Who created "manchurian" Huntsman ad - not us, obviously - see inside

[hillertexas]

Just an FYI: the footage with him holding his daughter is from this video I think (not his personal files or anything like that):
ht tp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_IQr9kMHdU8

 

[dante]

There is an easy way to test the Hunstman campaign's assertion that the first referral is due to the fact that it was tweeted to them. Let's put up a new video on youtube, tweet the link to someone who's twitter is set up like Hunstman's and then see what happens.

 

[btwilli1]

Just to recap my findings I posted in the 50pg thread,

Jan 4 10:12PM EST - Video was published to youtube
Jan 4 10:35PM EST - Video was tweeted to @JonHuntsman

Between 10:35 and midnight someone searched for Ron Paul on youtube and found the video, jon2012.com had a link somewhere on his site that sent someone to the video.

All evidence is circumstantial but on Jon Huntsman's site tweets on the main page only show tweets he published, not people who used the @JonHuntsman tag. Question is how did the referral happen. DailyPaul says a web based email client on jon2012.com It's interesting, but there is no way to really blame someone. A lot happened in a 2 hour span before Jan 5th.

 

[Emerick]

This isn't going to get us anywhere we don't have any allies in the MSM that would take this on. They already call us kooks and trying to explain this won't help that image right or wrong.

Good DP post on this here>> http://www.dailypaul.com/201111/urg...n-campaign-on-this-you-have-no-clear-evidence

The media hates us why would they report this circumstantial evidence to try to help us? they won't! I say we drop it and move on they got us and the campaign didn't handle it well.

Remember all the attacks in Iowa? Remember how it was used to create the narrative that Ron was loosing ground? Remember how it was used to pump Santorum?

This is the same thing. It will happen all the time. We need to fight the establishment. To let them attack us and do nothing is suicide.

All those circumstancial evidence against Huntsman is much more they had against Ron Paul. Ron's campaign - not Ron himself - should put the MSM in its place.

 

[slamhead]

Just to recap my findings I posted in the 50pg thread,

Jan 4 10:12PM EST - Video was published to youtube
Jan 4 10:35PM EST - Video was tweeted to @JonHuntsman

Between 10:35 and midnight someone searched for Ron Paul on youtube and found the video, jon2012.com had a link somewhere on his site that sent someone to the video.

All evidence is circumstantial but on Jon Huntsman's site tweets on the main page only show tweets he published, not people who used the @JonHuntsman tag. Question is how did the referral happen. It's interesting, but I guess we should leave it alone.

Why do we have another thread as you state here what you gleaned from the "50pg" thread? Can we join these threads mod?

 

[speciallyblend]

Remember all the attacks in Iowa? Remember how it was used to create the narrative that Ron was loosing ground? Remember how it was used to pump Santorum?

This is the same thing. It will happen all the time. We need to fight the establishment. To let them attack us and do nothing is suicide.

All those circumstancial evidence against Huntsman is much more they had against Ron Paul. Ron's campaign - not Ron himself - should put the MSM in its place.

sadly the media doesn't care so they only way we can get the campaign to act against it is to stop sending them money until they respond. Of course i am so broke that is not a threat to the ron paul campaign so even ron paul would laugh me off.

i only said that above since i have sent my money to ron paul instead of registering my vehicle though i was to poor to register it 6 months ago. After realizing the gov is just milking me.
I decided to send my money to ron paul so far i got 2 tickets for driving with no tags on my lisc plate(cops reminded me they were being nice and could tow my vehicle and i said go ahead i can't afford to take it out of tow so you would just have a bs vehicle,hell why don't you just lock me up and save me from being homeless) i cannot afford to pay the tickets or register my car so f the gov. I now refuse to register my car eventually they will tow it and i am screwed. I have gotten to the point of saying f the gov taking my money. i perfer to have a roof over my head insteaqd of paying the state money i need to live. f the gov i will no longer play by their rules of paying up so sooner or later i will lose my lisc and then my job and then be homeless. Even funnier i can't register my vehicle because it failed emissions so i am caught in a catch 22 fuck the government.

 

[amy31416]

Whoever made it is probably having a lot of fun reading this thread. Trolls get off on this sort of thing you know.

 

[George_K]

Just for your information. This story just hit the german press over here.

