That new video, "The Miltary Loves Ron Paul", POOF, is now gone

[LibertyEagle]

Did anyone happen to save a copy?

[Lord Xar]

which one is this?

[aravoth]

is that the fox interview with the "expert" who says the RP has the highest donations?

[LibertyEagle]

No. It was a brand new one with a soldier standing there and talking about how good Ron Paul is. I found out about it from this forum just a day or two ago.

[Paulitician]

I didn't save it. Personally I thought it need way better editing. Maybe they realized that so they took it down (?). There's a new video up now though.

[LibertyEagle]

I didn't save it. Personally I thought it need way better editing. Maybe they realized that so they took it down (?). There's a new video up now though.

Where? Have a link?

[Larofeticus]

I thought there were military regulations against endorsing a political cause while in uniform?

[Magsec]

With Val Venis supporting him why need a soldier? XD

[Kuldebar]

I thought there were military regulations against endorsing a political cause while in uniform?

There are, but this video clip is the news about donations to the Paul campaign from military members.

And military members can support political causes but as you suggested not overtly while in uniform.

[LibertyEagle]

There are, but this video clip is the news about donations to the Paul campaign from military members.

Not the one I'm talking about. The one I'm talking about used to be here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzhzQ1eydV8

[Kuldebar]

The one that the helicopter crew member made with video shots from Iraq, etc?



Perhaps this may have something to do with it?

In April, the Army announced new rules on blogging that required soldiers to clear them with a superior. Access to MySpace and some other popular Web sites was blocked. The Army said it was not trying to stop soldiers from speaking their mind, however. And so far, some of them have been.

Youtube was on the list...

[LibertyEagle]

No. It was a newer one than that.

[Paulitician]

I didn't save it. Personally I thought it need way better editing. Maybe they realized that so they took it down (?). There's a new video up now though.
This is the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSh6kVT4UL0) I'm talking about. I don't know why they took down the military video. Send them a PM.

[Kuldebar]

No. It was a newer one than that.

Yeah, I know, but some stuff gets pulled after the fact by Army IT types, so it's not out of the question.


Was it the chopper crew related one?

[LibertyEagle]

This is the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSh6kVT4UL0) I'm talking about. I don't know why they took down the military video. Send them a PM.

Who is "them"? All you get when you click on it is "Video removed by user". It doesn't tell you who the user is.

[LibertyEagle]

Yeah, I know, but some stuff gets pulled after the fact by Army IT types, so it's not out of the question.


Was it the chopper crew related one?

I'm not sure what you mean. It wasn't the same video as the one that made the video showing all the pictures around Iraq. This was a video showing a soldier standing there and talking. The title above the video was, "The Military Loves Ron Paul".

[LibertyEagle]

I guess next time we see one of these, we'd better save it ASAP, eh?

[Spike Kojima]

Just to let people know what video is being talked about here. It was an official RonPaul2008 video on youtube.
The video showed two uniformed service men at a Ron Paul speech clapping. After the speech there is a brief interview with one of the men in which he says most solider think its about time to come home.

I think.

[QWE]

hahah, I love how far this "military donates most to Ron Paul" story went since I posted those numbers minutes after the Q2 was posted on a facebook forum. The internet sure is an amazing thing!

[Paulitician]

Who is "them"? All you get when you click on it is "Video removed by user". It doesn't tell you who the user is.
The person/people who is/are responsible for the account and who upload the videos. Send a PM to RonPaul2008dotcom. I don't know if your PM is going to get answered but it's worth a shot I suppose...

[abstrusezincate]

I actually can give you a little detail on that. The serviceman in that interview was put in a position where he was going to be in serious trouble if that remained up, and therefore, he asked that it be removed. It's unfortunate that those who give the most are supposed to say the least.

Knowing the person in question, I know it must have pained him to do that.

[Kuldebar]

Troop blogs show increasing criticism of war (http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/09/ap_soldierblogs_070909/)

Army "Big Brother" Unit Targets Bloggers (http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002844.html)


Since the relatively wide-open days following the Iraq invasion in 2003, the Pentagon has been slowly tightening the screws on military bloggers. Officers started busting frontline diarists for their websites. In Iraq, new rules required bloggers to check with their commanders before posting. Then, in August, a message came highest levels of the military that "EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, NO INFORMATION MAY BE PLACED ON WEBSITES THAT ARE READILY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC UNLESS IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED FOR SECURITY CONCERNS AND APPROVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE MEMORANDUM WEB SITE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, DECEMBER 7, 1998."

"So much for military blogging," said one officer, deployed in Iraq, when the ruling came down. Not that the officer -- an active blogger back in the States -- was doing much public writing while on the front lines. "The Army's guidance on OPSEC [operational security] has been broad and ambiguous enough to chill my speech," he wrote to me. "Discretion is clearly the better part of valor where OPSEC rules are concerned, because the sensitivity of any particular detail is in the eye of the beholder."

[American]

I actually can give you a little detail on that. The serviceman in that interview was put in a position where he was going to be in serious trouble if that remained up, and therefore, he asked that it be removed. It's unfortunate that those who give the most are supposed to say the least.

Knowing the person in question, I know it must have pained him to do that.

Maybe Averoth can mask the patriot in the video and then repost it...

He got those kinda skillz

[LibertyEagle]

I actually can give you a little detail on that. The serviceman in that interview was put in a position where he was going to be in serious trouble if that remained up, and therefore, he asked that it be removed. It's unfortunate that those who give the most are supposed to say the least.

Knowing the person in question, I know it must have pained him to do that.

Darn. Well it was courageous of him to make it and post it, if even for a short time. Please give him our thanks.

[abstrusezincate]

I will do that. I know that he, his brother who serves as well, and the many veterans who support us will do what they can. They just aren't allowed to be presented in a way that suggests the military as a whole is endorsing a candidate, for obvious reasons.

[LibertyEagle]

I will do that. I know that he, his brother who serves as well, and the many veterans who support us will do what they can. They just aren't allowed to be presented in a way that suggests the military as a whole is endorsing a candidate, for obvious reasons.

I don't recall him saying anything like that in the video itself. It was just the name he gave it.

[Kuldebar]

I don't recall him saying anything like that in the video itself. It was just the name he gave it.


But, there were shots of military members right? Some videos of choppers and other scenes of a military crew?

If it's the one I remember, that's probably enough for him to be "asked' to remove it. I am sure the title didn't help, either. :/