Re: Gorgeous George Show (You Wanna Fight?)

• Report rights infringement
• published: 02 Jul 2016
• views: 37

I find it most hilarious that GG is still is butthurt about me calling him dead when I made a video a few days ago telling everyone that it was a joke. He thinks some faggot online will sway his friends in to believing his demise. What a dumbass. Today I confront GG on some threats he told piss4400 where he claimed he was going to my house, drag me out and kick my ass. Considering his history of losing fights I think he is in no position to issue challenges. Plane glass windows anyone? :D ================================================== http://encyclopediadramatica.se/Gorgeous_George The Gorgeous George Show is the equivalent of cutting off one of your limbs with a rusted olive fork. George Alexander Yarid, aka Gorgeous George (born July 16, 1968), is 47 and still lives in a tri-level house that he usurped from his dead mother. It is a decent house in a decent neighborhood, but it's not the mansion George likes to say it is on TV. Gorgeous George used to deliver food for a living. Now he drives a taxi that he has to pay the company to drive. George has been raping our eyes and ears for 20 years. It all started when he claimed he saw all of these racist shows on RCAN (a public access channel) and thought it was missing a man with a deficit in terms of talent. Over the years he has done a ton of lulzy things including harassing people on the internet he claims he doesn’t care about, sue people for copyright infringement when he frequently uses or steals various songs and comedic bits to use on his show, claims he’s not fat, he gave a whore in Las Vegas a wedding ring which in turn she pawned for meth, claims he’s straight yet he was caught sucking dick at a gloryhole in a gay bar called Fielden’s, etc. If I went on about all the funny things he’s done this description would be as long as War & Peace. The point is he’s a huge ball of fail and makes Chris Chan look like Betty White in comparison in regard to ego. Fair use notice: This video is covered under fair use as defined by 17 U.S.C. § 107 and upheld by Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., Salinger v. Random House, New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co, Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation, Sony Corp v. Universal City Studios, Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, Lenz v. Universal Music Corp.: Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include: 1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; 2) the nature of the copyrighted work; 3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors. Thank you for watching.