The headline of the german SPIEGEL translated:

US Republican Election: Racist campaign against "China John"
America's primary campaign is getting dirty: with racist undertones, a video of Republican candidate Jon Huntsman vilified as agents of China.
Probably followers of the radical-liberal opponent Ron Paul have created the clip.

source: hxxp://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,807744,00.html

Let me tell you good morning. the German Spiegel, the US FOX, CNN, MSNBC, British Guardian, even AL JAZEERA is in the same boat. They are all the same, they all push the same agenda and have all the same bosses. The media has a monopoly, not only in the USA, this is global.

 

[ratatosk333]

Guys don't worry about it. Dr. Paul probably knew something like this would happen, he'll handle it and make Huntsman look like an IDIOT, but more importantly he'll make the MSM lose a LOT of credibility. this is nothing but a good thing. I can't WAIT for Paul to come in 2nd on Tuesday it's going to be hilarious

 

[sailingaway]

He's a great article detailing the Huntsman/Ron Paul ad mess, in which a lone nut created a You Tube account and in one day uploaded ONE video characterizing Huntsman as a "manchurian candidate."

Ron Paul and his campaign HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT, but the media is running wild with it, demanding Ron Paul apologize.

Hey, *I* can go create some fake ad in Romney or Santorum's name and blast Ron Paul. Think they'll jump on that?

You wonder if these morons in the media realize how easy it is to post a video on You Tube and attribute it to someone.

The below link also shows some evidence the video may have been made by Huntsmans OWN STAFF (though I think this is inconclusive):

http://www.examiner.com/elections-2...t-piece-about-huntsman-claims-ron-paul-did-it

Yeah, it's inconclusive to put it mildly although it is pretty clear no Paulite would first ever have a first ever referal to the youtube video (not 'ad') from Huntsman's site. Clearly the ad was CREATED PURPOSEFULLY to blow up on Ron Paul and his supporters. BUT it is not at all clear that the Huntsman camp did it, rather than were alerted to it first so they could react before it was taken down.

Trolls have been coming here now for two days trying to rile people up to go on a witch hunt making it blow up even more in Ron's face and ours when it proves not true. Most have recent accounts, or low posts. Putting an inflamatory headline on a thread then ending the post with 'but I think this is inconclusive' raises questions, to put it mildly.

 

[hillertexas]

This isn't going to get us anywhere we don't have any allies in the MSM that would take this on. They already call us kooks and trying to explain this won't help that image right or wrong.

Good DP post on this here>> http://www.dailypaul.com/201111/urg...n-campaign-on-this-you-have-no-clear-evidence

The media hates us why would they report this circumstantial evidence to try to help us? they won't! I say we drop it and move on they got us and the campaign didn't handle it well.

The guy over at the Daily Paul is making all sorts of sense:

URGENT: Please Do NOT Unleash Blowback to the Huntsman Campaign over this New Video!
Submitted by egervari on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 08:52

There has been some talk on here that the Huntsman campaign actually created a smear video against himself to try and implicate Dr. Paul. I created this post to address this charge.

Please read this post carefully. It is URGENT that you understand what I'm about to tell you, because it is true to the best of my knowledge and it is factual.

When this post talks about the technical information about the referrer addresses of this smear video, I want to assure you that I am qualified to speak about it. I have 12 years experience in web application development using Java/Spring/Hibernate, and I've been programming for a total of 18 years in a variety of technologies. If anyone is an expert on these matters, it is me.

Let's use our heads and use reason and logic to sniff this one out.

First, the Orinje.com forum for the Huntsman campaign appears to be a joke. I find it hard to believe that the Huntsman people even talk like that... let alone use that site to communicate with each other.

None of these writings look sincere. The whole story doesn't add up. It actually looks like kids wrote the content, or at least the `real` culprits made it appear that way. Those comments on the forum do not look like messages that real people actually wrote - it actually reads more like bad fiction.

In fact, all the responses on Orinje.com look scripted and appear like the same person wrote them all - the writing style is the same for every post.

Also, posting such incriminating messages on an "open forum" just seems far too incompetent if you ask me. I don't buy it.

I don't think the huntsman campaign did this.

Secondly, what about the referrer address that everyone is talking about? Let us ask, how could it have come from jon2012.com? The referrer address from jon2012.com doesn't actually make much sense in most cases, and I don't know why people are saying this is evidence that the Huntsman campaign uploaded the video - it isn't.

First, you have to ask the following question: Why would the content authors for the John Huntsman website post a link to the youtube video on their website, click it to go to youtube.com to set the first referrer address, and then remove that link from their website afterwards? That is precisely what some people on the DailyPaul are telling us what happened. Ask yourself, does that make sense? Is that even plausible? Why would the Huntsman campaign do that for? Do you *really* buy that? I don't.

