NYT editor’s tweets mocking Jews, Indians amid newspaper’s ‘anti-racist’ drive

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 10.47.20 AM

A politics editor at the New York Times faces charges of anti-Semitism and bigotry after a series of old insensitive tweets surfaced online. This comes after a similar scandal with its Washington editor and leaked editorial tapes.

Breitbart News uncovered the tweets in an investigation published on Thursday, detailing a litany of offensive and racially-charged remarks from senior staff editor Tom Wright-Piersanti, who has worked at the Gray Lady for a little over five years, according to his LinkedIn profile.

Before that, on New Year’s day in 2010, Wright-Piersanti said: “I was going to say ‘Crappy Jew Year,’ but one of my resolutions is to be less anti-Semitic. So… HAPPY Jew Year. You Jews.”

The tweet has since been deleted.

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 10.52.03 AM

In another missive dated December 2009, the future Times editor posted a photo of a vehicle with what appears to be a menorah – associated with the religious holiday of Hanukkah – on its roof, and asked Who called the Jew police?”

Though the “Jew police” tweet was still publicly viewable when Breitbart’s story first ran, it has also since mysteriously vanished from Wright-Piersanti’s Twitter page.

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 10.54.55 AM

The apparently anti-Semitic comments prompted the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), one of the oldest Jewish political advocacy groups in the US, to demand for the editor’s swift termination, and a review of past stories he edited.

“The Zionist Organization of America urges the New York Times to immediately dismiss this individual and to undertake a review of all of the stories that he has edited for possible antisemitic bias,” a spokesperson for ZOA told Breitbart News.

In addition to members of the Jewish faith, Wright-Piersanti’s tweets often fixated on “Indians” as well, though it’s not always clear if he is referring to Native AmericRAans or people from India.

“There are four indian guys with mohawks in this one class, and each one is a douche in his own awful way,” he tweeted in December 2009.

I hate mohawk Indians.

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 10.57.25 AM

A number of other posts singled out Indians for ridicule or insult as well, all of which remain public on Wright-Piersanti’s page at the time of publication.

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 10.58.20 AM

In another deleted tweet, the Times editor mused “With asian babies, is it racist to say to the parents, ‘Aw, he looks just like you!’? What if you say it before you see any pictures?”

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 11.01.00 AM

While the Times has not yet addressed the allegations publicly, Wright-Piersanti tweeted an apology on Thursday morning, after scrubbing a number of the offending tweets from his page, which he briefly set to private.

Following the publication of Brietbart’s investigation, Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, weighed in on the story, tweeting “Disgusting. But we shouldn’t expect any better from the New York Times. This is who they are.”

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 11.02.24 AM

Earlier this month, the Times demoted its deputy Washington editor for “serious lapses in judgement” in the form of tweets criticized as ‘racist.’

Screen Shot 2019-08-23 at 11.04.02 AM.png

NYT shifts from Russiagate to racism, insisting Orange Man Still Bad

Last week, a transcript of an internal town hall meeting surfaced, showing that the newspaper deliberately decided to shift its coverage of President Donald Trump from his supposed connections to Russia to “race and other divisions.”

(JUST IN TIME FOR THE 2020 ELECTIONS) – Facebook hiring editors to pick stories for ‘News Tab’, that didn’t work out well last time

Screen Shot 2019-08-21 at 11.05.39 AM

Facebook will hire a “small team” of journalists to select featured content for its much-hyped ‘News Tab’ section, which the platform will begin testing across its US user base later this year.

What could go awry with human editors in charge? Facebook should know, since the company was forced to fire its last team of human content-pickers over revelations of bias against conservative viewpoints.

READ MORE: Facebook tells Trump ads can’t appeal to ‘strong women LIKE YOU,’ caving in to ex-Clinton staffer

The platform said Tuesday that the new team — which will likely be fewer than 10 employees at the beginning — will choose the content for the ‘Top News’ section of the News Tab. Stories found in the other sections will be chosen by algorithms and determined by specific user interests, the New York Times reported.

Screen Shot 2019-08-21 at 11.08.48 AM

‘Trending’ no more: Facebook removing controversial news feature

Facebook said it made the decision to go after human curators after discussions with publishers convinced them that algorithms would not be capable of “news judgement” the way real journalists would and that it would take too long to train an algorithm to that level.

But there are pitfalls to consider with human editors, too. Facebook ditched its ‘Trending Topics’ section last year after being plagued by accusations that it was politically biased and amplified “fake news.” 

Screen Shot 2019-08-21 at 11.12.40 AM

An explosive Gizmodo story put the spotlight on Trending Topics in 2016, revealing that human editors, independently contracted by Facebook, were asked to suppress conservative news and even stories about Facebook itself.

