Buds 131 Youtube channel shut down
Yes, I am well aware that Don Shipley has had his Youtube channel shut down. Youtube has even started shutting down some channels strictly because of the comments that are left and it having nothing to do with the actual content of video posted.
Patreon is a crowdfunding platform that allows people to directly support those who publish their own video content. It has become a nightmare as well.
Contrary to what some seem to think, I could care less what Shipley posts at his own site. I don’t watch his videos and I am not a member of his site and I have not been a member for years.
Don and Diane have worked for years to develop their own community. They have spent countless hours behind the scenes working to build what they have. They do what they do…we do what we do.
It’s amusing when I get emails and the such from people trying to stir up shit between what they do over there and what we do here. Its a waste of time, but amusing. I poke fun at people whom I respect and when I don’t … I generally ignore them.
We post mostly military-related content here. Just about anyone is welcomed to write a guest post. I try to read everything that is posted on this site each day. I can not and do not comment on every post made.
If anyone who visits this site finds it necessary to harass, bully or threaten anyone…start your efforts with me. That includes doing anything like that to one of the people we post for embellishing or manufacturing military service. I can not stand those who tarnish what honorable service the rest of us had, but I will defend them against threats of any kind. That is the root of why I got involved in Stolen Valor in the first place.
We post cases and move on.
I am not a supporter of what YouTube has done to the Buds131 channel, it hurts the entire community when one of us is seen as a bully that threatens and harasses people. We post the results of investigations along with the supporting documentation on each case. It is there for the world to see. We trust that people can come to their own conclusions about each case.
Category: Administrative, Media
Who?
They do what they do…we do what we do.
We post cases and move on.
Be careful, I might start thinking I’m not alone in my non-believing, libertarian, semi-anarchist leanings…..
For those who have a problem with those comments of yours, I’d suggest they’re not quite as clear on actual concepts of freedom as they think they are…
I still maintain that Heinlein got it pretty well right when he said “Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”
Surly Curmudgeons are always welcome, control freaks much less so in my world….
We post mostly military-related content here. Just about anyone is welcomed to write a guest post. I try to read everything that is posted on this site each day. I can not and do not comment on every post made.
For me I’d like to say thank you for allowing me to be part of the guest posting, and indeed if you were to spend time commenting on every post I would suspect life was not at all being kind to you…
Quot homines tot sententiae: suus cuique mos.
Much more nicely put than how my dad used to say it…
I wanted to leave the stink out of it.
I have an opinion about that
Interesting concept put forth but am unsure that you can political divide all folks up as stated.
Amen. It’s a free will life.
#OldMethTooth video I bet.
Only the Left gets to ‘kill’ its heroes?
Anyone defending that guy is actually retarded.
This may drive us all further and further into the dark alleys of the internet.
Our social media presence will become the equivalent of speakeasies during the days of prohibition.
Guess we are seeing Amendment 1.1 to the Constitution of these United States. ie; you have the right to free speech as long as it agrees with what we want you to say.
A slippery slope….indeed.
I do not have to agree with what someone says, but I will defend their right to say it.
Except on these private networks owned by corporations you only get to toe the corporate line.
Free speech on the internet doesn’t actually exist, the funny part is the corporations that were whining about “net neutrality” were selling the idea that dismantling net neutrality meant that providers would be able to discriminate against data and wouldn’t insure equal and fair access.
Which makes these cases so interesting to me, because clearly the corporations never had any desire to worry about YOUR access only theirs.
Corporate America is great for a lot of things, an altruistic view of human endeavor and dissent are not among those things.
Not supporting Net Neutrality was one of the biggest mistakes in the history of public discourse and free expression.
Moving forward we have essentially completely privatized the public square and corporate profit determines who gets a voice and who can hear it.
You mean like YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook, all of which have a hugely liberal/antiAmerican bias?
Pretty much exactly like that…the “public square” of data with zero actual free expression allowed…
Liberal used to mean support for the free exchange of ideas, now liberal in the United States stands for variants of collectivism where dissent is not only discourage but actively suppressed.
Got any data backing that up? I mean, I’m relatively sure that the Silicon Valley crowd of young people is skewed liberal because a) California and b) young people, so the company may lean hugely liberal, but the content on Facebook is a different story:
Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/gop-accuses-facebook-censorship-conservative-media-flourishes-online-n865276
I’m all ears for other data, but I see this thrown out a lot and it doesn’t exactly match my experience. This doesn’t mean Facebook is conservative either – it’s just that there’s a lot of nuance and uncertainty here. Eg, you might still have a slight lean in liberal users, but a conservative one in actual activity.
Your article is discussing liberal vs conservative entertainment value measured in likes LC. That’s a bit different than the Facebook Community Standards Team suppressing conservative commentary.
Air America and the like fail because they’re not funny, they’re not entertaining and even liberals get bored to tears by their own commentary. Conservative opinion commentators know how to play to their audiences for a great return.
