An Open Letter To CNN

April 20, 2009

Monday, April 20, 2009

Cable News Network
100 International Blvd
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 827-1500?

Dear CNN,

We at Founding Bloggers are somewhat bemused by your recent conduct. We are also incredulous, irritated, and amused – in short, our reaction is complicated.  We note, with some bemusement, that your main competitors have all aired the controversial Susan Roesgen segment with abandon, and that, moreover, dozens of other YouTube stations continue, to this very moment, to air this same segment without any evidence of your having objected in any way.  We regret, with some incredulity, your self-serving, if not entirely convenient, interpretation of the First Amendment.  We suspect, with some irritation, that your inconsistent application of copyright theory is informed by two factors:  1) that you are aware that your main competitors, i.e., MSNBC and FOX, have teams of salaried attorneys to vigorously defend their right to fair use, a case for which might very easily be made, and that, by way of contrast, you are also aware that Founding Bloggers has comparatively meager resources at its disposal and is ill-equipped to mount such a vigorous defense; 2) that you were substantially alarmed by the frequency at which our video was being viewed – internationally.  In short, we suspect that you are harassing us because our product was popular, because we are small, and because you can.  We conclude, with some amusement, that your conduct tends to lend validity to the least flattering stereotypes associated with your organization.  We live in the era of the internet – it is not so easy to silence people these days, as you will discover.  In the final analysis, you will have become the butt of your own joke.

Should you prefer to avoid this fate, we will, of course, welcome the return of our production to its rightful spot – and the 3000+ viewer generated comment-opinions, both in support and in opposition, regarding it. Alternatively, should you prefer to continue on your current course of intimidation and censorship, we will endeavor to counter your actions.

In short, withdraw your fraudulent DMCA claim against our production, and instruct You Tube to restore the clip.

Most Sincerely,
Your Founding Bloggers
www.foundingbloggers.com

UPDATE: Our original clip which CNN fraudulently forced YouTube to take down in a vain attempt to silence us, has been restored!! Click here to see the coverage CNN tried BUT FAILED to disappear.

Tags: , , , , , ,

30 Responses to An Open Letter To CNN

  1. [...] this will do: Monday, April 20, [...]

  2. madcap on April 20, 2009 at 10:34 am

    As a fellow Chicago blogger, lover of free markets, and concerned citizen, I stand with you. Keep up the good work.
    http://www.thoughtsongod.com/?p=3947

  3. Kurt on April 20, 2009 at 10:35 am

    ….maybe its time for CNN to pack it in as a NEWS network?! They obviously can’t find any journalists – only left wing nuts!

  4. Benaiah on April 20, 2009 at 10:37 am

    An open letter to CNN and the other mainstream mockers:

    The American people are entitled to know whether or not Barack Hussein Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981 as an Indonesian citizen, with an Indonesian passport.

    The American people are entitled to know whether or not Barack Hussein Obama received grants as a foreign student while attending Occidental College.

    In my opinion, the United States is now behind enemy lines…

    The United States Constitution states the following: “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President”.

    Even if Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii, he is not eligible “to the Office of President”, as his father was British citizen.

    The Supreme Court of the United States in THE VENUS relied upon Vattel’s “Law of Nations” as the authority in determining the citizenship status of a “domicil”.

    With regard to Vattel, THE VENUS court specifically stated, “Vattel, …is more explicit and more satisfactory on it [CITIZENSHIP ISSUES] than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says, ‘the citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or indigenes, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.’ ”

    The natives, or natural born citizens, “are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” Barack Hussein Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. Thus, even if Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii, he is NOT a “natural born citizen”.

    Vattel’s Law of Nations

    § 212. Citizens and natives.
    The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

    U.S. Supreme Court, THE VENUS, 12 U.S. 253 (1814)

    As this question is not only decisive of many claims now depending before this Court, but is also of vast importance to our merchants generally, I may be excused for stating, at some length, the reasons on which my opinion is founded.

    The whole system of decisions applicable to this subject, rests on the law of nations as its base. It is, therefore, of some importance to enquire how far the writers on that law consider the subjects of one power residing within the territory of another, as retaining their original character, or partaking of the character of the nation in which they reside.

