Hugh Lincoln
11-09-2007, 08:45 PM
NYT vows to censor comments from whites who oppose illegals, etc.:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.com/authors/Donovan-VoxPopuli.html
Editors have no doubt that the bounds of legitimate comment do not include racial realism. Kate Phillips, editor of The Caucus, the Times’ political blog, objects to “intolerance” and “vitriol,” wishing that “we could go back to the days when we never heard their voices.” It is easy to imagine what Ms. Phillips considers “vitriol” and what she considers fair comment.
This is indeed a serious problem for a mainstream media controlled by elements hostile to America’s white majority. The Internet has drawn back the curtain between the media producers and media consumers, and as it turns out, the white consumers don’t share the values of the often Jewish, minority, or liberal white producers.
What’s amazing is that The Times is actually admitting that it needs to be protected from the public, and describing what steps it will take to do so.
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.com/authors/Donovan-VoxPopuli.html
Editors have no doubt that the bounds of legitimate comment do not include racial realism. Kate Phillips, editor of The Caucus, the Times’ political blog, objects to “intolerance” and “vitriol,” wishing that “we could go back to the days when we never heard their voices.” It is easy to imagine what Ms. Phillips considers “vitriol” and what she considers fair comment.
This is indeed a serious problem for a mainstream media controlled by elements hostile to America’s white majority. The Internet has drawn back the curtain between the media producers and media consumers, and as it turns out, the white consumers don’t share the values of the often Jewish, minority, or liberal white producers.
What’s amazing is that The Times is actually admitting that it needs to be protected from the public, and describing what steps it will take to do so.