The article you cite even indicates there was a previous bias in how the News Feed displayed pages, Facebook fired that team but it doesn’t actually state the algorithms were replaced in whole with new ones that worked to balance display between conservative and liberal.
Occupy Democrats can post lie after lie after lie on Facebook without ever being banned. Occupy is so full of shit that Politifact claims most of what they post is false…
It’s easy to find articles that support both sides on this and I admit I could have perception bias, although I tend to take a little pride in disliking both Democrats and Republicans with equal fervor…being a libertarian here is not as bad as being a liberal but it’s not endearing you to the masses either.
I think the article touches on a number of things – ‘engagement’ is probably linked to something like ‘likes’ (or comments), but it also mentions that there are three times as many conservative publishers as liberal ones on Facebook. That’s just presence, not likes.
Now, if we have (just for the sake of example) 300 conservative ‘publishers’ and 100 liberal ones, and let’s just say 10% of each gets reported and subsequently banned, .. well, unsurprisingly, more conservative ones are getting banned than liberals. That isn’t evidence of bias, though – on the contrary, the 10% number that failed to pass censors was applied equally.
I have no doubt that Occupy Democrats post a lot of shit – but, if we had a huge swath of data from Facebook, I’d be willing to bet a lot that an analysis would show there wasn’t an intrinsic bias built in to the algorithms to give OD a pass and flag some conservative groups, but rather the algorithms they do use are completely apolitical, but are better at detecting things like a fetus (for, say, a conservative Catholic group writing an anti-abortion post) than, say, some erroneous calculation of how CEOs earned $3T playing tiddlywinks this weekend. Image analysis, for example, is a lot more technically advanced than lexical and statistical analysis.
Put differently, I don’t think there’s this bias conservatives seem to believe exists – there’s just more conservative groups, and they post things that easily trigger algorithmic review (a gun, a fetus, certain keywords, etc.). It’s easier to flag, “Clinton is a bitch!” than “The 1% own 99.999999872% of money”, even though the latter doesn’t make sense.
The part that doesn’t work for either of us I suspect is that the data and algorithms would have to be supplied largely by those profiting off of that data and algorithm combination.
Consequently the whole, “we investigated ourselves and found no evidence of wrongdoing” would come into play rather quickly.
Your suggestion that it’s a scalable thing is perhaps appropriate However, I was basing my perception and comments on the reporting in your linked article where a bias was admitted previously and now we’re supposed to believe it’s all been worked out and everything is even steven…
With corporate America I tend to distrust first, especially in the absence of actual verifiable data. I’ve never found corporate America to be willingly honest if lies promote their profit margin. Honesty is all well and good, but in a corporation unless it’s profitized it’s without value to the corporate structure. I’ve lots of experience with corporate lies on a grand scale sadly.
“Algorithms” do what the programmer writes them to do.
They are not plucked whole from the tree of code. Someone writes them to produce desired results.
“It was the algorithms!” Yeah. It was the programmers.
Like statistics, algorithms are another way to lie.
your baseless assertion is judged to be “completely incorrect”.
As proven by the brigading that leads to just one side of the “public” debate being silenced and having only a voice on the “private” square.
Of course, if the identity and proggie brigades have their way, everyone (even them) will be silenced.
But, that is way the neutrality cookie crumbles…
“Corporate America is great for a lot of things, an altruistic view of human endeavor and dissent are not among those things.”‘
Well put, Veritas.
Oh, yeah.
I’m sorry for the Shipleys. Damned shame when you can’t speak the truth without getting banned. They sure as hell don’t ban the fags and anti-American sons of bitches do they?
Maybe we should learn to s**k d**k and burn the flag before we lose internet personhood.
Why would the social mafiosi pick a fight with the stolen valor community?
They do ban the fags when we love America and don’t buy into the leftist victim mentality.
Have you checked out Dave Rubin’s Rubin Report?
He’s another one who chose the Red Pill, and let the chips fall where they may.
I haven’t looked at his stuff specifically. I’ve followed the #WalkAway community for a while, but my experience predates them by a few years when I lost some friends and transferred colleges. I’m just glad I’m a vet because if I was 18 I’m not sure I would have had the life experience that enabled me to question the hard left campus crazies.
Rubin was running defense for the less-tolerant left for awhile until his falling out. I think they called him a ‘Nazi homophobe’ or something.
I do not share Rubin’s solutions and views but I respect his logic. Dude has some balls too, going up against Crowder and Shapiro.
Props to him for trying. I realized how crazy things had become after I had classmates who earnestly believed people should be able to run from the police if they’d had ‘bad experiences’ with them, believed rioting and looting was a valid way for ‘oppressed communities’ to express their grievances, and that while the killings were bad it was still partly Charlie Hebdo’s fault and they shouldn’t be allowed to publish offensive things because feelings. Most of these occurred in an ethics class, and went unchallenged by the professor.
