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.

 

Berkeley Hot Dog Stand Fires Cook Seen At Charlottesville Protest

page: 8
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

I should think so...

Not that he'll have much luck--hypothetically.




posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t
a reply to: enlightenedservant
a reply to: [post=22556786]RomeByFire[/post
a reply to: olaru12

First off, yes, he may have terrible taste in politics and friends.
You are all idiots though, deeming it ok to have someone fired and persecuted because of their politics. How is having his own views so bad? Doesn't the constitution supposedly protect his right to hold those views?

Next. there is the definition of a Nazi.
The lefty numbskulls often like to portray anyone as Nazi who doesn't have a poster of Hillary to masturbate over while crying, so pardon me if I will withhold judgement on whether someone is a Nazi, a bit racist or simply fed up with their lot that they like to hang out with people who dress funny and talk rubbish while throwing a few beers back.

From what I have seen, most of the "white power" types that inhabit the internet also seem to be the same ones who like to deny the holocaust ever happened. That tells me they might not actually believe that committing genocide is an ok thing, which also means they aren't actual Nazis since, if you believe in Nazism it would also follow that you would also believe in killing off threats to your idea of a perfect gene pool...

Next, are Nazis of any ilk, both real and pseudo, a threat to America? Doesn't the constitution and the separation of powers protect against such an all encompassing, overbearing government ever getting the power it needs to take over?



Finally, costing anyone their jobs for attending a political rally is the act of coward and a fascist. If you support that sort of thing, you are scum and I hope you reap what you sow. You think you are the left but you aren't, you are just wearing different colour jackboots to the other fascists that want to impose their thoughts on people.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

That's the catch of "at will" employment. You can be fired for anything the employer feels like. Sucks for him, but I don't care because he is a racist.


I mean I know it sounds good to you, that's why you said it -- but just being there doesn't prove you're a racist. A.) It was a public place, B.) you could be investigating what's it's all about, C.) you could think it's about something it's not, and D.) even if he knew what it was about, doesn't mean he condones the actions of people who over stepped, and E.) he could have been there with a friend or a family member like a chaperone just to make sure they were safe.

The bottom line in the U.S. is freedom of speech, and I actually witnessed a situation like this happen at a local college by my house, where a kid was raised by white supremacists, was indoctrinated from birth with racist rhetoric, who was being thrown out of school because of those associations that were NOT voluntary, he wasn't thrown out because he stood up and recognized the ignorance and propaganda and got the students to hold a protest for him, and he went on to graduate and live life like a normal non racist person.

Not all associations are voluntary, nor is freedom guaranteed. Independence is a lie, nobody is independent, everyone depends on other people to survive and you damn sure don't get to choose your family or your living situations when you're a child.

Your boss depends on you, you depend on your boss. You depend on your wife, your wife depends on you. There is dependency and co-dependency, there is no such thing as independence, independence does NOT exist at all if you live in a society. Nobody rich made it on their own, they knew someone, had associations with a body or group of investors, they depended on their employees and their customers, like -- it's impossible to be independent unless you live off the grid and make your own clothes hunt your own food and build your own shelter. Last time I checked, you couldn't even really legally do that in the united states.

In this particular situation, Cole White depended on Top Dog, and Top Dog turned their back on him for a political statement. It would be one thing if Cole White did something with the Top Dog branding on him, it's be another thing if he was implicated in a crime that took place at the rally, but simply being present and being caught in a photo someone posted on twitter is just not enough context to draw any kind of conclusion and as such, Top Dog just slighted their own employee. This is not a respectable action, given the context and Top Dog should be boycotted for the venom they sent Cole's way.

This doesn't mean he's not a racist, it doesn't mean he is, it means you can't tell just from his presence in a photograph. His presence in a photograph is the only context Top Dog had to make their decision, and as you can plainly see, that's just not enough information to make a decision that firm against someone who depends on you for their rent/food/clothes. This is a counter society decision and it anti societal and as such is nothing but a condemning action that speaks volumes about top dog.


Finally, costing anyone their jobs for attending a political rally is the act of coward and a fascist. If you support that sort of thing, you are scum and I hope you reap what you sow. You think you are the left but you aren't, you are just wearing different colour jackboots to the other fascists that want to impose their thoughts on people.


And this ^ is fact.
edit on 14-8-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

He wasn't even fired. He resigned. Also, all companies have "codes of conduct" that if violated, can result in termination of employment. Why is it that this is the incident that makes you finally think that's unfair? It's telling that you think that's persecution though.



You are all idiots though



The lefty numbskulls



you are scum and I hope you reap what you sow.