The contractors were also told to artificially “inject” preferred stories into the trending module, even if they were not trending organically. Rather than relying on algorithms (as it claimed), Facebook was acting like a traditional news organization and reflecting the personal biases of its employees.

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that Facebook is planning to pay publishers “millions of dollars” to include their content in its News Tab.

A source told Digiday that the new batch of curators will be given the option to include that content in the Top News section, but they will not be obliged to. The new hires will be full-time employees, unlike the contractors used for the doomed Trending Topics section.

As Facebook rolls out the News Tab, users will no doubt be waiting to see if it has learned its lesson after the last debacle.

READ MORE: Google is censoring political content? *Gasp!* Who knew?

OBAMAS TO RELEASE ANTI-TRUMP MOVIE ON NETFLIX

Obamas To Release Anti-Trump Movie On Netflix

Film aims to undercut Trump’s job number claims

Steve Watson  – AUGUST 21, 2019

Ahead of the 2020 election, the Obamas are set to release a documentary via Netflix that has been described by Politico as anti-Trump.

The movie, scheduled to be released this week, titled American Factory, focuses on the economy in the heartland of the US.

The review states:

The documentary, which debuts on Netflix on August 21, never mentions President Donald Trump by name—but its message is clear: Trump’s promise to reinvigorate the industrial heartland is going to take a lot more than a campaign slogan. There are no easy solutions. And if some manufacturing jobs do come back, they’re going to look nothing like they used to. Americans will have to accept a new reality to stay competitive in the global marketplace—one that they might not like, and one that Trump doesn’t acknowledge.

it’s a message that echoes Obama’s declaration in 2016 that some jobs in the manufacturing sector are “just not going to come back.”

The movie argues that Trump’s efforts to reinvigorate manufacturing have not been successful, despite there being more employed in factory jobs now than before Trump was elected.

The message is clear. The Obamas are trying to hit Trump where it matters ahead of the election, in an effort to prevent history repeating.

Last year, when the Obamas inked the deal with the streaming service, the former president declared that the projects would focus on “training the next generation of leaders.”

“I continue to believe that if we are hearing each other’s stories and recognizing ourselves in each other, then our democracy works,” Obama said at the time.

WATCH: Why You Should Cancel Netflix

CNN ANALYST: WHITE REPUBLICAN MEN ARE ‘GREATEST TERRORIST THREAT’ IN US

CNN Analyst: White Republican Men Are 'Greatest Terrorist Threat' In US

Triggered by the word ‘hijacking’

Steve Watson  – AUGUST 21, 2019

CNN Analyst Angela Rye told a Republican strategist on air this week that ‘the greatest terrorist threat’ in the US are white men who think like he does.

GOP campaign strategist Patrick Griffin argued that the so called “Squad” of Democrats, including Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., has “hijacked” the Democratic Party.

“It’s so interesting that you use the term — the only two Muslim women in Congress, the term you chose to use, sir, is ‘hijacking,’” Rye, the former Congressional Black Caucus executive director, ridiculously responded.

“It has nothing to do with whether they’re Muslim or not,” Griffin hit back, “Nothing to do with that… They’ve hijacked from their own principles.”

“That’s a real interesting word choice, and you understand why,” Rye continued, insisting that Griffin used the term to connect the Democrats to terrorists.

“You can talk over me all you want to but the bottom line is the greatest terrorist threat in this country is white men, white men who think like you. That is the greatest terrorist threat in this country.” Rye blurted.

Griffin described Rye’s remarks as “silly rhetoric.”

“No, it’s not!” Rye responded.

“You know what’s silly? The fact that you’re on here knowing how dangerous times are right now defending this nonsense.” she added.

CNN, bringing the nuanced debate as usual.

SWEDEN: PEPPER SPRAY SALES SURGE 90% AMIDST RAPE CONCERNS

Sweden: Pepper Spray Sales Surge 90% Amidst Rape Concerns

Sales have “officially exploded” this summer.

 – AUGUST 20, 2019

Sales of pepper spray in some areas of Sweden have surged as much as 90 per cent amidst concerns over the country’s rape problem.

According to a report by Swedish newspaper Expressen, the Kjell & Company retail chain announced that sales of the self-defense item have spiked 90 per cent in August compared to June.

The sales figures are being described as an “accelerating, increasing trend,” with manufacturer Plegium revealing sales have been rising for years but “officially exploded” this summer.

Another pepper spray company called Bodyguard also revealed that its sales had increased by 21 per cent despite stiff competition from market newcomers.

“The Swedish summer has been shaken by a series of assault rapes. The most notable events have taken place in Uppsala, where two completed rapes and two attempted rapes took place between August 3rd and 7th alone,” reports Expressen.