The campus LGBT group was also a nightmare. The faulty advisors had hijacked it (not that most students would have disagreed) and decided the most important things we should do were force the college to give us a permanent room they didn’t have and we didn’t need, sponsor STD testing and and sex ed workshops, and ban Chik-fil-A from campus job fairs that they didn’t go to anyway. It felt like everyone decided to LARP Idiocracy for a year, and forgot to tell me.
Why, it is almost like they do not believe you are as human as everyone else, eh?
The Left was a big time proponent of Eugenics. (Arguably, still is.) Guess what was often a criteria for “undesirable”?
Welcome to reality.
Being a Admin of 2 sites that do share some common interests is a job in itself and even with some help one does lose some of their quality as to coverage, you are doing the best for us that you can and never feel like you have failed us in any way. I realize I am somewhat a pain often but I am slowly trying to mellow out as to those that provoke me with their vast knowledge they have learned from public publishing’s they read but for me they often cross the line as to their knowledge versus others personal experience of that time. Yes it is a rough time I am going through right now having found out things I was not aware of as to my pro ported status and my real status. I was starting to mellow out but had a phone call (while writing this) from the folks that started my personal mess here with their non searching of records as to my real service and their records of classing me otherwise. Yes I unloaded on the caller but stopped short of telling her to stick the paper work where the sun don’t shine. Now I shall go down to my low cavern and start over with the process. As for the dark alley’s, one must some times go down then so long as they select the alleys that are subject to either site, but on must be cautious as they go so as not go beyond the point where they can retreat to our main subject matters. Keep up this trying task as you are doing fine in my book.
Probably has something to do with pending lawsuits against the media.
They need to correct what is out there to fit the defense’s narrative.
I am unaware of any false accusations by Don but I don’t follow his stuff.
I have seen false stolen valor accusations published by other sites, including this one, so any private company that provides a platform for this kind of stuff runs the risk of being drawn into a lawsuit.
Essentially any media platform that talks about the lives of others by runs the risk of getting their facts wrong and being sued.
This is especially true for platforms like YouTube which directly profits from the content but does not directly control it. The fact that they directly profit makes juries less sympathetic to their defense that they do not control it when it comes to jury deliberations on how much responsibility Youtube has to deal with harmful content.
“I have seen false stolen valor accusations published by other sites, INCLUDING THIS ONE…”
When in hell have you seen TAH publish “false stolen valor accusations”?
There you go throwing shit on the wall to see what sticks when in fact none will!
You post shit like this out there most all of the time, but like this comment, never post links or proof to validate your accusation.
Intelligence officer my ass!!
All you are is a pompous former O-4 with shit for brains!
Very glad I never had to serve under you!
You know, before you say bullshit like above you should wait a damn second so I can respond to your bullshit accusation that I made it up.
HEY< you accuse TAH of having published false information on people in the past and I too would like to see you back it up. Here you go again spouting off without thinking and it's why the rest of TAH largely regards you as a JOKE!
Proof, Der Commisar. Publish one scintilla of proof. Standing by.
Which false accusations might those be, Lars?
Give specifics and links.
Post proof or retract.
He doesn’t have any links or specifics NHSparky, only socialist or communist thoughts are rolling around in that empty vessel he calls a head.
I remember this post, Jonn removed it I believe because there was some doubt.
The individual in question had served honorably in the Ranger Regiment but had not completed Army Ranger School.
Most Rangers that I have had contact with over the last 10 years consider an individual a Ranger if they have honorable service in the Ranger Regiment or have successfully completed the Ranger course.
Have honorable service in one of the lettered Ranger companies or LRRP units in Viet Nam. Most of these never had an opportunity to attend Ranger school.
Have honorable service in one of the numbered Ranger companies during the Korean conflict. Most of these never had an opportunity to attend Ranger school.
Have honorable service in one of the numbered Ranger Battalions during WW2. There was no Ranger course at that time.
Not a false accusation. It was about 18 months to two years ago.
I don’t remember his name. The guy was a democrat running for local office. Black guy.
Was accused of stolen valor for claiming to be a former Army Ranger because he never went to Ranger school.
But he did complete RAP and served in a Ranger Battalion so he legitimately was a former Army Ranger.
I argued with a dozen of you all a day and a half on the issue. Was just dismissed and told I was a moron. Ex was particularly aggressive in her insisting he was not a Ranger.
I never was a Ranger nor did I ever attend Ranger training, so I’m not up on all the criteria.
HOWEVER, seems to me attending RAP (Ranger Assessment Phase) DOES NOT make one qualified as an Army Ranger.
RAP is an assessment period.
You still have to attend & complete:
Mountain Phase
Swamp Phase
Desert Phase
Leadership positions
Peer evaluations
Than, and only then have you earned the tab.
Attending RAP only and then serving in a Ranger Battalion does not make one a “legitimate Ranger”.
