Fox News -Still Jerks- want wikipedia to be censored.

Post Reply New Topic

Inuyasha-

Consider yourself lucky you've never heard of the Kardashians. The Horror! The Horror!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

How about you go look at Drudge Report sometime, Drudge Report links to a variety of news sources...



Average Fox News viewers would probably say the same thing, who the heck cares about the Kardashians...



So now Fox News viewers like myself are being called pedophiles, after having been called racists, homophobes, and islamophobes, stupid, etc... This is why many Conservatives have no respect for liberals, when you can't win using the facts (which is most of the time) you smear people.



ArrantPariah, the FBI and other law enforcement generally does not press charges against someone that runs across something like that online and immediately reports it to law enforcement. Do you have any idea how incredibly stupid that would make them look? Seriously, assuming the individual is not involved in the creation of it, and ran across it on accident, the FBI isn't going to charge that person for reporting the site to them, if they did that, they would be helping the child abusers continue terrorizing children...



You really have no idea what you are talking about, if that were the case everyone that has ever been on a jury in a child sex abuse case would have to be arrested...

If you run across something like that online and immediately report it to law enforcement, generally you're not going to get charged because instead of letting it continue you're reporting the crime to put a stop to it.

The reason why Fox News wasn't charged with anything boils down to intent, Fox News was putting pressure on the FBI and/or wikipedia to take down the illegal material. Furthermore, Fox News was putting public pressure on the FBI to find and arrest those responsible for the creation of that material. If the Feds went after Fox News for putting public pressure on them to actually get that illicit material pulled and to go after the people abusing the kids, it would be a public relations nightmare for the government.



Probably cause they got taken down not long after Fox News reported on it (which it's sad that it took a news organization to force the FBI to do their job in the first place).

And conservatives don't ever smear liberals?
Think of only the insane charges that the President is a foreign born Muslim? Or that he's gay? Or even that he's the Antichrist? And this is coming from Republicans in elected office!
Or most recently, how Romney smeared literally half the country as losers not worthy of his vote?
I could go on and on.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

This is hilarious. Inuyasha's gonna need a bigger shovel for that grave..

And I'm pretty sure if there was anything illegal about the information on Wikipedia it is swiftly reported and edited out.
But censoring Wikipedia isn't something that should happen given the extreme amount of updates all the articles go through.
Such a place is monumental to things like freedom of public information to the public, and allowing the masses to educate themselves. If there's illegal content allow for the owners to take it down or just get the authorities to handle specific content. Once we start letting authorities determine whether an entire library stays because of 1 banned book we sacrifice not only freedom of thought for security but knowledge as well.

Thought this little tidbit might be funny - even though sadly enough, ti's true.
After Sarah Palin was found to be in error when she claimed George Revere had taken his famous midnight ride to warn how the British were coming to seize the colonists guns (a factual error, in fact), her supporters had tried to alter the Wikipedia entry on Revere to support their goddess, till Wikipedia locked the entry down.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Isn't this kind of like how religious indoctrine works?

For that kind of right wing religion, I would suppose so.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Well He still has the backlash wave so be careful.

You didn't deny the "w*king off to internet porn" bit, did you?

That is your preferred conclusion: Fox News acted heroically; the FBI failed to do its job. However, this time you failed to implicate President Obama. You're slipping.

Back when Napster came out, the news media reported on it, and pretty much encouraged the nation to download music illegally.

Fox News has sunk to a new low: reporting on where to find illegal pornography, so that Fox viewers will be able to go and look at it.

For shame!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Sheesh. Shooting fish in a barrel...

You'll gain more respect when you stop quoting worthless noise generators like Fox and the UK's The Daily Mail - and you seem to have gone rather quiet on that other thread, having had what you reported exposed as half-truths and lies by the simple expedient of... checking a couple of other sources.
The shocking truth is that people deride Fox because it is in fact utter crap. There is no ulterior motive - there doesn't need to be one.