After a string of four sexual assaults and rapes in the span of five nights, Swedish police in numerous cities advised women to not walk alone at night and to go home early.

Figures released last year found that 58 per cent of convicted rapists and 85 per cent of all convicted assault rapists in Sweden were born outside of Europe.

In cases where the victim did not know the attacker, the proportion of foreign offenders was more than 80 per cent. Nearly 40 per cent of the convicted rapists are from the Middle East or from Africa, areas of the world from which Sweden has accepted large numbers of migrants in recent years.

A study by the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet found that 88 per cent of gang rapists in the Scandinavian country over the last six years have had a migrant background.

Other figures show that migrants from Muslim-majority nations commit 84 per cent of “very violent” rapes in Sweden.

As we reported yesterday, robberies targeting children in Sweden have also hit a new record high, with young men with migrant backgrounds being blamed for the spike.

Seth Rich Murder Update: FBI Claims They Didn’t Investigate but NSA Claims Can’t Disclose Files Due to Matter of National Security

By Joe Hoft – August 20, 2019

We first reported in late July that Texas businessman Ed Butowsky filed a lawsuit where he outed reporter Ellen Ratner as his source for information on Seth Rich. The DNC operative was murdered in the summer of 2016 in Washington DC. His murder was never solved. According to the lawsuit Seth Rich provided WikiLeaks the DNC emails before the 2016 election, not Russia.

This totally destroys the FBI and Mueller’s claims that Russians hacked the DNC to obtain these emails.

Butowsky claims in his lawsuit:

Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange told her that Seth Rich and his brother, Aaron, were responsible for releasing the DNC emails to Wikileaks. Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange wanted the information relayed to Seth’s parents, as it might explain the motive for Seth’s murder.

On November 9 2016 Ellen Ratner admitted publicly that she met with Julian Assange for three hours the Saturday before the 2016 election. According to Ratner, Julian Assange told her the leaks were not from the Russians, they were from an internal source from the Hillary Campaign.

We later reported that Butowsky and his attorney, Ty Clevenger, requested and obtained documents from the FBI related to their case which we were able to analyze.

According to the duo, they obtained the transcript from former FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki where he states that the Obama White House was the entity that was pushing the Russia conspiracy as early as October 2016 –

Screen Shot 2019-08-20 at 11.19.05 AM

Rybicki was corrupt cop James Comey’s Chief of staff –

Clevenger stated in a post online that –

Newly released documents from the FBI suggest that the Obama White House pushed intelligence agencies to publicly blame the Russians for email leaks from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.

This afternoon I received an undated (and heavily redacted) transcript of an interview of James Rybicki, former chief of staff to former FBI Director James Comey, that includes this excerpt: “So we understand that at some point in October of 2016, there was, I guess, a desire by the White House to make some kind of statement about Russia’s…” and then the next page is omitted.

The comment is made by an unidentified prosecutor from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel or “OSC,” not to be confused with the office of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller (the OSC is a permanent office that investigates Hatch Act violations, and Mr. Comey was under investigation for trying to influence the 2016 Presidential election).

Roger Stone’s Indictment

Trump friend Roger Stone is facing charges from the Mueller gang that are based on this key question – who provided the DNC the Podesta emails to WikiLeaks?

The corrupt FBI and Mueller team claim the emails were hacked but neither entity inspected the DNC server which was supposedly hacked. They have provided no proof of this.

The DNC instead hired a firm Crowdstrike, with connections to Mueller and former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who provided a redacted report to the FBI and Mueller stating the emails were hacked by Russia.

Former NSA whistleblower Bill Binney claims he has evidence the DNC emails were not hacked but copied most likely on to a flashdrive or something similar.

Now This…

When Ty Clevenger requested documents from the FBI related to any investigation into the death of Seth Rich, they replied that they never investigated Seth Rich and they don’t even have any records on him –

But when documents were requested from the NSA, they replied that they won’t release their records regarding Seth Rich because it’s a matter of national security –

USC 552(b)(1) states:  This section does not apply to matters that are—

(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order;

So the FBI never investigated the Seth Rich murder even though the NSA said the case was a matter of national security?

This too does not pass the smell test.

Hat tip D. Manny

Meat tax will take food off poor people’s tables so that wealthy eco-socialists can feel virtuous

This is how you impose an unpopular and ineffective environmentalist policy that will hit the poorest citizens hardest, is bound to create a host of unintended consequences, and is founded on speculative science to begin with.

You are a centrist government in a democratic Western country. You want to be seen to be taking action on the environment, but you believe in consumer capitalism, and therefore wouldn’t dare to dismantle the profit-making machinery that actually contributes most of the CO2 within your economy. You praise the ideals of the Green New Deal, only because you know it will never become reality.