Maybe one the former Rangers here at TAH can give a better comment than I.
See Commissar, I post links, not just spew words out of my face.
https://www.benning.army.mil/mcoe/usmc/content/pdf/Ranger1.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger_School#Capabilities
It does. If you graduate RAP and are assigned to the Ranger Regiment the Regiment officially regards you to be an Army Ranger and so does the US Army.
Ranger school is a leadership school. It is not required to be an Army Ranger. Though it is expected that a Ranger complete Ranger School to assume a leadership position in the Ranger Regiment.
You’re probably wasting your time, Sky. Lars’ opinions, however wrong and unsubstantiated, usually yield a product more solid than Quikrete…
I am not wrong about this. There is just a lot of people who do not know what the hell they are talking about concerning the term “Army Ranger”.
“There is just a lot of people who do not know what the hell they are talking about concerning the term “Army Ranger”.”
And you’re one of them.
You HAVE to have completed Ranger School in order to have earned the tab!
Attending RASP and then be assigned to a Ranger Regiment ONLY qualifies you to wear the 75th scroll, but DOES NOT make you a Ranger.
….RASP is the selection process to get into the 75th ranger regiment.
Ranger school is by far harder than RASP. Ranger school is in three phases… Benning phase…. Mountain phase and Florida swamp phase which lasts approximately 9 week.”
“If you are unable to complete the course, you may be dropped from the regiment and sent to serve elsewhere. Obviously, if you have your Ranger tab before you apply, it will only expedite you ability to serve in the regiment.”
https://www.goarmy.com/ranger/your-questions-about-serving.html
Those who serve in the Regiment are Rangers. Also known as “scrolled”.
Those who complete Ranger School are Ranger Qualified. Also known as Tabbed.
RIP/RASP and serving/served Honorably? Ranger.
Honorable service in a number of “heritage” units? Ranger.
I assure you, if you call a “scrolled” Ranger “not a Ranger” you are going to get your head handed to you. By a whole bunch of folks, Ranger and otherwise.
I was neither Tabbed nor Scrolled. I have known a number of such, who patiently explained both
A good friend of mine while on active duty was a former “scrolled” Ranger. (Hey Z, happy landings.)
Thank you!
I have no idea why this is taking so longer to permeate the collective understanding of the TAH community.
BUDS/SEAL, don’t complete the training, you are not one.
Green Beret, don’t complete the training, you are not one.
Ranger, fail RASP, you are not one, BUT, snag a school slot in your follow on unit and complete the course, Ranger.
This is a very good explanation. I did not know you could serve in the Regiment without a Tab and still be considered a Ranger. Makes sense.
If a tabbed Ranger considers a non-tabbed troop serving beside him in one of the Battalions as a Brother Ranger, that’s good enough for me, because it’s their call to make.
A key thing to remember:
The 75th Infantry is the Ranger Regiment. They “Live the Ranger Lifestyle” as Z put it. “You earn your Scroll every day” as another put it.
If you see a guy with a scroll on the right shoulder (served there in combat) he is as Ranger as it gets.
Note; the guys that hit Pointe Du Hoc had never heard of “Ranger School” or a “Tab”. Rangers, and Legendary.
It is true that failing out of Ranger school in most cases will result in being removed from the regiment.
But that does not make it a requirement to be ASSIGNED to the regiment.
And the standard to call yourself a Ranger is be ASSIGNED to and SERVE as a member of the Ranger regiment.
My comment wasn’t directed toward you, Lars. I also keep wondering how the fuck a post topic about the Shipleys getting kicked off YouTube, of some interest to the rest of us, has devolved into an off-topic Lars comment freakout about the definition of “Army Ranger.”
You, and your apparent OCD, do this all the time and it’s a likely reason that you piss people off. Personally, I don’t have a problem when you express even goofy opinions, but would suggest there are times you learn to speak your piece, then sit down and shut up.
You do not need a “tab” to be a Ranger.
You can also be a Ranger if you earned the “scroll” by completing Ranger Assessment and being assigned to the US Army Rangers.
If he didn’t go to Ranger school he wasn’t a ranger end of story.
I served in a Special Forces Unit but I wasn’t Special Forces. Nor would I ever try to claim that I was.
He was a Ranger. The US Army standard to officially become an Army Ranger is complete the assessment program and be assigned to regiment.
That is the standard. Ranger school is not required to be an Army Ranger.
And the Special Forces example is a false similarity.
I was assigned to two Special Forces units, three if you count SWCS.
But I was never Special Forces.
The standard for being Special Forces is successfully complete the special forces qualification course and the Robin Sage culmination exercise.
Different standards.
https://www.specopscandidate.com/difference-between-ranger-school-rasp/
” I don’t remember his name.”
The name was Mike Webb, TAH Posting #65824, dated May 17, 2016.
And also TAH Posting #71605, dated April 21, 2017.
Thanks Claw. That’s the one. I hadn’t seen the other at the time.
