It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Social Justice Warrior Contacts The Employer Of Her Youtube Foe To Get Him Fired. It Backfires!

page: 8
49
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: angrypsycho1977
Like I said in my original post, I think the letter writing campaign was horrible, and I in no way think that she is an innocent. She lied and did some sneaky stuff to even get the letter to his employers. The source I posted agrees with that, even going so far to say


Writing employers is a low blow. And despite Mason’s many flaws as a thinker and a human being, he’s no Nazi.


My problem with the situation is the fact that the retaliation is affecting innocents that have nothing to do in this petty internet argument. These are the same people that decide when they disagree with you the best thing to do is send a swat team to their mother's house and think that is perfectly fine. And people in this thread are applauding these miscreants like they are heroes.

It is disgusting how people are celebrating the fact that people are losing their livelihoods because of internet trolls. If you condone behavior like any of the people involved in this farce on either side have been engaging in, you are just as bad as all of them.

And the youtuber is an ass. That is my opinion.



Utilitarianism has many flaws. Should this Anti-(Radical)Feminist should have just allowed this feminazi to get him fired because other people worked for her? If anything, SHE's at fault for attempting to use her employees as a shield from fair retaliation.(HaHa, you can't get me fired because my husband owns the business) Oh really? Since you are attempting to put me out on the street, I'm going to do what I can to put you out on the street. "Oh my god, it's actually working, sorry, now stop affecting my business! Think about my employees!"

She swung first. Her elitist mentality told her she could try to quash an opposing point of view by taking the food right out of him and his' mouths. He fought back, and yes, in crossfire her employees jobs have also been put at risk. But she only did this because she knew that her job would never be at risk. If she didn't attack him first, her employees would never have been put in the place they are in now. Plain and simple.




posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Evil_Santa
a reply to: Gryphon66

The issue that you're not seeing is that she attacked because she wanted to ruin him financially because of his opinions and thoughts. She was attacked because the previous sentence is a really screwed up reason for attacking someone.


The thunderfoot guy WAS in the right UNTIL he gave out personal information and then became liable if some thing befalls the lady du e to his revealing her address AND THEN INCITING his followers. Thunderfoot INCITED harm(financial harm) it can be argued. HE should had taken i t up with the ACLU instead but took th e law into his own hands.

Two wrongs dont make a right.



He didn't 'take the law into his own hands', he published publicly available information.

Also, do you really, HONESTLY THINK that the ACLU would have went to bat for a guy who is totally against the Third Wave Feminist agenda?



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 05:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Evil_Santa
a reply to: Gryphon66

The issue that you're not seeing is that she attacked because she wanted to ruin him financially because of his opinions and thoughts. She was attacked because the previous sentence is a really screwed up reason for attacking someone.


The thunderfoot guy WAS in the right UNTIL he gave out personal information and then became liable if some thing befalls the lady du e to his revealing her address AND THEN INCITING his followers. Thunderfoot INCITED harm(financial harm) it can be argued. HE should had taken i t up with the ACLU instead but took th e law into his own hands.

Two wrongs dont make a right.



He didn't 'take the law into his own hands', he published publicly available information.

Also, do you really, HONESTLY THINK that the ACLU would have went to bat for a guy who is totally against the Third Wave Feminist agenda?


The man said to mess with her in one of his videos. That is INCITEMENT.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

My point: did Thunderfoot's followers go after this woman ruthlessly because of her beliefs rather than her actions toward them?
/shrug
It is impossible to argue either way, as there is no way of conclusively knowing one way or the other why thunderfoots fans acted the way they did. For all we know they felt personally attacked and that's why they reacted.

Also I would debate the use of the word "ruthlessly" in this instance. That would imply that each person excessively and relentlessly attacked her, that might be true for a very few of thunderfoots followers but the majority likely only left one or two comments/reviews and called it done. Hardly ruthless. Ruthless would be hacking all her accounts and releasing the details to be public, advertising where her kids attend school, etc. In other words, ruthless would be using sensitive and private data to attack her where she can not defend. This is more akin to a letter writing campaign than a "Ruthless" attack. Though I can see your confusion because what she did (writing his boss to get him fired, calling the police, etc.) would be bordering on ruthless. Do you see the difference yet? Thunderfoot and his followers have attacked her publicly, while her and her supporters tried to attack him privately and his followers publicly.


Did they seek to harm her financially because of something she said or did that they did not agree with?

