NYT Magazine reporter suggests destroying property 'is not violence'

https://www.foxnews.com/media/nyt-ma...y-not-violence
New York Times Magazine reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones drew backlash on Tuesday when she claimed that the destruction of property "is not violence"
During an interview with CBSN, Hannah-Jones was asked how the rioting and looting from the George Floyd protests should be "interpreted."
"I think we need to be very careful with our language," the Times Magazine reporter responded. "Yes, it is disturbing to see property being destroyed, it's disturbing to see people taking property from stores, but these are things."
CNN'S CHRIS CUOMO BLASTED FOR SUGGESTING THAT PROTESTERS DON'T HAVE TO BE 'PEACEFUL'
She continued, "And violence is when an agent of the state kneels on a man's neck until all of the life is leached out of his body. Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence. And to put those things- to use the same language to describe those two things I think really- it's not moral to do that."
https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1267877443911778306
Hannah-Jones, who recently won the Pultizer Prize for the polarizing "1619 Project," went on to say that "any reasonable person" would discourage the destruction of other people's property but said "these are not reasonable times," pointing to the years of protesting against police brutality.
"So when we have people who say that people should respect the law, they’re not respecting the law because the law is not respecting them. You can’t say that- that regular citizens should play by all of the rules when agents of the state are clearly are not," she told CBSN.
Her comments sparked plenty of reactions on social media.
"According to this logic, burning down a building isn’t an act of violence. What a sophomoric and morally bankrupt defense of the indefensible," National Review editor Rich Lowry reacted.
"'Destroying property is not violence.' Those looters with crowbars and bricks smashing windows and stealing last night? Not violent at all. In fact it’s *immoral* to imply they were!" political commentator Andrew Sullivan slammed Hannah-Jones.
"When I moved to DC in the late 90s, it still wasn't close to recovering from the 1968 riots. Economic devastation in cities has long-term consequences, leads to despair, and it will kill people just as surely as bad cops do. This is such a terrible argument," RealClearInvestigations senior writer Mark Hemingway said.
"Disgusting and stupid comments. Such comments only deserve one response: a Pulitzer Prize," Ben Shapiro tweeted.
Hannah-Jones fired back at her critics, accusing The Daily Caller of "falsely" claiming that she was "defending looting and actual violence" despite its report quoting her word-for-word.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
"Despite numerous comments by people asking to post my address or burn or destroy my house, the Daily Caller is encouraging this by repeatedly reposting this story that falsely claims I am defending looting and actual violence," Hannah-Jones tweeted Tuesday evening. "This tactic is an attempt to silence black journalists and I will not cower."
This isn't the first time Hannah-Jones' commentary was slammed. On Monday, she was criticized for claiming that the Second Amendment was created "to ensure Southern slave owners the right to maintain & arm slave patrols to put down insurrections amongst the enslaved."

Found the reference. -Jones is -per the first amendment- entitled to her opinion - and as a Pulitzer winner is a coddled and enabled far-Leftist firebrand who sees Black America in terms of slavery and racial warfare of Liberation.

I guarantee - her place in NYC was carefully guarded and secure from those "Not committing violence" so that her property, would not have to be replaced, and her person and life were not at risk - as other minority folks found to their dismay - and in some cases deaths - at the hands of her violence -enabling rhetoric!!!


and - she has the chutzpah to deny she defended the rioting and looting - despite careful word for word quotation.

She deserves another Pulitzer ( idea from Ben Stein)! It should be labelled the Hypocrite-Pulitzer award!

Does the "reporter" have any property?

Nikole Hannah-Jones. that radical bitch has popped up in this forum before. i recall a certain vacationing member started a thread rambling on with her bs about the El Paso shooting.



https://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2643532


rip YR ..








BAHAHAAAA

The Boston TEA party was non-viollet nin threath, because there just toss it over board.

The Boston TEA party was non-viollet nin threath, because there just toss it over board. Originally Posted by Ripmany

Someone is facilitating the rewriting of U.S. history.

The Boston Tea Party arose from two issues confronting the British Empire in 1765: the financial problems of the British East India Company; and an ongoing dispute about the extent of Parliament's authority, if any, over the British American colonies without seating any elected representation. The North Ministry's attempt to resolve these issues produced a showdown that would eventually result in revolution.[3]

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

Comparing the stupidity currently spreading across the country to the "Boston Tea Party" merely emphasizes the failed educational system the CommunistSocialistLiberalAntiT rumpers have nurtured in this Country.....spawned from New England preppy schools aka "Ivy League."

Here's the big chicken that's coming home to roost.

They don't to provide police services. As we found out recently, they don't want to provide school services. And they want you to stay at home "for your own protection."

BUT THEY'LL WANT YOUR TAX MONEY.

The shits about to hit the fan. Too many 50K foot thinkers who believe everyone can work from home.