Good the argument is still on there so I don’t have to rehash the whole “what is an Army Ranger” thing again.
It was tedious then and getting tedious again.
Mike Webb is a bit of a crack pot but he did not lie or mislead anyone about being an Army Ranger.
He was.
I will say this; Jonn appeared to be very careful about who he accused of stolen valor.
So in that regard it could be argued that the “site” did not post a stolen valor accusation since Jonn was the primary operator.
However, Ex, who is a contributor, was very explicit and insistent that his claim he was a Ranger was false. And she was wrong about that.
So I will correct my post to make it clear that I have seen CONTRIBUTORS to this site make false stolen valor accusations on this site.
But, how could Ex-PH2 be making false accusations about this individual when in actuality this individual who claimed to be a Ranger never completed all of the requirements.
(see above list of requirements & links)
I would be interested on your facts (and links) as to how this person in your minds eye is a legitimate Ranger.
Care to share them with me?
I posted mine.
(It was so easy that even an old retired Army PSG who held the 11B4P, 19E4HP and 19K4HP MOS’s could do it)
You didnt post any evidence whatsoever. You are still assuming that the only Rangers are Ranger school graduates. You posted no proof your assumption that Ranger School is required is correct.
You won’t either.
Because I know for an absolute face that Ranger School is not required to be an Army Ranger.
In fact there are a lot of Rangers in the Regiment that do not regard people with Ranger tabs who do not serve in Ranger units to be Rangers.
And a lot of people who have Ranger tabs but never served in a Ranger unit are uncomfortable calling themselves “Rangers” prefering the term “Ranger qualifies”.
“Ranger qualified”
Here are the Rangers self imposed requirements to join the Ranger Association. ====USARA accepts application for membership from individuals who have been awarded the Ranger Tab by the Department of the Army; or who have served in a combat arms capacity, in a recognized U. S. Army Ranger unit, for at least one year, or, if less, were awarded the CIB (Combat Infantryman Badge) or the CMB (Combat Medical Badge) while serving in that unit. The following organizations comprise the definition of “Ranger Unit:”
Any of the World War II Ranger Battalions,
The 5307th Composite, “Merrill’s Marauders” during WWII,
The Alamo Scouts during WWII,
The 29th Ranger Battalion during WWII,
Any of the Ranger Infantry Companies (Airborne) during the Korean War,
The Eighth Army’s “8000 Series” units during the Korea War,
Any of the lettered Ranger companies of the 75th Infantry, or their immediate LRRP predecessor units, during the Vietnam War,
Any Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) Ranger Unit (Biệt Ðộng Quân).
Any officially designated U. S. Army Ranger unit, to include E/65th Inf (PRNG), D/151st INF (IN NG), A/75th and B/75th Ranger (V and VII Corps LRP), or their immediate LRP predecessor units.
The 1st or 2nd Ranger Battalion, during the period 1974 to 1984, the 75th Ranger Regiment, since 1984.
=== Webb was a clerk typist. He doesn’t qualify.
/facepalm
He might not qualify for the non-profit association but that is irrelevant.
Though I suspect he does qualify and the membership page is poorly written. He qualifies according to the main membership page.
I checked with them. Anyone who served in the Regiment since 1994 for more than one year, tabbed or not, combat arms or not qualifies for membership in the association.
1984
And you, Commissar, are a shit throwing simian when it comes to making accusations about who has served.
I do question whether some of you anonymous pricks served.
There is one prominent big mouth who claims to have military service that is all kinds of “special” but has more than once posted things that someone who legitimately had his background would know differently.
But I am just going to chalk it up to old age and senility since there is no way to validate the claims of an anonymous poster.
Convenient for them isn’t it?
Bull shit! You went as far as to question my service… or don’t you remember that?
Of course you don’t… you have selective socialist memory.
I remember.
You seem very upset about that. Good thing you use an anynomous handle so my questioning your service has no impact on you whatsoever.
You notice how often my service is questioned? And I am not even anonymous.
Imagine how often it would get questioned if I was some anonymous guy with sketchy opinion?
“Convenient for them isn’t it?”
Like a brain injury?
OH, I see. Can’t attack Jonn Lilyea, because he is no longer among us, but now this asswipe with hair up his backside – because he is continually proven incorrect by me and by others – decides he’s going to pick on little old me???
So he switches from Jonn, now deceased, to someone who he thinks can’t defend her position.
That is the WEAKEST excuse for backpedaling I’ve seen in a long time. First it’s Jonn Lilyea, then it isn’t so it’s me. And of course, no proof is offered. It’s just thrown out there.
What an asshole!
Well, SquishfishMcBlobsquish, that makes YOU liable for what YOU say.
Technically Jonn can’t defend his position and you can defend yours.
So essentially the exact opposite of what you said.
But if you want to claim that you are weaker at defending your position than the deceased than I will concede that you are probably correct.