As Tyler Durden points out, the referrer address was more likely set from an email client. If the Huntsman campaign actually runs a web client off their jon2012.com server to read their email as opposed to using gmail or hotmail, this would actually prove that the Huntsman campaign did NOT make the video. Clicking a youtube link inside of the web client running on their own server would actually send the jon2012.com referrer address, as has been reported.

Also, they probably also received a twitter message that they checked on their cellphone at the same time, which explains why twitter.com is one of the referrers and why it was viewed by a mobile device.

Let me be clear: If the jon2012.com domain hosts a web client where the campaign people read their email, then this actually proves that a 3rd party made the video and then sent it to the Huntsman campaign via email AND twitter. Then when the Huntsman campaign noticed that they got a new tweet and email, they clicked youtube.com link and established the first referrers. In fact, the line of reasoning is very plausible and probable.

Now, I can't prove that the Huntsman campaign has a web client running on jon2012.com, but this is a possibility YOU CANNOT DISMISS. If this is true, it essentially debunks the claim that the Huntsman campaign created this video fully and completely.

Even if the Huntsman website does not have a web client hosted on it, you still have to prove that a link to the video was posted to the jon2012.com website, clicked by a member of their staff, and then deleted. If there's no record of this, then how else did the referrer get to be jon2012.com?

Well, the only other possibility is that the referrer address was faked, probably to cause deception and to point the blame at Huntsman - because there aren't any other possibilities I can think of to explain this referrer address beyond creating a link on the jon2012.com website or clicking a link that was sent to an email address on the jon2012.com web mail client.

Now, it is actually very easy to fake a referrer address to YouTube to make it appear like the request came from jon2012.com. You can do so using a low-level HTTP library such as Apache HttpComponents. You can read about it here:

http://hc.apache.org/

Now, whether you think someone faked the referrer address or not is irrelevant - it is a possibility that you have to consider because we do not have all the evidence.

So guys, this whole thing SMELLS like a setup. There are more rational arguments to explain Huntsman's innocence than the other way around. I don't think the Huntsman campaign did this. They are not this incompetent. Nobody is. Nobody would post this video to their website only to delete it after the fact. It just doesn't add up.

The odds that this whole video was created and released by a 3rd party to get us all "riled up" is EXTREMELY HIGH. It's quite logical to conclude that this video is NOT associated with either the Paul or the Huntsman campaigns.

I think this was done by a 3rd party for the expressed purpose to stir up trouble between our campaigns. It could have been done to make Ron Paul supporters out to be "crazy conspiracy theorists". This is very likely that this is a false-flag within a false-flag - so it's important not to fall for it!

I honestly don't think the video was done by the Paul campaign, or from any of the supporters who regularly create videos. It just doesn't match the style of the Ron Paul videos we often see on YouTube.

At the same time, I don't think the Huntsman campaign did it either. I am not saying Huntsman campaign didn't know about a 3rd party making this video, but the evidence supports Huntsman's innocence.

The evidence trail is either too obvious, makes no rational sense, or it's as innocent as the Huntsman campaign people checking their twitter and email accounts and clicking youtube video. It's really as simple as that.

This proves that the Huntsman campaign was the FIRST people to VIEW the video via twitter and email, but it does not prove they created the video.

Now, I think Huntsman is totally overreacting to this video. If Huntsman's campaign were the first people to see the video, they are 100% guilty for bringing it to the media's attention, because they had no evidence that anyone in the Ron Paul campaign made the video.

I think Huntsman should have known better than to accuse Dr. Paul of releasing this video. I guess it's fashionable to accuse Dr. Paul of all sorts of evil these days. It makes no sense for Dr. Paul to put this out. Why would he?

So while Huntsman didn't create the video, it shows that he is negligent and foolish for not vetting the video and jumping the gun on this by bringing it to the media. If Huntsman is guilty of anything, he is guilty of this.

For all we know, the 3rd party who actually made this video would like nothing better than for us to overreact and make us think that the Huntsman campaign created this video so that we would unleash blowback to the Huntsman campaign unjustly, thus destroying Ron Paul in the process!

So I want to make this perfectly clear: DO NOT STIR UP TROUBLE AGAINST THE HUNTSMAN CAMPAIGN OVER THIS! They are likely completely innocent when it comes to the creation of this video (although not innocent in telling the media about it).

