Huff Post link White Radicalization is a Violent Threat

I remember the NY Times promoting stories by putting them on the front page to help make the case to invade Iraq back in the early 2000s such as those written by Judith Miller and burying stories that exposed the truth. That's how some of the MSM is dishonest or promotes a certain agenda.

The NY Times has done many things like that over the years. It's a myth that it's some kind of a "liberal rag." Still, they do have some good, in depth journalism most of the time and when they screw up, they take action, like firing Judith Miller. But their biases have influenced major events for 100s of years.
 

The local and major network 30 minute broadcasts are usually OK....they just broadcast the latest daily events....with Plenty of commercials. However, when viewing the Cable networks, where the "news" consists of people offering their "opinions" of various events and subjects, the "bias" soon becomes fairly obvious.
 
www.huffpost.com

www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Huffington-post-Reviews-E230057.htm

www.influencewatch.org/for-profit/huffington-post/

www.politico.com/news/the-huffington-post

www.downdetector.com/status/huffington-post/

www.crunchbase.com/organization/huffingtonpost

www.cislm.org/case-study-huffington-post/

https://archives.cjr.org/cover_story/six_degrees_of_aggregation.php

www.statista.com/statistics/649139/huffington-post-credibility-usa/

www.houstonpress.com/arts/wil-wheaton-and-why-i-won-t-write-for-huffington-post-anymore-7896530

www.mic.com/articles/144177/this-tweet-from-a-huffington-post-editor-shows-the-problem-with-white-feminism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HuffPost

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianna_Huffington






https://www.youtube.com/c/huffpost/video

https://www.youtube.com/c/HuffPostEntertainment/videos

https://www.youtube.com/user/HuffPostLive/videos
 
Whites are a threat but the blacks and yellow are not? There is something wrong with this kind of
thinking. I could be wrong but it seems that the white are a diminishing species so how could they be a threat to the others who are increasing by leaps and bounds every year. It just doesn't make any sense if you still believe in "common sense" which I still do!
 
Packerjohn said:
Whites are a threat but the blacks and yellow are not? There is something wrong with this kind of
thinking. I could be wrong but it seems that the white are a diminishing species so how could they be a threat to the others who are increasing by leaps and bounds every year. It just doesn't make any sense if you still believe in "common sense" which I still do!
Click to expand...

Don't forget the Browns.

Wby?
 
Packerjohn said:
Whites are a threat but the blacks and yellow are not? There is something wrong with this kind of
thinking. I could be wrong but it seems that the white are a diminishing species so how could they be a threat to the others who are increasing by leaps and bounds every year. It just doesn't make any sense if you still believe in "common sense" which I still do!
Click to expand...
“Whites” are not a separate species. As for “diminishing” - that replacement theory going around is lifted straight from Nazi ideology. Think it through. If you’re referring to people of European extraction, they have always been a minority of the world population. Nothing new there.
 
SeniorBen said:
I remember the NY Times promoting stories by putting them on the front page to help make the case to invade Iraq back in the early 2000s such as those written by Judith Miller and burying stories that exposed the truth. That's how some of the MSM is dishonest or promotes a certain agenda.

The NY Times has done many things like that over the years. It's a myth that it's some kind of a "liberal rag." Still, they do have some good, in depth journalism most of the time and when they screw up, they take action, like firing Judith Miller. But their biases have influenced major events for 100s of years.
Click to expand...

The NY Times dirty little secret:

ny times giant negros 1.jpg

www.nytimes.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times

www.nytimes.com/2021/07/10/opinion/sunday/white-newspapers-african-americans.html

www.metafilter.com/63770/Attack-of-the-Giant-*****es

www.pinterest.com/pin/405746247655508788/

www.vox.com/2014/11/25/7283327/michael-brown-racist-stereotypes

https://undercoverblackman.blogspot.com/2007/07/attack-of-giant-*****es.html
 
mrstime said:
WOW, apparently politics is OK depending on who is sneaking it in.
Click to expand...
Had a PM exchange with Matrix about this. Matrix acknowledged that there is a lot of political matter here, her objective is to limit it to things that do not lead to heated exchanges. I know that makes it a bit subjective, but someone has to be the decider, and can't spend a lot of time debating it.

I don't always agree with the decisions, but I know someone has to make them. Seems to me that on balance most are reasonable, and have kept this forum relatively civil.

I don't think it matters so much who is doing the posting, one thing Matrix relies on is member reporting, makes sense Matrix cannot read everything, but that probably introduces some bias. Apparently there were some real problems in the past, before my time here, that drove this policy.
 
I agree with Alligatorob. Most if not all of the SF membership fully realizes that Seabreeze and now just Matrix have lives and responsibilities outside of SF. If they had or have time to lurk and address concerns they have and will accommodate membership concerns, questions and valid complaints. But know this, oftentimes due to time constraints in their personal lives a decision has to be decided not in what some members feel a decision is a rush to judgement and not something that is reviewed, decided on a course of action then addressed via a PM and according to the issue it may be posted in the member assistance subforum in a timely manner. Generally they depend on non TOS questions be correctly addressed by experienced senior members. TOS and/or personal issues should always be in a PM to Matrix to avoid the typical he said, she said resentment that has actually lead to the complete destruction of some forums. Case in point: Topix which had a well documented history of membership violence, threats, bullying, racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic tirades and other socially disturbing themes actually resulting in a few suicides. IMHO SF has a pretty liberal TOS policy considering what's out there in Cyberland.
 
Last edited:
FastTrax said:
I agree with Alligatorob. Most if not all of the SF membership fully realizes that Seabreeze and now just Matrix have lives and responsibilities outside of SF. If they had or have time to lurk and address concerns they have and will accommodate membership concerns, questions and valid complaints. But know this, oftentimes due to time constraints in their personal lives a decision has to be decided not in what some members feel a decision is a rush to judgement and not something that is reviewed, decided on a course of action then addressed via a PM and according to the issue it may be posted in the member assistance subforum in a timely manner. Generally they depend on non TOS questions be correctly addressed by experienced senior members. TOS and/or personal issues should always be in a PM to Seabreeze and or Matrix to avoid the typical he said, she said resentment that has actually lead to the complete destruction of some forums. Case in point: Topix which had a well documented history of membership violence, threats, bullying, racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic tirades and other socially disturbing themes actually resulting in a few suicides. IMHO SF has a pretty liberal TOS policy considering what's out there in Cyberland.
Click to expand...
Sea breeze is a regular member now as of over a year ago. She no longer is an Admin Or mod. Address complaints about T O S to Matrix.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top