And if you will recall on that “To be or not to be a Ranger” discussion an actual member of regiment told you you were wrong. Which mercifully ended the discussion.
“Well, SquishfishMcBlobsquish, that makes YOU liable for what YOU say.”
You mean when I said you falsely accused someone of stolen valor? Yeah, I stand by that.
Of course it is irrelevant because you are anonymous and you don’t get to both hide behind anonymity and also claim personal injury to your reputation if someone accuses you of something.
But to be clear; you did do that thing where you false accused someone of stolen valor, you did that.
But don’t worry. Saying you reasonably believed it to be true is an affirmative defense and it is reasonable to believe that you do not know what the hell you are talking about with regard to anything involving the US Army.
Derailed the thread again, drug it off topic, hurled a handful of feces into the air-conditioning, and played the victim. Your SOP.
Derailing is what the cuttlefish does best, SFC D. It’s the only way it can get attention – change the subject and pick on someone else, too.
Weak, weak, weak.
So it’s my fault that they wanted to argue with me about an off topic issue?
My original post was on topic.
I’m still trying to figure out how being mistaken is equal to “false allegation”.
The post asked the question but made no allegation as I recall.
Is your standard that all who comment must follow a narrow path of “truth” or the article itself is “false”? To whom shall we appeal for the truthiness of any comment made?
From what I am reading here, your standard of truth vs false makes journalism impossible–not that it is being practiced today, but just in concept.
The “free market” has spoken and decided Don is bad for business.
Many people think Don is performing a public service…
Thus the more public good minded among them can contribute via crowdfunding if he decides to go that route. Content creating can be an expensive and time consuming process.
The “free market” is anything but.
And I’m not a member of his site, but I’m pretty sure he has enough members to pay to keep the site up as well as contribute to his other endeavors.
The free market has spoken? Or have the powers-that-be at YouTube spoken?
Some SJW that got all triggered and made the decision to shut it down. It seems to be the gameplan of YouTube, Twitter, Instagram and other social media platforms.
HMCS(FMF) ret, and when the lawer that eventually became a lawn dart posted his sick, twisted YouTube videos about Don & Diane & Jonn, nothing was ever done by YouTube.
Go figure.
Free speech my ass.
There is no free speech on YouTube. Never was.
And now with Net Neutrality is repealed there is no free speech on the internet.
Those are profitable get a voice and you get to hear it only as long as it is profitable for you to hear it. Any semblance of free speech is created because it is profitable to maintain the semblance of free speech. Until it is no longer profitable to do so.
So you’re saying that Don Shipley wasn’t profitable for YouTube with all of his videos & hundreds of thousands (if not in the millions of views)?
Don is the “go to guy” for exposing SEAL posers & others.
In the past few years just in the area where I live, a couple of newspapers AND the State American Legion turned to Don to help them successfully expose three of them. One of them was the State Provost for the Legion & one was the State Legion Historian.
What really contributed to Don & Diane getting banned, were posers like “Dullass” & “He who crashes sport planes” and others that were exposed, whining to You Tube.
there you go with that NN bull squeeze again. NN would not protect anyone from censorship. Ever.
What we are seeing with the deplatforming of non-conforming thought is exactly what the very text of the NN proposals promised.
It was nothing but the legitimization of deplatforming and you supported it.
Says it all, doesn’t it?
Yep. It is Government Doublespeak at it’s finest.
Good, people who make their living off of social media need to learn how to make money elsewhere. Social media personalities are the fucking scum of the earth.
Don’t harsh my dreams. I was hoping to make $800 a month being another old white guy on the internet with a political opinion.
You are not that old. (smile)
I hate all of you, I just happen to hate stolen valor more.
Kidding!
Damn shame this.
It’s getting really hard to remain tolerant of illiberal a-holes.
If someone hates the haters, aren’t they a hater themselves, and in turn, shouldn’t they hate they damn self?
I’ve been working on putting pieces together for a TAH guest post on censorship, but so far haven’t been able to come up with a specific veteran or military aspect. Some examples of what’s out there in terms of the broad sweep:
What’s absolutely clear is that Google’s search, news, and YouTube all lean toward a liberal bias. Google denies this, saying it’s the result of algorithms, but there’s plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise. When Google CEO Sundar Pichai appeared before congress recently, and said there was no active human intervention, it was demonstrably false and he knew it.
Another player used to censor and game the system has apparently been the Southern Poverty Law Center which can put on a media hit list any group critical in any way of people of color. Such being considered hate speech. Somehow their policy does not consistently apply if a hate group itself consists of people of color.
Still another emerging player is a company called NewsGuard which acts as a browser extension to determine which websites are “reliable” purveyors of information. The company is also not some off-the-wall startup from mom’s basement. NewsGuard founders include those responsible for current paywall technology now used by a lot of local news orgs.
Didn’t mean to ignore. It actually initiated some thoughts on the matter of the military aspect.