Yes of course they did, she attacked them first and so they reacted. Pretty simple and been answered dozens of times so far in this thread.
edit on 7-11-2015 by looneylupinsrevenge because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I don't think it's a good day when several innocent people should fear losing their jobs. Retaliation would be threatening the livelihood of the one lady, but to threaten an entire business, and it's employees is not something to celebrate. I'm sorry but I disagree with a lot of the posters here - This is not something to laugh about, this isn't karma, or payback - This is getting punched, and it retaliation you gouge out someones eye. The punishment does not fit the crime type of mentality fits, in my opinion.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: nancyliedersdeaddog
a reply to: Gryphon66

I think Thunderfoot's fans have learned it's not a good idea to write letters to employers/media/police that are full of lies, czech republic needs to rethink their laws when it comes to "speech crimes", don't doxx yourself, Social Justice Warriors are becoming unhinged, Laughing Witch is a pretty sick person, and lying to further your agenda is wrong.


Is that the official definition of social justice warrior?

My point: did Thunderfoot's followers go after this woman ruthlessly because of her beliefs rather than her actions toward them? Did they seek to harm her financially because of something she said or did that they did not agree with?

/shrug

What are you talking about? You asked what Thunderfoot's followers learned from this situation which my comment addressed and I have no clue why you believe I was giving you the definition of a "social justice warrior". They went after her for her actions and almost every review made that pretty clear and the fact that she is a far left conspiracy nut was just icing on the cake.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Loveaduck

So then you do agree it was thunderfoot's and his fans civic duty to get rid of Laughing Witch and stop a person who's detrimental to society? According to you it was a good thing for Thunderfoot and his fans to expose this vile bully and the people involved were just doing their civic duty, this women has no problem lying and making up ridiculous allegations (she's made ridiculous allegations against other people also) and her potential customers needed to know who they might be doing business with.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

The reason her employees are in fear of losing their jobs is because the 2 owners of the company have put their business in deep debt, one of the owners is a lair, and the other owner seems to be a giant enabler. One of the owners had no problem lying about someone to his employer/the media/law enforcement and openly admitted she had no regret/laughed when she believed she got thunderfoot fired (of course she gave a half you know what apology once she was exposed).



posted on Nov, 8 2015 @ 04:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: everyone

So, it was injustice for one person to attempt to cause Thunderfoot to lose his job or lose financially, but fine when multiple others attempt to cause the Witch to lose financially.

Somehow that just doesn't compute.


That is called justice. Justice is served in response to a injustice. I really dont understand why this is so hard to grasp. If you murder someone then dont be surprised to get a life sentence or death penalty for it and then call it disproportionate. If you do a injustice to someone then justice is the mechanic we use to make you pay for it with a punishment that reflects or equals the injustice you impared on others. Justice in this case was served with equal consequences. She bet the pink slip in a fight with 400.000 people and she lost.

I said it earlier in the thread. She calls herself a social justice warrior ,even a leader there in. She got social justice,Real social justice.



posted on Nov, 8 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: everyone

This is more like punching someone in the face, and then having their gang stab you forty two times in an unfair fight against a mob... That's not justice, it's not fair, it's not equal punishment. Her employees are losing jobs, I truly think they should file a lawsuit against her and thunderfoot for the combined ignorant actions.



posted on Nov, 8 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

Let it be a lesson then..right , wrong or indifferent. 2 wrongs seldom make a right.
edit on 8-11-2015 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2015 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: everyone

Her employees are losing jobs, I truly think they should file a lawsuit against her and thunderfoot for the combined ignorant actions.


Not bad, wouldn't it be an interesting case.

edit on 8-11-2015 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: everyone

This is more like punching someone in the face, and then having their gang stab you forty two times in an unfair fight against a mob... That's not justice, it's not fair, it's not equal punishment. Her employees are losing jobs, I truly think they should file a lawsuit against her and thunderfoot for the combined ignorant actions.


She tried to make 1 other person lose his job. a lot of other persons made her lose hers.

What here is so disproportionate?


She held responsibility for her own company. Why do you think Mcdonalds does not engage in public religious debates and takes a side ? Because it is not smart to do so becasue they know it can and will hurt their company. Now Mcdonalds is big enough to take that hit and survive yet they still wont even consider it. You simply do not go out and public in the way that she did , exposing her own name (and then later try to shame this thunderfoot for mentioning her name) zooming in on her own name to make sure everyone has seen it in the video in wich she declares that she is going to make him lose his job ,based on lies.

No wonder the people that she called terrorists, racists , nazi's and mysoginsts stood up and took the same actions as she did.

Also this thunderfoot has done nothing other then tell his story and what she did to him and wich she did publicly and proudly. He took no actions against her and the funny thing is, he still could take legal action against her right now. But he is not, she should count herself lucky for that. Imo he should have , he would have made a nice sum of money of of it.

As for the the 400.000 followers that she insulted. He has no control over that obviously. Stick a stick and a bee's nest and you will get stung, by many bee's. Dont act so surprised or offended if you do.

People treat you how you treat them.
dont expect to be able to be a complete jackass and that your victims behave like budhists. If you have no morale , dont expect much in return and complain about it.




top topics



 
49
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join