallies challenging the leadership to turn away from this evil,and people started to take notice,and some people agreed.

change does not come easy for some people,and this is especially true for those who hold strong religious ideologies.
(insert religion here) tends to be extremely traditional.

so sayyid started to gain popularity for his challenge if this new "westernization",and this did not go un-noticed by the egyptian leadership,who at that time WANTED western companies to invest in egypt.(that whole political landscape is totally different now,but back then egypt was fairly liberal,and moderately secular).

so instead of allowing sayyid to speak his mind.
they threw him in prison.
for 4 years.
in solitary.

well,he wasn't radicalized when he went IN to prison,but when he came OUT he sure was.

and to shorten this story,sayyid was the first founder of the muslim brotherhood,whose later incarnation broke off to form?

can you guess?
i bet you can!
al qeade

@Fairbs ,@newtboy and @Asmo have all laid out points why radicalization happens,and the conditions that can enflame and amplify that radicalization.

so i wont repeat what they have already said.

but let us take dearborn michigan as an example.
the largest muslim community in america.
how many terrorists come from dearborn?
how many radicals reside there?
how many mosque preach intolerance and "death to america"?
how many imams quietly sanction fatwas from the local IHOP against american imperialistic pigs?

none.

becuase if you live in stable community,with a functioning government,and you are able to find work and support your family,and your kids can get an education.

the chances of you become radicalized is pretty much:zippo.

the specific religion has NOTHING to do with terrorism.
religion is simply the means in which the justifications to enact violent atrocities is born.

it's the politics stupid.

you could do a thought experiment and flip the religions around,but keep the same political parameters and do you know WHAT we find?

that the terrorists would be CHRISTIAN terrorists.

or do i really need to go all the way back to the fucking dark ages to make my point?

it's
the
politics
stupid.

Congratulations! Your comment on Trump won't release his tax returns because... has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 21 Badge!

At the end of the day, we are talking about an unarmed teen girl. There are levels of reasonable force and levels of excessive force. This is clearly in the excessive region.

The sad thing is, it seems to be a maneuver that cops are wont to default to with kids. In the related video, a school officer body slammed a 12 year old girl. Elsewhere in Texas, an officer bodyslammed a teen girl for being at a pool party without a pass. That case is being taken to court, by the way, with the taxpayers possibly on the hook for 5 million.

We are doing something wrong when the only move that an officer can do to take an underage individual down is a bodyslam. This isn't fake wrestling, that isn't a canvas ring with some shock absorbing capabilities, and she isn't an actor who knows how to take a fall. Real and permanent damage could happen.

Can I do that with my Time Capsule? It'll be the router that both my laptop and Apple TV get internet from. I said I have AirVPN on my laptop - what steps would I take to get it running on the router, so it covers the Apple TV as well? I`d follow many guides such as: [url redacted] but it wont work on time capsule yet.

The population is greatly decreased.
And now the odds are greatly increased.
That I may someday get a chance,
to kiss your lips.
I thank the lo-o-ord each day,
for the apocalypse.

Folks are mostly disfigured or dead
but, sugar, I wont let it go to my head.
My mama's face has dripped down into the dirt.

But I'm still chasin' chitlins, whiskey and skirt.

colour grading as in DI is "new" and related to digital film but colour timing, which is the analogue method, goes back to the start of film making.

i've done work for several marvel films, their DI is generally pretty subtle. the raw footage def. has blacks (and negative values in the blacks). the new cameras used wont change this unless they want to change it. the colour gamut has been wide the whole time. OCIO colour may have a certain effect but i can't see it having the colour effect wanted here.

@AeroMechanical is exactly right. the new cameras aren't going to change shit. they're still going to grade the movies to be consistent with past movies. and they've fully had the latitude to grade them in a more vibrant manner the whole time.

and as far as rereleasing them as "UHD Blu-Ray box set" (i'm assuming 4K UHD), they can't. they were all done in HD or 2K (at least the ones i've worked on). uprezing is possible (4K outside of a theatre is actually pretty bullshit, you can uprez HD uncompressed to 4K without that much effect) but resolution doesn't change colour grading/DI.

I didnt write that comment to prove it to anyone. I just said my opinion. Some people wont even agree when they see the facts, since they are just like him, so why bother.

I don't want to repeat myself from the earlier thread, so I wont.
Just to say that Eric, you are an absolutely brilliant chap, and the sift wouldn't be the same without you!

P.S. I've always wanted to ask; What happened to the first 3578 Erics?

I'm basically done with defending WikiLeaks as well, after the shit they pulled with the leaks of Turkish data. Completely irresponsible, that one.

However, WikiLeaks doesn't need credibility -- the data does. And the data they published vis-á-vis Clinton/Podesta/DNC is, as of now, solid. There was one fake document, but that was shown to have been injected by someone other than WL.