There are also a lot of people that listen to Alex Jones who are Ron Paul supporters, and frankly, these people are *way* too easily led to the wrong conclusions given little actual evidence by Alex and his guests. Please consider what I have said because it's likely Alex Jones will not look at what I wrote here as evidence. He will likely continue to claim that Huntsman did it. Alex is not interested in logic or facts. He will take a half-truth or something that is "maybe true", and out-right say it is 100% true.

Please tread carefully everyone. Be smart. Please do not react to this and do something everyone will regret.

I only hope I managed to stop this in time.

 

[roderik]

Let me tell you good morning. the German Spiegel, the US FOX, CNN, MSNBC, British Guardian, even AL JAZEERA is in the same boat. They are all the same, they all push the same agenda and have all the same bosses. The media has a monopoly, not only in the USA, this is global.

I already commented it and sent the author an email.
You are right on every account, but i'm not gonna sit here and let this happen without speaking up.

 

[pulp8721]

two more accounts have uploaded the video: NH4MittRomney NH4santorum

 

[speciallyblend]

Whoever made it is probably having a lot of fun reading this thread. Trolls get off on this sort of thing you know.

i think they are more concerned of making sure ron paul doesn't get nominated. this is above trolls. This is corruption and liars msm and status quo not trolls.

 

[unknown]

here's a link to the text in image form, just for storage purposes

http://i.imgur.com/8vhJw.png

Yup, its gone.

 

[sailingaway]

THIS -- DON'T LET TROLLS SET YOU OFF FURIOUS TO HURT RON'S CAMPAIGN - the OP has been banned until after New Hampshire

The guy over at the Daily Paul is making all sorts of sense:

URGENT: Please Do NOT Unleash Blowback to the Huntsman Campaign over this New Video!
Submitted by egervari on Sat, 01/07/2012 - 08:52

There has been some talk on here that the Huntsman campaign actually created a smear video against himself to try and implicate Dr. Paul. I created this post to address this charge.

Please read this post carefully. It is URGENT that you understand what I'm about to tell you, because it is true to the best of my knowledge and it is factual.

When this post talks about the technical information about the referrer addresses of this smear video, I want to assure you that I am qualified to speak about it. I have 12 years experience in web application development using Java/Spring/Hibernate, and I've been programming for a total of 18 years in a variety of technologies. If anyone is an expert on these matters, it is me.

Let's use our heads and use reason and logic to sniff this one out.

First, the Orinje.com forum for the Huntsman campaign appears to be a joke. I find it hard to believe that the Huntsman people even talk like that... let alone use that site to communicate with each other.

None of these writings look sincere. The whole story doesn't add up. It actually looks like kids wrote the content, or at least the `real` culprits made it appear that way. Those comments on the forum do not look like messages that real people actually wrote - it actually reads more like bad fiction.

In fact, all the responses on Orinje.com look scripted and appear like the same person wrote them all - the writing style is the same for every post.

Also, posting such incriminating messages on an "open forum" just seems far too incompetent if you ask me. I don't buy it.

I don't think the huntsman campaign did this.

Secondly, what about the referrer address that everyone is talking about? Let us ask, how could it have come from jon2012.com? The referrer address from jon2012.com doesn't actually make much sense in most cases, and I don't know why people are saying this is evidence that the Huntsman campaign uploaded the video - it isn't.

First, you have to ask the following question: Why would the content authors for the John Huntsman website post a link to the youtube video on their website, click it to go to youtube.com to set the first referrer address, and then remove that link from their website afterwards? That is precisely what some people on the DailyPaul are telling us what happened. Ask yourself, does that make sense? Is that even plausible? Why would the Huntsman campaign do that for? Do you *really* buy that? I don't.

As Tyler Durden points out, the referrer address was more likely set from an email client. If the Huntsman campaign actually runs a web client off their jon2012.com server to read their email as opposed to using gmail or hotmail, this would actually prove that the Huntsman campaign did NOT make the video. Clicking a youtube link inside of the web client running on their own server would actually send the jon2012.com referrer address, as has been reported.

Also, they probably also received a twitter message that they checked on their cellphone at the same time, which explains why twitter.com is one of the referrers and why it was viewed by a mobile device.

Let me be clear: If the jon2012.com domain hosts a web client where the campaign people read their email, then this actually proves that a 3rd party made the video and then sent it to the Huntsman campaign via email AND twitter. Then when the Huntsman campaign noticed that they got a new tweet and email, they clicked youtube.com link and established the first referrers. In fact, the line of reasoning is very plausible and probable.