LOL Yeah, no bias there.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: SprocketUK

He wasn't even fired. He resigned. Also, all companies have "codes of conduct" that if violated, can result in termination of employment. Why is it that this is the incident that makes you finally think that's unfair? It's telling that you think that's persecution though.



You are all idiots though



The lefty numbskulls



you are scum and I hope you reap what you sow.

LOL Yeah, no bias there.



Yeah, he resigned....jumped before he was pushed more like. Probably threatened by the company's legal team with the sort of storm that would see him unemployable and broke forever...But that's ok, because he "Thinks wrong" doesn't he? He isn't like you, so its ok to hound him.


Yes there is bias, I absolutely think this is a see you next Tuesday trick by people and, don't try and lecture me on the left, mate, I have been a union member most of my working life, I have gone on strike, raised money for other strikers and supported my union in everything, what these people did wasn't of the left, it was idiotic, fascist, divisive and utterly anti worker.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Unless he committed a crime while there, or tried to say he was representing the company he worked for, he should not be fired.


He didn't have to commit a crime to lose his job, as has been pointed out California is an 'at will' employment state, they could fire him because they don't like his cat. And frankly I'd fire him too and any other hardcore political agitator because it could harm my business.



Too bad the poor kid can't get a special prosecutor.




posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: SprocketUK

He wasn't even fired. He resigned. Also, all companies have "codes of conduct" that if violated, can result in termination of employment. Why is it that this is the incident that makes you finally think that's unfair? It's telling that you think that's persecution though.



You are all idiots though



The lefty numbskulls



you are scum and I hope you reap what you sow.

LOL Yeah, no bias there.


If you believe he resigned than you're naive. People often get told to resign, which is the same thing as being told you're fired, it just saves the person being forced to quit the embarrassment of telling people you were fired.

*IF* he truly resigned on his own accord and they didn't influence him to do that, than there would be no story and nobody would cover it. Why would we be talking about it right now if that was honestly the case?


“Effective Saturday 12th August, Cole White no longer works at Top Dog. The actions of those in Charlottesville are not supported by Top Dog. We believe in individual freedom and voluntary association for everyone”


And there is also this. An official statement released by top dog basically owning the fact that they don't tolerate his presence at the rally, and the reason for the termination of employment is because his actions didn't fall in line with their belief structure. They didn't say he resigned, and if he did; why would they even need to make a statement? This is a statement condemning Cole's presence at the rally and it's written in plain English.

Yeah though, he totally quit. /sarcasm.


We do respect our employees’ right to their opinions. They are free to make their own choices, but must accept the responsibilities of those choices


Then they made this statement which contradicts itself. They say they respect their employees' right to their opinions and they are free to make their own choices, but MUST ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THOSE CHOICES. The responsibility therein is the consequence of no longer being employable at top dog. They admittedly brought him in to have a conversation about the photo and the result of that conversation was that he was no longer employed at top dog.

That's not a resignation, that's an ousting, full stop. They are calling it a resignation because it's a very carefully written statement and they are well aware of the consequences and responsibility of their own actions. Had they admitted they fired him, that would have been bad for business, but they knew from before the conversation happened that he was no longer going to be an employee at Top Dog by the end of that conversation.

It is persecution. Plainly. When was the last time someone quit and the next day there was a notice on the door airing out that persons personal business? That's called name and shaming and also persecution. They want the world to know they believe Cole White is a white supremacist, and is totally out of line for any reason, even if it were true. You employ me, you fire me, that's cool -- you post a notice on the door telling everyone that I'm a white supremacist and you don't support those actions with my full name attached to it? That's libel and is actually illegal. If you don't support my actions, then you fired me -- I didn't quit, and if you fired me and lied about firing me, and then posted a poster detailing the events that lead to that decision for the termination of my employment, that's slander, plainly.

The public notice and shaming of Cole White is way over the line. Again; you fire me, that's it. I don't come into work and you stop paying me. I quit, then that's it, I stop coming into work and you stop paying me. The second you make a flier with my name attached to it insinuating based on your opinion that I'm a white supremacist, you cross the line into libel and slander.

Again, I don't support Cole White, I don't not support Cole White. I do however condemn the actions of top dog because they over stepped plainly when they started naming and shaming and by definition persecuting.

THEY DIDN'T JUST FORCE HIM TO QUIT, THEY THEN PUBLICLY OUTED HIM WITH SLANDER ON A POSTER THEY PUT UP DETAILING THE EVENT.


per·se·cu·tion
ˌpərsəˈkyo͞oSH(ə)n/Submit
noun
hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of race or political or religious beliefs.