    Vattel, …is more explicit and more satisfactory on it [CITIZENSHIP ISSUES] than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says, ‘the citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or indigenes, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.’ ‘The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state, while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it, because it grants

    [Page 12 U.S. 253, 290]

    them protection, though they do not participate in all the rights of citizens. They enjoy only the advantages which the laws, or custom gives them. The perpetual inhabitants are those who have received the right of perpetual residence. These are a kind of citizens of an inferior order, and are united and subject to the society, without participating in all its advantages.’ ‘The domicil is the habitation fixed in any place, with an intention of always staying there. A man does not, then, establish his domicil in any place, unless he makes sufficiently known his intention of fixing there, either tacitly or by an express declaration. However, this declaration is no reason why, if he afterwards changes his mind, he may not remove his domicil elsewhere. In this sense, he who stops, even for a long time, in a place, for the management of his affairs, has only a simple habitation there, but has no domicil.’

    A domicil, then, in the sense in which this term is used by Vattel, requires not only actual residence in a foreign country, but ‘an intention of always staying there.’ Actual residence without this intention, amounts to no more than ’simple habitation.’

    Although this intention may be implied without being expressed, it ought not, I think, to be implied, to the injury of the individual, from acts entirely equivocal. If the stranger has not the power of making his residence perpetual, if circumstances, after his arrival in a country, so change, as to make his continuance there disadvantageous to himself, and his power to continue, doubtful; ‘an intention always to stay there’ ought not, I think, to be fixed upon him, in consequence of an unexplained residence previous to that change of circumstances. Mere residence, under particular circumstances, would seem to me, at most, to prove only an intention to remain so long as those circumstances continue the same, or equally advantageous. This does not give a domicil. The intention which gives a domicil is an unconditional intention ‘to stay always.’

  5. [...] Marcus of Founding Bloggers and posted to YouTube. Founding Bloggers has sent and published an open letter to the cable network requesting that the video (which has aired on other TV networks without retribution) be restored: [...]

  6. Beverly on April 20, 2009 at 11:33 am

    Thank you for your blog. Keep it up!

  7. VotingFemale on April 20, 2009 at 12:11 pm

    You guys are way cool! Just discovered you from WND. You got a pingback from my latest blog post on this subject.

    Carry on!

  8. [...] Marcus of Founding Bloggers and posted to YouTube. Founding Bloggers has sent and published an open letter to the cable network requesting that the video (which has aired on other TV networks without retribution) be restored: In [...]

  9. brainout on April 20, 2009 at 1:30 pm

    Amen to this, foundingbloggers! Our nation was founded by mostly Deists and Reformed folks who wanted basically one thing: FREEDOM. Freedom from religion, freedom from oppressive government.

    We’ve LOST that founding perspective. We need to get it back! Taxation without representation is a form of slavery, just as imposed religious views would be. For the taxation makes a ‘religion’ out of its use (abuse, really) of the money.

    I don’t want handouts, and I don’t want to pay for handouts. Government has NO right to circumscribe freedom; it’s purpose is to PRESERVE freedom, and you don’t preserve freedom by taxing the people who work, and giving it to those who do not work: you thus end the freedom of ALL.

  10. brainout on April 20, 2009 at 1:32 pm

    My last post misspelled something: “it’s freedom” should be “its freedom”. Can you change that? If not, will you print this post also? Thank you!

  11. [...] by doing this. By the way, she just happens to be on vacation this week, how convenient. Here is Founding Bloggers response to CNN: In short, we suspect that you are harassing us because our product was popular, [...]

  12. j stuart on April 20, 2009 at 2:48 pm

    That totally biased reporter, if you want to call her one, is pathetic. CNN is now more than ever, out of the closet. I’ll get my news from the Internet or anyone but CNN. Formerly Clinton News Network, now the Comintern News Network.

  13. Cindy on April 20, 2009 at 2:55 pm

    What does CNN stand for? Censorship News Now!

    I hope the internet remains open and “free”, it is the choice for individual thinkers who actually want to find the truth.

  14. Change Barack on April 20, 2009 at 3:28 pm

    3 Reasons CNN Should Not Have Pulled an Incriminating Tea Party Video from YouTube…

    With a masterful stroke of the irony pen, CNN forced YouTube to remove Founding Bloggers\’ clip of \”journalist\” Susan Roesgen arguing with one of the Tea Party participants….

  15. Leslie Hanks on April 20, 2009 at 3:33 pm

    May God bless you richly for your perseverance and
    pursuit of TRUTH!!!!

    Thank you, thank you.

    Never give up! Never, never, never.

  16. [...] Marcus of Founding Bloggers and posted to YouTube. Founding Bloggers has sent and published an open letter to the cable network requesting that the video (which has aired on other TV networks without retribution) be restored: [...]