Your target must be insignificant economically, yet high-profile in its symbolic value. Meat works perfectly. Eating it already has an aura of hedonistic licentiousness, and restricting consumption covers several bases – animal cruelty, public health, and most importantly, climate change resulting from intensive livestock farming. You will get years of headlines, just as when you banned plastic bags or forced people to pay deposits on plastic bottles.

Screen Shot 2019-08-20 at 10.50.34 AM

From brat to wurst? Germany proposes beefing up meat tax to battle climate change

But you can’t just ban meat. Or ration it to 200 grams a week for every citizen. Because that would be considered an authoritarian intrusion that fundamentally violates your people’s freedom.

You try to turn it into a just cause. Activist organizations have been lobbying for this longer than you have been in power, and PETA will have the factory farming pictures. Scientists will supply the studies (take only the ones that support your view). You leverage entirely hypothetical but impressive sounding research such as the 2016 Oxford University one that claimed that going vegetarian would save 8 million lives and $1.5 trillion, or one that alleges that meat “kills” 2.4 million people a year around the world, or the one that says that the US going vegetarian would be the same as taking 60 million cars off the road.

Yet, even after the publicity campaign, you still can’t ban meat. This is the time for the moment of genius, the clever solution that squares the circle between a free populace and their paternalistic-minded rulers.

You put a tax on it. Not a declared one, but a stealth tax. Perhaps merely drop the VAT rebate that it enjoys, as was proposed in Germany, which currently taxes meat at 7 percent VAT, but is contemplating moving the levy to 19. You can have more meat – as much as you want – but you will pay more for the luxury, and there is a fairness to it too – the more schnitzel you consume the more dosh you dish out. Does the money go into environmental causes? Probably not – there is currently no way to separate meat VAT from others – but at least people will be nudged into the correct behaviors.

The fruits of your labors will be evident within months.

Being a wealthy lawmaker you will eat as much or as little meat as before, as food makes up a small proportion of your monthly budget. Your constituents – that is a different matter. Perhaps some will get the message, and eat more vegetables instead. Or perhaps, instead of buying organic, cruelty-free, carbon-neutral meat, they will now buy more factory-farmed meat. Or perhaps they will spend the money on a decent steak but will not be able to afford to repair their car, or take that holiday to the Balearics. Though I guess that could be a result in itself – after all, as a rule, the poorer someone is in the West, the less CO2 they emit. Some might be so deprived, however, that they will eat no meat at all. Their remaining money will now go to other, cheaper and more harmful high-calorie processed foods, like cakes or oven-fried chips. While your farmers will simply find it more profitable to export the food abroad, over longer distances, increasing their emissions. Is this what you wanted?

Oh, sin taxes, they used to be so simple when you were targeting the universally agreed-upon harms, such as smoking, with the aim of their complete eradication. But this is getting more nuanced now. Meat has been eaten by the homo sapiens since its emergence, and played an important role in its evolution. It still remains a key source of protein for your population. Ethically too, eating it is a source of legitimate pleasure to the sensory organs of millions. Is it the job of the government to strip its citizens of their daily pleasures, to literally deny adults the full choice of food for their dinner? What’s the morally correct trade-off between seven-course feasts of imported ostrich and elk and government-mandated buckwheat three times a day?

Let them sail yachts: Why Greta Thunberg and the environmental elite hate you

You, the politicians, will complain that you are only using the tools at your disposal – that you can’t charge a poor person less at the meat counter, that you cannot ban a farmer from exporting his carcasses, or a supermarket from opting for cheaper transatlantic chicken over homegrown beef. But then is your clever solution any better than rationing books and Iron Curtain-style central planning?

You will say that at least it is better to be doing something.

And indeed you are right – it is the “something” that matters, not the specific results. After all if there is one thing that Greta Thunberg and Nigel Lawson can agree on is that creating a meat tax in Germany, Sweden and Denmark, the three countries that have shown the greatest appetite for this policy, will make almost no difference to global emissions. For example, even if every resident of the United States, the country with the highest consumption of meat per capita, stopped eating meat tomorrow, that would only slice 2.6 percent off its emissions. Meanwhile, a Chinese person now eats five times as much meat as they did in the 1980s, and still only half as much as Americans – so he wants more. And the world population will likely double by the end of the century. Germans eating two fewer sausages a week was never going to be more than a gesture, and everyone knows it.

Though bearing in mind other environmental policy perversities – like banning nuclear to rely on dirty coal, or incentivizing biofuels and, in the process, rainforest destruction – perhaps “negligible” is the best effect we can all hope for. And you get to enjoy your steak guilt-free.

By Igor Ogorodnev

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