The below is about the above video, take note that the following is from Big Peace:
Here’s an update on Youtube’s removal of Latma-TV’s English-subtitled “We Con The World” video – the parody of the politically correct posturing in the original “We Are The World” song. The Latma video parodied the singers as “Flotilla terrorists” singing about their propaganda tactics. The original English-subtitled video had over 3 million hits, before Youtube removed it due to a complaint of copyright violation on behalf of Warner/Chappell Music Inc. Versions with Hebrew subtitles can still be seen at Latma-TV channel here and within the Latma-TV weekly newscast.
When Youtube removed the links to the English-subtitled video, they effectively stopped the then 3-million plus viral distribution just as it was expanding, eliminating potentially millions of other views (see the classic analysis on viral marketing projections by Alan L. Montgomery of Carnegie Mellon University).
Latma-TV sent a formal request to Youtube to put the parody video “We Con the World” back up. The producers received an email back on June 18, stating the video would be back up in 10-14 business days. July 9 will be “day 14,” so the deadline is near for Youtube’s staff to make the judgment that the English-subtitled video was a legitimate parody – and therefore protected under the “Fair Use” provision in the US copyright law.
Watch this space for updates as we count down to July 9.
Meanwhile – as a comparison – you can view two satirical parodies, both from the Left’s perspective, of the “We Are The World” song that were NOT removed from Youtube.
The Media is how America fights its civil wars. In this war at least half the country is both under-served and is painfully aware it is being under-served and lied to.
Obama & Black Nationalists = zero mainstream media coverage.
One of the longest standing and most respected conservative journals Human Events, recently uncovered some shocking information on Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. She repeatedly cited a 20th century European Marxist-turned-Nazi Werner Sombert in her college thesis paper…
[….]
and now…
Kagan and her citing of Marxist/National Socialist Werner Sombart in her college thesis paper = zero mainstream media coverage.
Here is a larger portion of the Human Events article:
…During World War I, however, Sombart endorsed Germany’s “heroic” war against the “capitalist spirit” represented by England. In 1934, Sombart published Deutscher Sozialismus, which advocated the “total ordering of life” as an expression of the German Volksgeist, or “national spirit.”
…In the introduction to her 1981 thesis, Kagan addresses a question famously asked by Sombart: Warum gibt es in den Vereinigten Staaten keinen Sozialismus? — “Why is there no socialism in the United States?”
“The Socialist Party of the United States could not lay claim to the kind of pure proletarianism that Sombart considered essential to any socialist movement; indeed, most of the party’s members did not even consider this a worthy goal,” Kagan wrote on Page 3 of the thesis. “But the American socialists ‘failure’ to build a movement that even resembled Sombart’s idealized notion of a class-conscious party . . . did not render their party any less significant. Nor did such a failure render their party any less successful. In the first two decades of the twentieth century the American socialist movement, whose very existence Sombart refused to consider, grew if not by leaps and bounds at least by inches.”
In the final pages of her thesis — To the Final Conflict: Socialism in New York City, 1900-1933 — Kagan returns to Sombart’s theories, writing: “Why, in particular, did the socialist movement never become an alternative to the nation’s established parties? In answering this question, historians have often called attention to various characteristics of American society that have militated against widespread acceptance of radical movements. These societal traits — an ethnically divided worked class, a relatively fluid class structure, an economy which allowed at least some workers to enjoy what Sombart termed ‘reefs of roast beef and apple pie,’ — prevented the early twentieth century socialists from attracting an immediate mass following. Such conditions did not, however, completely checkmate American socialism.”
Even before he embraced National Socialism, Sombart’s socialist theories reflected an anti-Semitic tendency that identified Jews with capitalism, a theme explored in his 1911 book, Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben (“The Jews and Economics,” which was published in a 1913 English translation titled, The Jews and Modern Capitalism). In his 1915 book Handler und Helden (“Merchants and Heroes”), Sombart praised the “heroic” German character, contrasting them with “Trading Peoples,” especially Jews, whose “commercial” habits Sombart depicted as prevailing among the English.
