NYTIMES’ NEWEST HIRE SENT TONS OF ANTI-WHITE RACIST TWEETS

[Dashinka 24,497]

12 hours ago, smilesammich said:

if anyone throwing a tantrum about nyt hiring sarah, search her response. i can't link it here, but she shows the harassment she was responding to.

So she was a victim?  Maybe the NYTimes should make her a top level editor.  Considering you are referring to only her view, maybe, just maybe, there is more to her story?

[Ironclad43 131]

What I learned from this thread is that it's okay to dehumanize people based on their political views, but only if they're white and right wing. (Leftists and "PoC" can't be nazis right?)

 

It's also okay to hire someone who openly hates white people and then do mental gymnastics to justify it, while at the same time you would throw anyone out on the street if they were white and had aversion toward other races.

 

Pointing out leftist hypocrisy won't change their minds, but hopefully it will change the minds of sane, rational people, to stop supporting them.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

17 hours ago, smilesammich said:

context is important.

Context is my Bible. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

46 minutes ago, Ironclad43 said:

What I learned from this thread is that it's okay to dehumanize people based on their political views, but only if they're white and right wing. (Leftists and "PoC" can't be nazis right?)

 

It's also okay to hire someone who openly hates white people and then do mental gymnastics to justify it, while at the same time you would throw anyone out on the street if they were white and had aversion toward other races.

 

Pointing out leftist hypocrisy won't change their minds, but hopefully it will change the minds of sane, rational people, to stop supporting them.

Welcome to CEHST.  It may seem unbelievable, but you'll see it on a pretty regular basis.  There used to be a few far-right posters here, but they are all pretty much gone now.

[Ironclad43 131]

It's not unbelievable at all. There has been an agenda to replace the indigenous populations of Europe (US & Canada, Australia included too) and in the US that was achieved with the 1965 immigration act, "diversity" visas and the constant anti-white rhetoric blasted by the mainstream media. (Amnesty for illegals, asylum, open borders, have fewer children, delay marriage or don't get married at all, etc) 

 

Marriage with foreigners accounts for a very small portion of net immigration and it's a voluntary choice made by a USC to marry a foreigner, in contrast to the above, which is forced on all Europeans by the ruling elite.

 

If believing this means I'm far-right, then I'll accept that label, even if I do hold some leftist principles.

Edited August 3, 2018 by Ironclad43

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

14 hours ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

I am sure this was taken out of context --http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/08/02/new-york-times-stands-by-new-tech-writer-sarah-jeong-after-racist-tweets-surface.html

 

 

These tweets are pretty offensive.

She should have responded to her trolls with wit,  not racism. 

Edited August 3, 2018 by Keith & Arileidi

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

So she was a victim?  Maybe the NYTimes should make her a top level editor.  Considering you are referring to only her view, maybe, just maybe, there is more to her story?

yes, a victim of online harassment. maybe you've heard of it happening to other public people on twitter? not just her view. she has evidence, which nyt has reviewed. 

just like the director guy, i understand this writer's explanation. obviously, so did her the nyt.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

These tweets are pretty offensive.

She should have responded to her trolls with wit,  not racism. 

did you read a sample of the messages and tweets she received?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, smilesammich said:

yes, a victim of online harassment. maybe you've heard of it happening to other public people on twitter? not just her view. she has evidence, which nyt has reviewed. 

just like the director guy, i understand this writer's explanation. obviously, so did her the nyt.

 

 

did you read a sample of the messages and tweets she received?

I'd be willing to bet Keith had experienced worse in his lifetime.  It's terrible that anyone should be subjected to such treatment, but I've never seen an instance where responding in kind made the situation any better.  

 

Had she replied as Keith suggested, I'm sure all of us here could respect her more.  Racist BS, no matter which direction it flows, should not be allowed to fester.

[Dashinka 24,497]

1 hour ago, smilesammich said:

yes, a victim of online harassment. maybe you've heard of it happening to other public people on twitter? not just her view. she has evidence, which nyt has reviewed. 

just like the director guy, i understand this writer's explanation. obviously, so did her the nyt.

 

 

did you read a sample of the messages and tweets she received?

So you know for a fact that she didn’t engage in the harassment to begin with, or are you just taking her word for it?

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

So you know for a fact that she didn’t engage in the harassment to begin with, or are you just taking her word for it?

what do you mean 'engage in the harassment'?

i don't have to take her word for it anyway, i'm not the one hiring her.

[Dashinka 24,497]

Just now, smilesammich said:

what do you mean 'engage in the harassment'?

i don't have to take her word for it anyway, i'm not the one hiring her.

You are defending her based on her responding in kind to online harassment.  It would be nice to know who started it before a defense is offered.  As to the employment issue, agreed, it is not up to either of us.

[smilesammich 10,727]

9 minutes ago, Satisfied said:

I'd be willing to bet Keith had experienced worse in his lifetime.  It's terrible that anyone should be subjected to such treatment, but I've never seen an instance where responding in kind made the situation any better.  

 

Had she replied as Keith suggested, I'm sure all of us here could respect her more.  Racist BS, no matter which direction it flows, should not be allowed to fester.

i simply asked keith a question. i don't know him, but i guess you do - since you speak for him.

people don't always react on twitter the way they should. if i were a journalist on twitter and i received constant harassment and abuse for being a woman/minority - i don't know that i'd always be able to keep my cool. 

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

You are defending her based on her responding in kind to online harassment.  It would be nice to know who started it before a defense is offered.  As to the employment issue, agreed, it is not up to either of us.

you think she initially harassed herself?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

3 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

i simply asked keith a question. i don't know him, but i guess you do - since you speak for him.

people don't always react on twitter the way they should. if i were a journalist on twitter and i received constant harassment and abuse for being a woman/minority - i don't know that i'd always be able to keep my cool.

you think she initially harassed herself?

Of course you wouldn't.   It would be hard for anyone to ignore.  But in my experience, the harder you fight back against antagonism, the harder the instigators push, especially when the reasons behind it are just malicious with no real basis.  Been true since kindergarden.  Meanwhile, letting such BS roll off your back is usually the best way to let it die off.  Not the easiest way, of course.

 

As for Keith, no, I don't know him yet.  That may change in the future however.  But I know from his posts here that he's pretty intelligent, respectful towards others, and he's black.  Those three attributes make him a target for racist remarks.  

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

9 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

 

you think she initially harassed herself?

Yes.  That's what Bill meant.   

 

But for the logical folks, he meant perhaps she instigated the situation.  It's a possibility. 

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, Satisfied said:

Of course you wouldn't.   It would be hard for anyone to ignore.  But in my experience, the harder you fight back against antagonism, the harder the instigators push, especially when the reasons behind it are just malicious with no real basis.  Been true since kindergarden.  Meanwhile, letting such BS roll off your back is usually the best way to let it die off.  Not the easiest way, of course.

 

As for Keith, no, I don't know him yet.  That may change in the future however.  But I know from his posts here that he's pretty intelligent, respectful towards others, and he's black.  Those three attributes make him a target for racist remarks.  

so basically, because this woman didn't react to a scenario you've never experienced, in the manner you deem proper, nyt is improperly hiring her.

 

Just now, Satisfied said:

Yes.  That's what Bill meant.   

 

But for the logical folks, he meant perhaps she instigated the situation.  It's a possibility. 

well duh, she is a woman and asian and in the public eye, writing for leftist rags. of course she instigated the situation. give me a break.