"Strong bias" -- oh, I do have a strong bias. Plural, as in biases, actually. For instance, I'm disinclined to take anything the US intelligence agencies say at face value, given how they manufactured more than one casus belli. I don't put much weight into (un-)official statements in general, but especially since all the misinformation they spread about issues like the coup in Honduras or the actions of Nazi militias in Ukraine.

In this particular case, however, my argument is much simpler: Occam's razor seems much more likely than malicious intent. Propaganda outlets on both sides are run by people. Maybe the propaganda outlet Sputnik intentionally twisted the content of email, or maybe they just fucked up, like people are wont to do. Maybe someone intentionally fed Trump this bad info, maybe his people are just as incompetent as he is.

There are too many parts in this that include people who have more than once proven themselves to be utterly incompetent, or in complete ignorance of even the concept of truth. I don't think Trump gives a shit about truth or facts, he strikes me as the typical blowhard who spouts whatever shit comes to mind, and spins stories on the fly like a 4-year-old when caught red-handing.

No need for a conspiracy there, with all this incompetence, naiveté and plain disregard for facts.

So when they keep on pushing the Russian angle in this, it just seems like a desperate attempt to conjure up the old unifying enemy. Why worry about Russian propaganda when there's plenty on FOX and MSNBC/CNN? Why worry about Russian hackers when you accept the unbelievably insecure method of eletronic votes, partly without paper trails, and completely controlled by private companies?

It's just very strange to an outsider like me to see them focus on perceived external influences when the internals are a complete clusterfuck. And this presidential election is the biggest clusterfuck I've seen in 30 years, which doesn't mean much, admittedly.

That said, we can't just be looking at it from the outside with binoculars, not when people are back to full-blown Cold War rhetoric. When the ruling class in the US and/or the ruling class in Russia start their pissing contests and other forms of grandstanding, it's usually brown people who pay the price, like they have been in Syria for the last couple of years. And Libya. And Yemen. And Somalia. And Afghanistan, And Iraq. And Pakistan.

Personally, all the rhetoric about "standing up to Russian aggression" and similar nonsense makes me keenly aware that the bridge just outside my hometown was constructed with a shaft to place explosives in, to slow down advancing Soviet troops... so yes, I would very much like to bitch-slap all these warmongerers on both sides, but particularly the ones in the US since they are currently the ones racking up the highest death toll.

Edit: I should have made it clearer. Yes, WL is absolutely biased against Clinton and they do seem to act in support of Trump. Assange in particular. Which bums me out to no end, since I actually met the guy in person when they presented WL at the 26C3.

Congratulations! Your comment on Jim Gaffigan: Disagree? Calling Them a Moron Won't Help has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 24 Badge!

Oh, I already know how much you care about facts and just bend them the way you need them. But Ill bite. Once.

At least half of that is a lie, not based on actual facts, only on your interpretation, and has been proven wrong already. Yet you guys still believe it. And on the other side you dont believe the stuff about Hillary, that has been proven long ago, and every normal person would have been jailed for it long ago and lost all support from true ethic people. I mentioned the hypocrisy. And you have proven my points perfectly. Youre going off over words.

Its unmasking how you believe so much stuff that is based not once on facts, and yet you only mention the emails on Hillary. Only one thing.
Seriously? Do you think I will start a proper discussion with someone that biased? You guys make a joke of yourselves, and then wonder why people like Trump get more and more support. You dont even get how you only hurt yourself with sick thinking like that. You dont know cause and effect, and thats why you dont get whats going on in the world because of politically correct liars like Hillary. Your hypocrisy is choking me. Maybe thats your tactic though? You having no facts, and thus annoying the shit out of people with such bullshit and hypocrisy, that they wont even bother with you, so you can keep spewing that crap without intelligent people touching you, because they know its useless with you guys. Whatever, as I said, youre only hurting yourselves with jumping on lies, like the side you accuse of them, marking yourself with a big fat red bullseye for manipulators to target you even more.

You can just not vote then because it wont change anything.

I just dont get how some of you Americans are so afraid of Trump. Yeah, hes a loudmouth, but thats about it. He talks a lot of crap, but a lot is lied about or blown up by the media. He didnt show yet what he can do. Hillary on the other hand has shown very well what kind of sick despicable stuff she does and how much she cares about it getting public: She just lies more and puts up her creepy disconnected grin when confronted with it.

I think it shows perfectly whats wrong with the USA. Words mean more to you than actions. Fits perfectly into the Americans hypocrite stereotype. You have been lied to so much that you adapted it yourselves and thus hiding behind political correctness gives some kind of protection from the truth that has been going on for decades, not only in your own country, but especially the shit you did in other countries, killing millions of people, causing the mess we are in today. And here comes a guy who doesnt give a shit about it and just speaks his mind. Must be scary for a lot of people, who have been lying to themselves and others for their whole lives, I guess.

So, I suppose thats not racist? Next time an asian clip is uploaded I can use stereotypical chingrish to comment and that wont be racist either. Love these double standards

*backup=[...snipped...]

(edit) weird siftbot wont take it https://vimeo.com/167217111