Thought long and hard but could not come up with anything. Maybe the case with others as well.
Very provocative post.
” Google denies this, saying it’s the result of algorithms … ”
It actually could be because of the algorithms.
But, what is an “algorithm?” It is a module of computer code generally used to automate, or reduce the time required to accomplish, some process.
Coders at Google, Facebook, and Twitter are humans using Basic, Java, C, Python, or some other programming language to write these algorithms.
Humans have biases – everybody does. It’s why double-blind, placebo controlled studies were developed, to try and minimize the influence of our innate biases on outcome.
Therefore, Google’s, et al, pious declamations of, “the algorithms did it, our hands are clean, there is no malicious intent,” are artless at best.
In this case, where smoke is seen, there would almost certainly be fire. IMO.
I absolutely love it when social media sites ban people. Good, they can do whatever the fuck they want with their own sites. You know what my problem is? Morons that use sites like Facebook for free and expect privacy in return. Hey, fucko: if something is free then YOU are the product! I honestly wish social media was far more obtrusive than it is. Maybe try reading a fucking newspaper and writing letters? No one NEEDS social media, therefore I truly enjoy seeing people punished for using it.
Don said his YouTube channel was shut down over a video that showed some graphic images.
That video had been on YouTube for years. Years.
Of course the fact that Don put out the truth about Nathan Phillips less than a month ago has nothing to do with his account being shut down.
I am not all that social to start with but, if you are drinking social I. There have been some cases over the years that came down for various reasons. Jonn was insistent about keeping them up once they were made public but we always had exceptions to the rule. There are cases that Jonn published that I would not. In the early years, all kinds of things were done that we would not do today. The bar that I use is a bit higher than what Jonn used when publishing a case, it has to be higher for all kinds of reasons. I am positive that no case I published has ever come down because it was not accurate. There is not a week that goes by that we don’t get a request to take down some case from years gone by. It sucks that some of these people lied to their own families for decades and the died. How many hours do I have on the phone with some wife/son/daughter of a poser listening to them cry? It sucks but the post stays up. Working to bring some credibility to the Stolen Valor effort by getting an actual Private Investigator License and learning what can and can not be done is work. It takes time. But we did that and in the process improved our investigations dramatically. So many other efforts have failed over the years. We are still here. We will change and adapt in the future but we have no plans on going anywhere soon. The community of people who contribute here are what drives this site. We almost never agree on anything. I do not agree with people here about all kinds of things but I have a profound respect for their opinion. I try not to do things that I know will discredit the SV community. Most often the objection I have to others is not what they do but the manner in which they go about doing it. We don’t sell coffee, patches, vests, coins, or cheap beer. I am just some asshole… Read more »
“Working to bring some credibility to the Stolen Valor effort by getting an actual Private Investigator License and learning what can and can not be done is work. It takes time. But we did that and in the process improved our investigations dramatically. ”
I sent an obit to M.P.’s last month, I was amazed at the quick response and all the data that had been found in such a short period of time.
Ya’ll do great work and it is appreciated.
I could not imagine having to have those phone calls.
So sad. I wrote a eulogy for a deceased family member and in drafting it I had to manage gently letting them know that we should stick to what we see in his records and DD214… that the secret Navy commando stuff and underwater knife fight with the Vietcong should remain a “secret”.
[sarcasm] Found out the real reason why Shipley was shut down. [/sarcasm]
Frank Dux is the most notorious Stolen Valor fraud in the world. Small wonder he was at odds with Shipley, and with anyone else who exposes these phonies.
All Frank Dux is is an Associate Member of the DRG.
What’s “DRG”?
If I’m not mistaken, I dubbed a trio or more of the most vexatious assholes here at TAH and it stands for “Dutch Rudder” Gang.
Dutch Rudder is a NSFW term on Google.
Chip, yep, it all started with you.
I remember questioning how the esteemed, er, steaming pile of…, lawer managed to manipulate the rudder controls on his plane with his disability that affected his legs.
You then replied that he probably used a device called a Dutch Rudder.
I googled it without having safe search enabled. It took a lot of bourbon to get the images out of my head.
Here’s where it started: https://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=40313&cpage=3#comment-1172585
In actuality, Frank Dux is one of the original members of the “Stolen Valor POSers club.” He has 6 pages devoted exclusively to him in B.G. Burkett’s seminal book, “Stolen Valor” (pages 411-417), and a photo of him wearing a USMC uniform, his chest bedecked with “bogus medals” and gold Jump Wings which he never earned.
It’s apparently dickweed season. Who sprayed the miracle grow?
This domain is a flipping mess now.
I have an explanation…
Colis viriditas americana, also known as American dickweed, or dick salad, is a poisonous, herbaceous PERENNIAL plant in the assweed family Imbecilefers growing up to 5’ 11” (1.8m) in height.
The relevant detail is the “perennial” part.
Damn, spelled “coles” wrong. Should have checked first.
