"Claiming?" Maybe you didn't read this sentence properly with a pair of glasses:
In the article:
> Patton revealed that, as a 17-year-old, he was involved with the Dixie Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.
That is a solid indisputable fact written in history. If that doesn't sound like a "direct connection" to the KKK, then I don't know what is. Some may say he was still responsible for his own actions at the time during the Navy in his early adulthood even when he was still involved with white supremacists. With his statement on this, he has just taken responsibility for his previous actions and 'apologised'.
> If you want to claim Banjo is otherwise an evil company, OK, it may be, but that's a separate point. But claiming that this episode as reported constitutes a direct connection to the KKK, and implying it's ongoing, is off the mark.
Well I just stated a fact and didn't imply anything. Mind you, I think Option 3 is likely to happen because of his apology, but there are those out there that can be less forgiving... What do you think?
Interesting and somewhat horrifying. Maybe SoftBank failed to do some due diligence here and have essentially funded a CEO with direct connections to the KKK. I can only see Banjo's next chapter going through three options:
* Option 1: Softbank cares enough and ends their investment in Banjo and the CEO stays on.
* Option 2: Trial by Twitter will pressure Banjo CEO to resign and everyone's happy.
* Option 3: Nothing happens.
Help me write the next chapter in which option is likely.