Now, I can't prove that the Huntsman campaign has a web client running on jon2012.com, but this is a possibility YOU CANNOT DISMISS. If this is true, it essentially debunks the claim that the Huntsman campaign created this video fully and completely.

Even if the Huntsman website does not have a web client hosted on it, you still have to prove that a link to the video was posted to the jon2012.com website, clicked by a member of their staff, and then deleted. If there's no record of this, then how else did the referrer get to be jon2012.com?

Well, the only other possibility is that the referrer address was faked, probably to cause deception and to point the blame at Huntsman - because there aren't any other possibilities I can think of to explain this referrer address beyond creating a link on the jon2012.com website or clicking a link that was sent to an email address on the jon2012.com web mail client.

Now, it is actually very easy to fake a referrer address to YouTube to make it appear like the request came from jon2012.com. You can do so using a low-level HTTP library such as Apache HttpComponents. You can read about it here:

http://hc.apache.org/

Now, whether you think someone faked the referrer address or not is irrelevant - it is a possibility that you have to consider because we do not have all the evidence.

So guys, this whole thing SMELLS like a setup. There are more rational arguments to explain Huntsman's innocence than the other way around. I don't think the Huntsman campaign did this. They are not this incompetent. Nobody is. Nobody would post this video to their website only to delete it after the fact. It just doesn't add up.

The odds that this whole video was created and released by a 3rd party to get us all "riled up" is EXTREMELY HIGH. It's quite logical to conclude that this video is NOT associated with either the Paul or the Huntsman campaigns.

I think this was done by a 3rd party for the expressed purpose to stir up trouble between our campaigns. It could have been done to make Ron Paul supporters out to be "crazy conspiracy theorists". This is very likely that this is a false-flag within a false-flag - so it's important not to fall for it!

I honestly don't think the video was done by the Paul campaign, or from any of the supporters who regularly create videos. It just doesn't match the style of the Ron Paul videos we often see on YouTube.

At the same time, I don't think the Huntsman campaign did it either. I am not saying Huntsman campaign didn't know about a 3rd party making this video, but the evidence supports Huntsman's innocence.

The evidence trail is either too obvious, makes no rational sense, or it's as innocent as the Huntsman campaign people checking their twitter and email accounts and clicking youtube video. It's really as simple as that.

This proves that the Huntsman campaign was the FIRST people to VIEW the video via twitter and email, but it does not prove they created the video.

Now, I think Huntsman is totally overreacting to this video. If Huntsman's campaign were the first people to see the video, they are 100% guilty for bringing it to the media's attention, because they had no evidence that anyone in the Ron Paul campaign made the video.

I think Huntsman should have known better than to accuse Dr. Paul of releasing this video. I guess it's fashionable to accuse Dr. Paul of all sorts of evil these days. It makes no sense for Dr. Paul to put this out. Why would he?

So while Huntsman didn't create the video, it shows that he is negligent and foolish for not vetting the video and jumping the gun on this by bringing it to the media. If Huntsman is guilty of anything, he is guilty of this.

For all we know, the 3rd party who actually made this video would like nothing better than for us to overreact and make us think that the Huntsman campaign created this video so that we would unleash blowback to the Huntsman campaign unjustly, thus destroying Ron Paul in the process!

So I want to make this perfectly clear: DO NOT STIR UP TROUBLE AGAINST THE HUNTSMAN CAMPAIGN OVER THIS! They are likely completely innocent when it comes to the creation of this video (although not innocent in telling the media about it).

There are also a lot of people that listen to Alex Jones who are Ron Paul supporters, and frankly, these people are *way* too easily led to the wrong conclusions given little actual evidence by Alex and his guests. Please consider what I have said because it's likely Alex Jones will not look at what I wrote here as evidence. He will likely continue to claim that Huntsman did it. Alex is not interested in logic or facts. He will take a half-truth or something that is "maybe true", and out-right say it is 100% true.

Please tread carefully everyone. Be smart. Please do not react to this and do something everyone will regret.

I only hope I managed to stop this in time.
__________________________________________

Frankly, I think I smell Newt Gingrich.

 

[Diurdi]

These are just internet trolls. They succeeded pretty well.

It would be absurd to think Huntsman's campaign has anything to do with this.