Coles viritidas
BUT it’s also been shown that enough exposure to Dickweeds can cause one to think for themselves!
Now that is funny!
Lars….you never come on this site unless you are looking for someone to put up with your argumentative ways, in which you are (or so you think) always right. No wonder we get so sick and tired of reading the same expected B. S. from you. Your reference to the obit you wrote, by the way, completely contradicts (or should I say challenges?) Dave’s point of view. If I did not want to know the absolute truth about someone who had lied their way through life and sought recognition for false claims, plain and simple I would not read the article exposing a dead liar. The purpose is well-served when one is shown to have created so-called respect for an undeserving person. Good example…where I grew up one of the most active and hard working members of the local A L had always been held in such high esteem for all his charitable work. Shortly after he passed, finally someone decided to take a look at the Post’s books. Lo and behold….this dead asshole had been stealing from the Post treasury for 20 some-odd years and continued to be respected and revered for nearly three decades; thanks to his ability to continue charming his way into leadership roles. In a small town, nobody gets by with that, even after death. And so it should be. You, on the other hand, chose to write a eulogy which was as deceitful from the git go. Now you expect us to show respect for that brand of “Failure To Inform”? Once again I find myself falling into that same old pit of arguing with a damned stone wall made of hardened concrete.
Not in the mood to argue with you tonight, so don’t anticipate a rise from anything you say about me. All on this site have seen you bitch until you are out of breath. Lars, I truly believe you could bitch yourself into a rut every morning you wake up.
Keeping all of his embellishments out of the Obituary neither contradicts nor challenges Dave’s point of view.
As for the other issue I find it literally astonishing how little many of you care about falsely accusing a former Ranger of stolen valor and care more about saying I am wrong.
I did not write a deceitful eulogy you asshole.
I kept it straight off his DD-214 and any other records we could find. Apparently you have reading comprehension issues.
Done washing my dog; time to read what I could not resist before night’s end. You are absolutely right Mr. Taylor. Reading Comprehension has ALWAYS been a problem with me. Sorry, I confused you with some manipulator who wrote the following:
“So sad. I wrote a eulogy for a deceased family member and in drafting it:”
Silly me thinking any pseudo-intellectual with delusions of grandeur could have possibly been a wordsmith like you.
For what it is worth, the same critic who has taken much an artistic license to “never let the truth get in the way of a good story” bewilders me, specifically in the following example of another poorly timed anecdote:
“The “free market” has spoken and decided Don is bad for business.”
Might that have been the confused peasant’s way of saying: “The “Free Market” drama queens are slowly succeeding in destroying the Free Speech movement?
I see, you think that because I used a play on the word “secret” I was hiding the fact that he embellished.
That is bullshit. I made it clear that his stories were not supported by his dd214 and his records. So I would not add them to his obituary.
He never told the world his stories so I had no reason to tell the world he embellished them. I told the people that heard the stories that they were not supported by his records and that is enough.
He never profited off them financially nor did he even try. He used them to salve his fragile ego during the declining years of his life.
My post to Dave is empathizing with how hard those phone calls must be. It was hard telling people who knew my family member that they were lied to. I would hate to have to tell grieving loved ones of a stranger that he lied to the world and will be remembered on the internet primarily for that.
I was fortunate in that my family member never lied to the world so I did not need to correct his lies to the world. The family and his friends were enough. They we’re the only ones he lied to.
It was the hair….
Those laser hair regrowth things sold by some not so honest purveyors that use the 20mm Picatinny rails on their laser hair regrowth instruments got pissed because Shipley has so much hair and they were about to prove it wasn’t real…
So The Hairman and his beloved wife decided to split the country and are currently on a boat, “Sailing for the Southern Islands. Drawing 80 feet at the waterline, nicely making waves”…
(Pinpoint the source of that quote and get ten Hair Points)
That’s too bad. I just wonder where all of us conservatives will go once the interwebz becomes nothing but an opportunity to speak only to the choir filling the medium with nothing but left wing propaganda and drivel, like lars’ stuff.
Always the same, long boring and absolutely no point other than….
I dunno, actually, I’ve never bothered to read his stuff. Waste of my valuable Certified 9’Th Infantry Division Ski Instructor time !!!
And THAT is valuable !!!
Thank you for your feedback. We will look into it.
Your welcome…..
BWAHAHAHAHA !!!
Sticks tongue out and runs like hell !!!
PFFFFTTTTTTT !!!!!
T, here’s your coffee.
T? Where’d ya go, T?
Checking in this morning I see Thunderstixx’s challenge and I accept, being a CSN fan I suspect you’re referring to the Southern Cross my friend…also being a weekend sailor all these things have taken on a different meaning in the last few years….
If I’m off the mark, flunk me and tell me what you were actually referring to…thanks.
“Southern Cross, CSNY.
Southern Cross. Crosby, Stills, & Nash 1982.