>> ^vlsd:

first off, the reporter was there before the police started arresting and shoving people. second, i can't believe you're advocating that the press should be intimidated by any sort of violence. that is the quickest and surest way to creating a police state.
>> ^Beefpile:
OK so there's a massive dogpile of police arresting people while being pushed, shoved, and yelled at... and this reporter decides to run into them with a camera. BRILLIANT. Why would anyone do that, I wonder? Was it because if you throw yourself in a chaotic moment like that, there is a good chance you will be injured either on purpose or by mistake? Did he want to be injured so that he could post police hate all over the internet?



I didn't advocate that press should be intimidated by violence. That's just something you assumed. I will say though, that he could have gotten a better view of the violence a few feet away. He jumped into the dogpile for a reason and it wasn't to get a better shot. If he wanted a good shot for reporting he would have stood back where he could get all of the action in view and less ambient noise.

OK so there's a massive dogpile of police arresting people while being pushed, shoved, and yelled at... and this reporter decides to run into them with a camera. BRILLIANT. Why would anyone do that, I wonder? Was it because if you throw yourself in a chaotic moment like that, there is a good chance you will be injured either on purpose or by mistake? Did he want to be injured so that he could post police hate all over the internet?

3 things I dislike about this video:
1) it's fake
2) it's not funny
3) it has an ipad in it

Ugh.... so tired of looking at police brutality videos getting upvoted all the time. Seriously, police are human beings just like the rest of us. That means just like the rest of us, there's going to be some douches out there. This is not new or interesting.

Every movie on that list has a male main character. Why would they want to have scenes with women talking to each other that don't relate to the main character or his story? If they did, those scenes would be off-topic.

This test does not determine if movies are catering to men or women, it simply determines whether the main character is male or female.

One of the movies on the list was Braveheart. The whole motivation of the main character in that movie was his wife. We are reminded of this several times throughout the movie:
- when he avenges her death by cutting the throat of the lord who killed her
- when he dreams of her
- when he tells the princess of england that she reminds him of her
- when he envisions her in the crowd at the end while being tortured
- when Robert the Bruce carries her rag with him in the battle in the very last scene in the movie before credits roll

To say that movie has no female presence is absolutely asinine.

I played the demo on Xbox Live and loved it. Can't wait to get my hands on the full version!

>> ^hpqp:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://religion.videosift.com/member/Beefpile" title="member since April 28th, 2010" class="profilelink">Beefpile
No one is claiming all Catholic priests are like that; the majority of accusations and calls for action against such crimes came from members of the clergy themselves (did you even watch the video?). Moreover, the problems are not only "in the past"...
Also, note how I did not entitle the video: "The Christian Faith: 2000 years of paedophilia"... there is a big difference.
Regardless, I would have no qualms posting a video entitled "Islam: 1400 years of violence" if someone where to make such a video on the subject.


You just put an awful lot of words in my mouth that I never typed.

edit: Wow that's a lot of weird code.... apparently the quote button doesnt work or maybe I'm just using it wrong.

It's true there have been problems with Paedophilia and Catholic priests in the past, but don't let that cloud your judgement of all Catholics and all Catholic priests. They are not all like that.

I also dislike the title of this video. If someone were to post a video called "The Muslim Faith: 2000 Years of Terrorism" they would be called ignorant or intolerant. I don't see how this is different.