 

[lucent]

The guy over at the Daily Paul is making all sorts of sense:

When this post talks about the technical information about the referrer addresses of this smear video, I want to assure you that I am qualified to speak about it. I have 12 years experience in web application development using Java/Spring/Hibernate, and I've been programming for a total of 18 years in a variety of technologies. If anyone is an expert on these matters, it is me.

Then it makes me wonder how he can be such a noob.

Let's use our heads and use reason and logic to sniff this one out.

Yes, let's.

Secondly, what about the referrer address that everyone is talking about? Let us ask, how could it have come from jon2012.com? The referrer address from jon2012.com doesn't actually make much sense in most cases, and I don't know why people are saying this is evidence that the Huntsman campaign uploaded the video - it isn't.

First, you have to ask the following question: Why would the content authors for the John Huntsman website post a link to the youtube video on their website, click it to go to youtube.com to set the first referrer address, and then remove that link from their website afterwards? That is precisely what some people on the DailyPaul are telling us what happened. Ask yourself, does that make sense? Is that even plausible? Why would the Huntsman campaign do that for? Do you *really* buy that? I don't.

Because it was likely posted on a back end page on their website. Usually there are forums or a private messaging system. This was probably sent via a PM to the person who would then spread it elsewhere.

As Tyler Durden points out, the referrer address was more likely set from an email client. If the Huntsman campaign actually runs a web client off their jon2012.com server to read their email as opposed to using gmail or hotmail, this would actually prove that the Huntsman campaign did NOT make the video. Clicking a youtube link inside of the web client running on their own server would actually send the jon2012.com referrer address, as has been reported.

Sorry, doesn't work that way. Emails on the jon2012.com are guaranteed to be a POP email. Emails are downloaded onto your mail client. This can either be a free email or an email program.

Let me be clear: If the jon2012.com domain hosts a web client where the campaign people read their email, then this actually proves that a 3rd party made the video and then sent it to the Huntsman campaign via email AND twitter. Then when the Huntsman campaign noticed that they got a new tweet and email, they clicked youtube.com link and established the first referrers. In fact, the line of reasoning is very plausible and probable.

No, I doubt it hosts some kind of web client. When confronted that it came from jon2012.com, their campaign said it has to do with the Twitter feed on their website, which hogwash because all URLs posted through Twitter are forwarded through http://t.co. Meaning, their campaign has already given their excuse and lied.

Now, I can't prove that the Huntsman campaign has a web client running on jon2012.com, but this is a possibility YOU CANNOT DISMISS. If this is true, it essentially debunks the claim that the Huntsman campaign created this video fully and completely.

I don't need to, their campaign already answered the accusations with a false answer. Almost all these websites are hosted elsewhere. Meaning if they have access to a web client, it is running on their host's server, and it is not on their domain.

Even if the Huntsman website does not have a web client hosted on it, you still have to prove that a link to the video was posted to the jon2012.com website, clicked by a member of their staff, and then deleted. If there's no record of this, then how else did the referrer get to be jon2012.com?

For being a professional, this guy sure doesn't know much about web hosting. There are back ends websites that are member access only. On the back end it is actually most likely a forum with a private messaging system. As I said above, someone probably PMed it to someone else.

Well, the only other possibility is that the referrer address was faked, probably to cause deception and to point the blame at Huntsman - because there aren't any other possibilities I can think of to explain this referrer address beyond creating a link on the jon2012.com website or clicking a link that was sent to an email address on the jon2012.com web mail client.

I am sorry, but the easier explanation is that they probably had no clue referrals are monitored. It was done by a complete amateur and they got caught.

 

[UK4Paul]

$15 trillion in debt... possible war with Iran... but ooh look, a Youtube video Ron Paul didn't even make!

Why on earth do we call the media "mainstream"?

 

[sailingaway]

The point is it isn't PROOF Huntsman did it. It might be proof someone is trying to make it LOOK like Huntsman did it, just as they 'tried' transparently to make it look like Ron Paul supporters made it to begin with. We can and should use the track back info to show WE DIDN'T do it -- I think that is pretty obvious since we'd have been spreading it around if we actually liked the video, not sending it to Huntsman. But we can't prove who did it, and the benefit from pinning it on someone isn't worth the risk of blowback if we are wrong and it is provable. In fact, if we can get out that we didn't do it and get remotely fair coverage of that (drudge etc) HUNTSMAN going off half cocked against RON is likely to create voter blow back.

Be pure, folks, just defend ourselves.