The influence of Sombart, who died in 1942 at age 78, was scornfully cited in Friedrich Hayek’s famous 1944 book The Road to Serfdom. In Chapter 12 of that book — “The Socialist Roots of Nazism” — Hayek said that Sombart “had done as much as any man to spread socialist ideas and anticapitalist resentment of varying shades throughout Germany.”
Hayek also mentioned this in note #13 in the first chapter of The Road to Serfdom:
Historian of the development of capitalism Werner Sombart (1863-1941) was perhaps the last of the historical school economists. Hayek would view his move from left-wing socialism toward anticapitalism of the fascist variety as exemplifying a natural tendency.
…Of course it’s obvious why BP would want to minimize the problem. They are on the hook financially for the clean-up and their reputation as a “green energy” company is taking a severe hit. But recall that the President claims to have his boot on BP’s neck. The only comparable motivation for the Obama administration is politics.
Granted politics are always an issue where Presidents are involved, especially with the midterms approaching. But in this case there seems to be ample reason to conclude that politics is wagging the dog on the Gulf spill. When Katrina hit, the media went overboard with stories of everything up to murder (and just short of cannibalism) in flooded New Orleans. This time around, the media–with the exception of Rolling Stone, Mother Jones and now PBS–are being far too reticent to investigate the government’s response.
Chris Matthews famously felt a thrill going up his leg listening to an Obama speech. Now, MSNBC anchor Alex Witt has been similarly moved by Obamian oratory, declaring this morning “I got a few chills” listening to PBO’s “very powerful” speech on immigration.
Some old videos confirming why the left would get a “chill” up their leg:
May I first say I enjoy John Cole’s art and he is included often in my Sunday Toons and he isn’t always biased as he is here.
The above cartoonist mentions the following at his blog:
And I’m still waiting for a common sense explanation of how the convoluted grammar in the Second Amendment (“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”) lays out the right for everyone (who isn’t a convicted felon, etc.) to own a gun.
I will supply him with some original intent:
1) There is no contrary evidence from the writings of the Founding Fathers, early American legal commentators, or pre-twentieth century Supreme Court decisions, indicating that the Second Amendment was intended to apply solely to active militia members.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government.
In the appendix to the Commentaries, Tucker elaborates further:
This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty… The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Whenever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.
Not only are Tucker’s remarks solid evidence that the militia clause was not intended to restrict the right to keep arms to active militia members, but he speaks of a broad right – Tucker specifically mentions self-defense.
“Because ‘[g]reat weight has always been attached, and very rightly attached, to contemporaneous exposition,’ the Supreme Court has cited Tucker in over forty cases. One can find Tucker in the major cases of virtually every Supreme Court era.” (Source: The Second Amendment in the Nineteenth Century)
(William Blackstone was an English jurist who published Commentaries on the Laws of England, in four volumes between 1765 and 1769. Blackstone is credited with laying the foundation of modern English law and certainly influenced the thinking of the American Founders.)
Take note there is another aspect to this cartoon that seems to go unnoticed in Mr. Cole’s creative mind. It is this:
Forty children under age 5 die annually from drowning in water buckets at home.
One hundred fifty children under age 5 die from fires they start with cigarette lighters.
Mechanical locks diminish the effective value of guns because they require that a gun be unloaded, yet thousands of children are saved each year by adults who use loaded guns to defend themselves and their families against home intrusion.
Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year — or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.
As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse
Where is this in his cartoons? Which is why I wrote this on his blog:
Your drawing draws the slimmest of deaths. There are many more persons saved by the stopping of a criminal. So the drawing should be a tombstone with writing on it that would go something like this: “Here lies another criminal who was killed in the action of committing a crime against which an innocent person feared for her life.”
HotAir h/t – 90% OF Al Sharpton’s radio listeners applaud decision:
Fox & Friends invited me on air today to discuss how The Washington Post could run a small obituary on left-wing domestic terrorist Dwight Armstrong and describe in the headline only as a “Vietnam War protester.”…
Every other newspaper obit I found had the B-word (“bombing” or “bomber”) in the headline. In the New York Times, Margalit Fox had a strong opening:
Dwight Armstrong, one of four young men who in 1970 bombed a building on the University of Wisconsin campus in Madison, killing one person and injuring several others — a political protest that, gone violently wrong, endures in the national memory as an act of domestic terrorism — died on June 20 in Madison….