  17. Mary Louise on April 20, 2009 at 4:00 pm

    Thanks for standing up for freedom. I saw this the first day…
    Ya’d think the reporters might try to do a little research before they go cover an event. The are supposed to be the eloquent ones…That man was obviously new at making public statements.

    Here is the video:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G3fvNhdoc0

  18. Barry O on April 20, 2009 at 4:11 pm

    You absolutely should make a case of it, and you’ll easily find pro bono legal counsel. Networks wave the first amendment news when it suits them, and then brush off gross bias as “commentators, not reporters” (i.e. Matthews’/Olberman’s unprofessionalism).

    You should argue for a DMCA news use exception while letting them keep their entertainment BS copyright broad. It forces the networks to stand by their product.

    Any lawyer would jump at the chance…

  19. [...] Marcus of Founding Bloggers and posted to YouTube. Founding Bloggers has sent and published an open letter to the cable network requesting that the video (which has aired on other TV networks without retribution) be restored: [...]

  20. themaskedanalyst on April 20, 2009 at 6:21 pm

    You have a big story here. But I hope you will do some research and focus in on the bigger picture of how the DMCA is used to suppress free speech on the internet. I will be making a video on YouTube about this incident and how it relates to the bigger picture, but you can see the transcript for it here:

    http://www.themaskedanalyst.com/CNNs%20DMCA.htm

  21. [...] Marcus of Founding Bloggers and posted to YouTube. Founding Bloggers has sent and published an open letter to the cable network requesting that the video (which has aired on other TV networks without retribution) be restored: In [...]

  22. Mary Meyer on April 20, 2009 at 10:52 pm

    They are desperate. They must restore the video.

    Join us-
    Memorial Day Mainstream Media Protest at the doorsteps of MSNBC at 12 noon
    1335 Avenue of the Americas, NY NY

    Don’t let evil triumph!Bring your CNN signs!
    Maybe Janene and Keith will show up? nah.

  23. dweebisis on April 20, 2009 at 11:33 pm

    Right On! Where did you find this one?

    Btw, Craigslist Killer Facebook Profile:

    http://dweebisis.blogspot.com

  24. hamedelic on April 20, 2009 at 11:58 pm

    Definitely on the road to socialism. Check the Public Service Announcement at http://hamgrownvideos.com.

  25. WhatBubbaKnows on April 21, 2009 at 9:31 pm

    Communist News Network remains in the news-making business only because there’s still some Americans that help pay their bills.

    If you pay for cable or satellite TV, then you are helping keep the ObamaMedia on the air. Cancel your subscriptions by telephone, make sure they understand why : You can no longer constribute to the coffers of anti-America networks.

    I cancelled mine in November 2008. It’s amazing how quickly you can get used to not having TV.

  26. g.gordon on April 21, 2009 at 10:34 pm

    I must say that I enjoy ambush news when it blows up in the reporteretts face, CNN Her next assignment should be an interview on how to receive food stamps and other blessings of the exalted leader’s welfare state. Praise be to he whom must be obeyed

  27. abeline on April 23, 2009 at 9:15 pm

    I’m confused — did you file a counter DMCA notice with YouTube? You should — don’t rely on CNN to do the right thing. Then you can sue CNN for filing a false DMCA.

  28. Mary on April 26, 2009 at 10:07 pm

    I was offended by both Susan Roesgen and Anderson Cooper’s smearing of the tea party protesters. I’m a former liberal democrat (now an independent) and attended the tea party protest in Lansing, MI on April 15th, and there were many democrats and independents there as well as conservatives, some of us were black, brown and white, at least 7,000 of us strong. It’s the reason some of the corrupt democrats in DC, like Debbie Stabenow started shaking in their shoes, they know that we mean business this time.

    Roesgen and Cooper showed us for once and for all that they do not respect the citizenry of the US, they treated us with nothing but disdain. Thing of it is, we’ve known how little they respect us for some time, it’s the reason the media is not trusted in the US any longer.

  29. Republicans Suck Too! - Political Forum on April 29, 2009 at 9:05 am

    [...] that shows Tea Party activists confronting hostile reporter Susan Roesgen. Go here for more info:http://www.foundingbloggers.com/wordpress/2009/04/an-open-letter-to-cnn/ About half way through the video, the CNN reporter begins to interview a woman who explains it [...]

  30. [...] So an embarrassed CNN gets the video scrubbed from YouTube. And the Founding Bloggers respond. [...]

TEACHING RADICAL

Jon David Kahn “American Heart”



Links