Of course it isn't - but if that 36 year-old album cover had actually been child pornography then it would have been removed, and presumably also from Amazon and every record shop on the planet still selling it.
Oh, and it's not "illicit content". Constantly saying it is doesn't make it so.

I would have said that the primary responsibility of any news organisation is to remain unbiased and establish the truth, before reporting anything. One day, Fox might experiment with either of these but I doubt it.
Law enforcement wasn't sitting on its hands, either - it was doing nothing, because nothing needed doing.
There was no "situation". There still is no "situation" - just lots of huffing and puffing from a self-righteous Fox News.

But it isn't illegal material.
You mean the album cover? Have they tried contacting the girl's mother? She (along with the model's sister and three female assistants) was present at the photography shoot and AFAIR that and the photographer's details have been in the public domain during the 36 years since that cover artwork was created and remained freely available.
There's also the minor detail of the FBI attempting to arrest German citizens (where the photographs were taken, IIRC) for creating something almost 40 years ago which isn't illegal anyway.
Well, I expect they have more pressing things to attend to...
Once again: it isn't illicit material and the child on the album cover wasn't abused.
That album cover - as "illegal" and "illicit" "child pornography" involving "abusing the kids" (I expect puppies get kicked too) - is still and always has been freely available. The way Fox carries on you'd think it only existed on Wikipedia - and there's a small clue about their motives, for those with the eyes to see it.
Either the rest of the world are slavering paedophiles (there's one around every corner, kids!!), or no-one cares - or Fox is just being self-righteous and desperately trying to whip up a story where none exists.
And just like like The Daily Mail, that's all it ever does.

Cornflake, would you object to me starting a religion with you as its central deific figure?

hehe.

cornflake, for some reason that post soudned like brian in my head, kudos.

Cornflake, if it helps your argument that album cover you mentioned is in the top 1000 album covers of all time or at least has been prior to 2005. This wasn't voted by an individual, either, and yes would have been removed if offensive.

Cornflake, I can say with absolute certainty, that Sean Hannity, has more integrity than all the news sources you probably use COMBINED.

After what happened on 9/11/2012 and the media attacks on Romney rather than doing their jobs (an American Ambassador was murdered, do you know when that last happened, I do, it was 1979).



You only have your left wing sources saying that the album cover was what Fox News had reported on. Which really doesn't make any sense, because Wikipedia's co-founder had reported wikipedia to the FBI.



Just like what happened in Libya was a "spontaneous attack caused by an internet video insulting Islam," really Cornflake while some media sources are finally reporting the truth, Fox News pointed out that it wasn't a spontaneous attack last week.



How do you know, just cause some pundit at say mediamatters tells you that doesn't make it true.



Again you are assuming that media sources with an ax to grind, are actually telling you the truth... Fact of the matter is you're assuming that the pictures the media is using as the example material in order to bash Fox News, are the pictures that got reported to the FBI.





Again you're assuming that it was the album picture, you're assuming that your "source" is telling the truth.



Perhaps, perhaps not. While I am well aware I have Conservative leanings, fact of the matter is that I don't think any of you realize your own bias.

Cornflake, to be rather blunt, if you had any objectivity you would have to admit how easy it is to remove something from a server if one really wants to, there are also a few key things that you are not aware of.

For instance, Conservative bloggers have been targetted by leftists phoning in phony "shootings" and then SWAT teams show up to said Conservative's house... Fortunately no one has been killed yet, but you don't hear about it from much of the mainstream media. Fox News reported on it, and before you say Fox News is making it up, I actually know of at least two bloggers this has happened to already (one of which I can't think of his name off the top of my head, but the other's name is Erick Erickson (whom is also a CNN contributor)).

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1lmWqZp_tY[/youtube]

I'll give kudos to CNN for reporting on it, but not sure they would have done so if not for the fact Mr. Erickson is one of their employees.

This is relevant because if this had happened to a leftist the media would be going ballistic, but since it happened to a Conservative the Media is perfectly fine with it.

So with things like that happening, and Conservatives like those at Fox News are risking their lives on a daily basis to even report news, you'll understand that I think they have more credibility than the sources you are using.