Very literally persecution. That notice is hostile towards Cole White because of racial and political beliefs. It's such persecution and it's in such bad form and poor taste and even illegal and that's why the news covered it, which then makes Top Dog responsible for the entire country now believing that Cole White is a white supremacist based solely on a picture someone posted on twitter that placed him geographically at a rally that they disagreed with.

It's completely unfair and out of line, even if he is a white supremacist. That doesn't mean he's going out of his way to make the lives difficult for people who aren't white, that also doesn't make him a criminal, yet -- who's going to employ him now? They ruined him, and they ruined him on purpose. How is that not over the line? How is that not unfair?

I could never work there just because I'd fear they'd do the same thing to me if they ever found out I had an opinion that they didn't believe in. That'd be like Chik-Fil-A firing me because they found out I'm an atheist and then releasing a public statement that went out nation wide demonizing me and making me seem like a deviant and a Satan worshiper. If they want to fire me or force me to resign, that's their prerogative, when they make a national statement with my full name included followed by libel and slander in an attempt to make me less employable, that's malicious intent. How is that not persecution? Like what world do you come from?

You fire someone and that's it. Someone quits, and that's it. You don't then air out their personal information to the entire country and let it make the news in an attempt to make them less employable, and that's exactly what Top Dog did. It's totally fair and they completely respect their employees and allow them to have the right to their own free opinions right? I mean -- seriously, they so blatantly fired him, they so then blatantly persecuted him nationally to where I'm in Florida and I know this guys name and what he looks like when he worked for them in California.

Like gtfo. That's not professional behavior.
edit on 14-8-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Just an update: The local news has more information. I haven't found a link yet but according to the company he resigned as was not fired


(I mean i'm sure it was resign of be fired......)



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Too bad the poor kid can't get a special prosecutor.


Eff him and eff all Nazis.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Abysha

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Still cannot admit that there were 2 parts to the OP and I responded in 2 parts...


Yes, yes you did. With two posts. I responded to ONE of those posts. The one where you called the employer an overreacting snowflake for firing a Nazi.



originally posted by: Irishhaf
Toodles champ keep marching in lockstep you'll get there one day.


Lol. Hold the door for me when I get there, will ya?


Fire him; I'm fine with that. Posting a notice on the door with his full name and telling the world that he's a white supremacist when they don't know one way or the other just because his photo was taken at a rally? That's slander and libel and absolutely over reacting and by definition persecution.

On top of that, they want us to believe that he willfully resigned? So it'd be like, if you got fired from your job tomorrow and your boss bought a bill board airing out all your personality defects and political associations that they didn't agree with and detailing the reasons why they don't like you and then lying to the world and telling them that you quit when you had no choice in the matter.

Would you be okay with that? Because that's what top dog just did to Cole White.

Libel is criminal. Slander is criminal. Your employer is not allowed to tell people your political associations or your personal information to anybody. They fired him and then publicly shamed him and then lied about firing him because firing someone for a political belief is bad for business. Yet -- they wanted to make sure everyone knew intrinsically that he was a white supremacist without giving him a platform to defend himself. That's called persecution.

How did they not over react again?

Again; fire him, that's your prerogative. Public name and shame, denial of the firing, and national persecution after the fact is fascist and over reaching. If I quit, that's it -- you don't tell anyone why I quit, it's not your business to. It's your business to take me off pay roll, that's where that transaction ends. Same thing if you fire me.
edit on 14-8-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Too bad the poor kid can't get a special prosecutor.


Eff him and eff all Nazis.


Here's the ironic part to me. My grandfather and many of the males his age were drafted to fight in WW2. My grandfather was in a segregated unit under Patton in Northern Africa, and he even spent time in Germany after the war. With all of the American soldiers who were killed and wounded by Nazis in combat, you'd think Americans would be united against the Nazis. The fact that there are so many apologists is astounding.

It's even more astounding when you think about all of the British, French, and other Europeans who suffered due to the Nazis. The Germans themselves have been more anti-Nazi since the end of the war than many of our own citizens. It just makes no sense to me.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
...you'd think Americans would be united against the Nazis. The fact that there are so many apologists is astounding.


Nope, Nazis are cool. Where else can a goddamn chicken farmer go on to be a celebrated mass-murderer?



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Too bad the poor kid can't get a special prosecutor.


Eff him and eff all Nazis.


Here's the ironic part to me. My grandfather and many of the males his age were drafted to fight in WW2. My grandfather was in a segregated unit under Patton in Northern Africa, and he even spent time in Germany after the war. With all of the American soldiers who were killed and wounded by Nazis in combat, you'd think Americans would be united against the Nazis. The fact that there are so many apologists is astounding.

