There isn't anythng wrong with that thread. The pictures are linked with very explicit warnings. Can't deal with the truth or are you for censorship suddenly?

Starting a topic was completely unnecesasry. If you have issues use the report to moderator.

.
[Edited 6/11/05 19:15pm]

lovemachine said:

...
...
i did orgnote it but i dont think they are working.....im sorry but when someone posts their collection of snuff movies on this website and dresses it up as "this is our enemy" thread which is complete rubbish, i dont want to have anything more to do with this website. prince.org is no place for snuff movies.
[Edited 6/12/05 4:19am]

lovemachine said:

...
...
i did orgnote it but i dont think they are working.....im sorry but when someone posts their collection of snuff movies on this website and dresses it up as "this is our enemy" thread which is complete rubbish, i dont want to have anything more to do with this website. prince.org is no place for snuff movies.
[Edited 6/12/05 4:19am]

blackboab said:

i agree - foreign policy could be discussed without having that kind of salacious footage shown. while i support Dook's right to post this stuff, my question is, does it contribute to serious discussion of a very serious topic, or is it intended to start a flame war?

IrresistibleB1tch said:

I believe it does.Personally, I havent clicked on those links ,because it isnt something I would want to veiw.However,I think it is necessary that the truth about the terrorist's tactics should be presented in that forum ,as a counterpoint the usual anti-US / pro-terrorist threads.
[Edited 6/12/05 7:58am]

MrTation said:

ok, i'm going to ignore that last statement - we've been around that block a million times. if you can find one orger who sides with the atrocities of the terrorists, let me know.

again, i'm in favor of Dook's RIGHT to post this stuff. i actually believe that we should not shelter ourselves from the suffering others endure - ALL others. (as Albert Schweitzer said: "think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight.")

now, taking this a step further, we can have many threads with "look at this footage of somebody being killed - it proves my point!" and "yeah, but look at THIS footage of carnage - it proves MY point!". what that kind of tit-for-tat does is mire us more deeply in pre-conceived notions. how can that be constructive? a much more poignant discussion could be, for example, "what underlies the policies that cause people to kill others?", "who benefits from creating the concepts of enemies", etc.

i see a lot of threads like that started by very thoughtful orgers - Shanti, Namepeace, Abrazo, etc. - folks who can see beyond the black-and-white simplistic notions of patriotism that are the root of threads like the one we are dicussing.

Well...I'll concede that "anti US" and "pro-terrorist" aren't exactly synonymous , but the "folks who can see beyond..." bit sounds pretty elitist to me.Both sides of these issues have valid points .

lovemachine said:

...
...
i did orgnote it but i dont think they are working.....im sorry but when someone posts their collection of snuff movies on this website and dresses it up as "this is our enemy" thread which is complete rubbish, i dont want to have anything more to do with this website. prince.org is no place for snuff movies.
[Edited 6/12/05 4:19am]

MrTation said:

i agree - both sides have valid points when they can get beyond the good-vs-bad basics. but the thread we're talking about isn't one of those.

IrresistibleB1tch said:

im not posting this to give your views a big "whoop whoop" (even though I do agree with them....but:

I AM SOO F*CKING GLAD TO SEE YOU BACK!!!!!

Anybody watching snuff movies for whatever reason is sick in the head. In a very bad way. Posting and thus endorsing them is even worse. Fucked up.

Teacher said:

respectfully disagree..

sosgemini said:

Whatever, I still can't see how posting links to snuff films are an argument to ANYTHING. Besides, snuff films are illegal in most countries, posting links to them could be as well. Can we get Matt's take on this? (Can't believe I just asked that )

Teacher said:

this issue has already been debated....Ben made the final call.....so if your that upset about it take it up with him....at the time all the mods envolved agreed that content like this (with warnings) was acceptable....

now, unless there is something new to this debate i dont see the point in rehashing the debate....everybody is making their views known on the issue, and thats fine...

but the decision has already been made....im sorry, i know this isnt the answer you want to hear because you disagree.....but like i said in my previous post, i respectfully disagree..

i hope all those who disgree can do the same...

I don't have a problem with it I guess. Though I wouldn't have a problem either if you all chose not to allow it.

I guess I'm just a little curious if you guys discussed what would happen if someone who felt strongly about these videos one way or the other, posted a comment that might be considered offensive.

Would their comment be deleted?

i wasnt going to add anymore to this debate but i cant believe that some of the moderators cant see how badly this reflects on this well-run website, a website that i have visited every day for the last 4 years.
...
i would just like to ask the moderators that if someone decided to put a link to a video clip on this website of some pedophilia and called the thread "pedophilia...curable or not"...would this be allowed???....or if some orger decided to film himself killing someone and posted it on this website with the thread title "he had it coming"....would this be allowed???.....i really dont see much difference in those and what has been allowed here.....its still clips of people getting murdered and it has been approved by this website....
...
what i am saying is you have to draw the line somewhere and video clips of people getting murdered have no place on this website and no argument can cover this up.
...
...
we all know what the world is like but i cant be a member of a website that allows itself to be associated with snuff movies.

I orgnoted this point to someone else today, but I figured I would post it here as well...

We do remove links to bootleg sites. So, in that regard, we are sending mixed messages with regards to our policy on links to illegal/offensive material.

I still feel that noone is being forced to watch the videos, they are clearly clicking these links on their own free will, and in spite of the warning. It's also common knowledge that Prince.org did not produce these videos, host these videos, or endorse them in any way.

The practice of replacing offensive pics posted directly on threads, with their URL and a warning is a fair compromise to prevent people from seeing things they didn't anticipate.

I'm under the impression, that some people on here allowed curiosity to get the best of them, and watched the videos despite their warning. And now they are taking their disgust out on prince.org, as opposed to the source of the videos.

If we were to start removing links to offensive material, whats the cutoff point to where its ok to post. Can we all agree on the same criteria and make everyone happy?
[Edited 6/13/05 10:35am]

as a sidenote: as i was driving home from out of town i couldnt help but think, "man..if people were this engaged in their congressional and federal representation here in the States.....our government would be held a lot more accountable for its actions"..

that was just a lil thought i have.....and its not even really directed at the participants of this site...more so the lack of involvement nationally...

sosgemini said:

The people most upset with that thread and what its legal posting implies aren't american. Remember that.

Teacher said:

and for the most part they arent participants of the p&r forum either.