It's even more astounding when you think about all of the British, French, and other Europeans who suffered due to the Nazis. The Germans themselves have been more anti-Nazi since the end of the war than many of our own citizens. It just makes no sense to me.


Being a white supremacist is not the same thing as being a Nazi. There is a huge difference in thinking whites are better than others but coexisting fine and supporting and carrying out the genocide of everyone who isn't an Aryan christian. There is a big difference between the cowboy at the bar who doesn't like black people and being a klan's man who lynches them in his back yard.

Neither are good, but it's the right of a person to their own personal belief and there is nothing wrong per say with it provided they don't impede the progress of other. It's quite another story to be out there running people over, lynching black people and burning Jews in ovens while gassing their family with neuro toxins in front of them.

I don't apologize for Nazi's, I don't apologize for white supremacists, I'm also not out there trying to destroy the lives of black people who hate me because I'm white. It's their right to hate me if they so choose even if they are wrong about their belief. That's what makes us the united states of america -- the ability to have the freedom of speech and personal opinion. When it goes from speech to action, that's the line that you cannot cross. There is a world of difference between the two, and that's what I find ironic.

Freedom comes with negatives, but the positives are worth the negatives. The only way to stop such occurrences from happening is to remove freedom. I personally don't want to be told what to think or what opinions to have, or what religion to follow, and as a result -- I fully and out right support people having opinions that I think are abominations because it's the mechanism that allows me my freedom.


“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” -George Orwell



“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an ass of yourself.” -Oscar Wilde



“Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost.” -Neil Gaiman



“You can't pick and choose which types of freedom you want to defend. You must defend all of it or be against all of it.” - Scott Howard Phillips


Freedom breeds negative consequences but the positives are worth it. To remove freedom under the guise of safety is to lose both freedom and safety.

In other words, yes -- America has racists, yes sometimes they commit crimes, you will never get rid of the crime no matter how many laws you make, the more laws you make, the more restrictions on freedom you put in place. This means you have to defend people who have terrible things to say in order to protect your ability to say the things you want to say. In other words, you have to tolerate the intolerable in order to be able to speak freely. It's a consequence of freedom.
edit on 14-8-2017 by SRPrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

Yeah. That'd be about the size of it.

I've an issue with posting that notice on the door of the establishment. That's kind of reminiscent of Hester Prynne and her scarlet letter.

Seems to me, firing would be enough. No references. It'll be tough for the guy to get a job now, in any case... The notice really wasn't necessary to my mind.

Yeah, he's a slimy neo-nazi/white supremacist. If he isn't, he's certainly considering becoming one now, isn't he?



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Oh well, that's what one gets for being a racist white supremacist in a free society. Yes, one has the right to be that, but others have the right to also not want anything to do with them - including employment.

He's reaping what he sowed. I laugh at his misfortune.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull



Seems to me, firing would be enough. No references. It'll be tough for the guy to get a job now, in any case... The notice really wasn't necessary to my mind.


Otherwise known as a business boost.

"Hey, look at us ! We just fired a nazi scum, come buy our equal rights hot dogs !"


Shame on the skinhead nutbag.

And shame on the business for using it as an excuse to boost their sales.



It seems the lack of ethics and moralities are coming from all directions.




posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: SRPrime



In other words, yes -- America has racists, yes sometimes they commit crimes, you will never get rid of the crime no matter how many laws you make, the more laws you make, the more restrictions on freedom you put in place. This means you have to defend people who have terrible things to say in order to protect your ability to say the things you want to say. In other words, you have to tolerate the intolerable in order to be able to speak freely. It's a consequence of freedom.

Sorry but I don't buy that argument at all.

By that logic, we should defend Islamic extremists and fight for their "right" to spread their propaganda. After all, Nazis and the Confederates killed way more Americans than Islamic extremists have. And by that logic, we should fight for someone's "right" to threaten others including elected officials (threats are crimes, and threats against elected officials are even bigger crimes). And we should fight for someone's right to spread classified data (free speech!), someone's right to sing copyrighted songs in public without a license from the copyright holder (which violates copyright law), the "right" to yell "Fire!" in a crowded building (which is inciting a riot, which is a crime), etc.

We already have an enormous amount of limits to freedom of speech. So it's bewildering & telling that this is the one that people are choosing to take a stand on.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

"Right to work" States are the same way. They can fire us for any reason at all or for no reason at all. If only there were collective bargaining organizations that could protect workers from random changes in our employment contracts... though in this case, it's a good thing


And Union protection only goes so far.

I'm local to this area BTW and have been watching the local coverage. He was fired specifically for the hate rally and employers can at their sole discretion terminate an employee for just about any reason.

From a business owners perspective, Your first amendment rights do not obligate me to commit financial suicide by keeping you employed. If your actions can impact me in a negative way, what incentive do I have to keep you as an employee?


Well here is the thing, you're not wrong, but that's also not what happened is it? Among all of the coverage, a guy that kind of looked like Cole White ended up being in one single solitary photo that got posted to twitter. His own co workers admitted the guy in the photo looks kind of like Cole White, but even they couldn't say for certain if it was actually him [his own co workers that see him every day doubted it was even him and told the news this], they could only say that the man in the picture kind of resembled him. Cole White lived and worked in California at a Hot Dog stand. The photo was taken in Virginia, the complete and total opposite side of one of the biggest countries in the entire world, 2,650 miles. The probability that any meaningful amount of customers would even identify Cole is so infinitesimally small. Secondly, when I want a hot dog, I'm not cross examining the guy putting it in the bun with news articles from the other side of the country.

What does this mean? This means that there was absolutely no financial risk to Top Dog and nobody could even prove it was him from the onset.

But even still; it's their prerogative to fire him, and they exercised their right to do so. Yet, they didn't have the balls to publicly admit they fired him, so they LIED about it by saying he resigned to avoid the political backlash, which WOULD and IS a financial risk. Rather than stop there, they brandished a poster on the front door name and shaming him for being a white supremacist and made such a big deal about it that it made the news, nation wide.

This is libel, slander, and persecution in an attempt to stop him from being employable. All of top dogs actions drove attention to the situation that otherwise almost nobody would have known about, and they can't even prove empirically actually even happened.

All of the while creating financial risk. I'll never eat a Top Dog hot dog in my life after this and it's not Cole White's fault, it's Top Dog's fault.

Libel, Slander and Persecution are all criminal retaliatory actions. Cole White going to that rally isn't even criminal.

So who is the bad guy?

Again, they could have put him on notice, they could have even fired him and nothing would have happened. The second they posted that flier and it became national news is the second they ended up in any kind of financial danger. I can't support a business that would do that to any of their employees, it's a detestable action and they should be punished criminally for the libel and slander and if not criminally, than by us with a boycott.

How could you ever work for someone that has done this to one of their employees over a matter of political opinion and belief that cannot even be verified? I'd be afraid if I worked there that I could be next, that it's just a matter of time before they find out something about my personal belief system that they didn't like.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   
The poor guy now he'll never ever get another job at a hotdog stand. His career is over.

Awe shucks....Maybe he should try burger king, they even sell hot dogs now.



posted on Aug, 14 2017 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: SRPrime



In other words, yes -- America has racists, yes sometimes they commit crimes, you will never get rid of the crime no matter how many laws you make, the more laws you make, the more restrictions on freedom you put in place. This means you have to defend people who have terrible things to say in order to protect your ability to say the things you want to say. In other words, you have to tolerate the intolerable in order to be able to speak freely. It's a consequence of freedom.

Sorry but I don't buy that argument at all.

By that logic, we should defend Islamic extremists and fight for their "right" to spread their propaganda. After all, Nazis and the Confederates killed way more Americans than Islamic extremists have. And by that logic, we should fight for someone's "right" to threaten others including elected officials (threats are crimes, and threats against elected officials are even bigger crimes). And we should fight for someone's right to spread classified data (free speech!), someone's right to sing copyrighted songs in public without a license from the copyright holder (which violates copyright law), the "right" to yell "Fire!" in a crowded building (which is inciting a riot, which is a crime), etc.

We already have an enormous amount of limits to freedom of speech. So it's bewildering & telling that this is the one that people are choosing to take a stand on.


Well some of your examples are straange.

I can sing a copyrighted song in public, as long as I am not making money off of it. Would you really be for criminalizing that?

But the answer is quite simple, as long as someone is not threatening violence, they should be allowed to speak.

Now there are exceptions for things like you can't block roadways, etc.

But yes, I say this for Nazis and Radical Islamists. They are free to speak until the advocate violence.

And we are free to laugh at them and point out how disgusting they are.

But we are not free to censor them, no matter how disgusting they are.

Thats why this "punch a nazi" meme is such a bad idea; all you are doing is breaking the law and giving these a holes a platform.

Thats why Antifa is so bad; they arbitraily decide who is a nazi, and then attack or censor people who have every right to speak even if they are nazis, but most often are not and are actually quite reasonable people.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join