UPDATE
Minutes after I posted this article, the ludicrous Jess Phillips published an article in the Guardian which could not have been better designed to prove my thesis. A number of people have posted comments on the Guardian article pointing this out, and they have all been immediately deleted by the Guardian. I just tried it myself and was also deleted. I should be grateful if readers could now also try posting comments there, in order to make a point about censorship on the Guardian.
Catching up on a fortnight’s news, I have spent five hours searching in vain for criticism of Simon Danczuk from prominent or even just declared feminists. The Guardian was the obvious place to start, but while they had two articles by feminist writers condemning Chris Gayle’s clumsy attempt to chat up a presenter, their legion of feminist columnists were entirely silent on Danczuk. The only opinion piece was strongly defending him.
This is very peculiar. The allegation against Danczuk which is under police investigation – of initiating sex with a sleeping woman – is identical to the worst interpretation of the worst accusation against Julian Assange. The Assange allegation brought literally hundreds, probably thousands of condemnatory articles from feminist writers across the entire range of the mainstream media. I have dug up 57 in the Guardian alone with a simple and far from exhaustive search. In the case of Danczuk I can find nothing, zilch, nada. Not a single feminist peep.
The Assange case is not isolated. Tommy Sheridan has been pursuing a lone legal battle against the Murdoch empire for a decade, some of it in prison when the judicial system decided his “perjury” was imprisonable but Andy Coulson’s admitted perjury on the Murdoch side in the same case was not. I personally witnessed in court in Edinburgh last month Tommy Sheridan, with no lawyer (he has no money) arguing against a seven man Murdoch legal team including three QCs, that a letter from the husband of Jackie Bird of BBC Scotland should be admitted in evidence. Bird was working for Murdoch and suggested in his letter that a witness should be “got out of the country” to avoid giving evidence. The bias exhibited by the leading judge I found astonishing beyond belief. I was the only media in the court.
Yet even though the Murdoch allegations against Sheridan were of consensual sexual conduct, Sheridan’s fight against Murdoch has been undermined from the start by the massive and concerted attack he has faced from the forces of feminism. Just as the vital messages WikiLeaks and Assange have put out about war crimes, corruption and the relentless state attack on civil liberties have been undermined by the concerted feminist campaign promoting the self-evidently ludicrous claims of sexual offence against Assange.
As soon as the radical left pose the slightest threat to the neo-con establishment, an army of feminists can be relied upon to run a concerted campaign to undermine any progress the left wing might make. The attack on Jeremy Corbyn over the makeup of his shadow cabinet was a classic example. It is the first ever gender equal shadow cabinet, but the entire media for a 96 hour period last September ran headline news that the lack of women in the “top” posts was anti-feminist. Every feminist commentator in the UK piled in.
Among the obvious dishonesties of this campaign was the fact that Defence, Chancellor, Foreign Affairs and Home Secretary have always been considered the “great offices of State” and the argument only could be made by simply ignoring Defence. The other great irony was the “feminist” attack was led by Blairites like Harman and Cooper, and failed to address the fact that Blair had NO women in any of these posts for a full ten years as Prime Minister.
But facts did not matter in deploying the organised feminist lobby against Corbyn.
Which is why it is an important test to see what the feminists, both inside and outside the Labour Party, would do when the leading anti-Corbyn rent-a-gob, Simon Danczuk, was alleged to have some attitudes to women that seem very dubious indeed, including forcing an ex-wife into non-consensual s&m and that rape allegation.
And the answer is …nothing. Feminists who criticised Assange, Sheridan and Corbyn in droves were utterly silent on the subject of Danczuk. Because the purpose of established and paid feminism is to undermine the left in the service of the neo-cons, not to attack neo-cons like Danczuk.
Identity politics has been used to shatter any attempt to campaign for broader social justice for everybody. Instead it becomes about the rights of particular groups, and that is soon morphed into the neo-con language of opportunity. What is needed, modern feminism argues, is not a reduction of the vast gap between rich and poor, but a chance for some women to become Michelle Mone or Ann Gloag. It is not about good conditions for all, but the removal of glass ceilings for high paid feminist journalists or political hacks.
Feminism has become the main attack tool in the neo-con ideological arsenal. I am sceptical the concept can be redeemed from this.
“There are no safe places to make safe zones, they are having civil wars. The only way to make a safe zone would be to send in huge amounts of troops and military hardware to defend it hence entering the conflict.”
_________________
That’s bollocks Fred and you know it.
The war in Syria has been instigated by the West, and their Jihadi proxy armies, and now that Assad and Russia are kicking there arses, they want to call time out with a Geneva peace deal.
The same applies to Iraq Yemen and the now fractured Sudan, and probably at least another half dozen countries.
The whole idea is to flood Europe with refugees and destabilise it, but some countries are fighting back such as Hungary and Moldova Austria Denmark and Finland.
Nato and the UN controlled mainly by the US, (infact France Germany and Britain don’t really have a foreign policy they just follow the USA’s lead) could quite easily set up green zones in Iraq and Syria where citizens could live without having to trek to Europe.
But that’s not part of the plan Fred, the plan is to flood Europe with Muslims destablise it with incidents that will turn nations against Muslims (it’s already happening) and in the process divide us all.
Meanwhile in France intellectual terrorism reins supreme teachers and lecturers have already been fired from their jobs for suggesting the pre-planned demonisation of Muslims in France, countless dissidents of French racism have been rounded up and questioned.
I’m surprised at how naive you are Fred.
“Yes indeed RoS, and nobody is stopping the bombing, the creators of this refugee drama are dropping more ordinance and hitting the innocent civilians by the by.”
__________________
Nevermind.
The EU has been infiltrated by the US who in my opinion virtually call the shots, why else would the detrimential (to EU citizens) TTIP deal be conducted behind closed doors. The truth is the USA doesn’t want you to know what the deal holds.
In turn EU leaders also don’t want their 500 million citizens to know what the deal holds. If they’re hiding the details from us then you can be pretty sure it’s not good.
As for the bombing of Syria and Iraq and Yemen, it’s all, about the money, regime change is the name of the game, and in Saudi Arabia’s case conversion to Wahhabism. According to some reports France is now allowing the building (only) of Wahhabist mosques.
In the future those young brainwashed French Wahhabists will be sent out to fight against the likes of Iran and funded by Saudi backers.
“That’s bollocks Fred and you know it.”
No I don’t because it isn’t.
If you set up a refugee camp in a war zone you have the responsibility to defend them and also the problem of supplying them. Food would have to be transported across hostile territory every day.
Another sixteen people have starved to death in Madaya because the UN can’t get food to them. The Syrian government is hostile and the rebel groups are hostile. There is no way the UN could put refugee camps inside Syria.
They have, however put refugee camps as close as possible in Turkey and Jordan.
“If you set up a refugee camp in a war zone you have the responsibility to defend them and also the problem of supplying them. Food would have to be transported across hostile territory every day.
Another sixteen people have starved to death in Madaya because the UN can’t get food to them. The Syrian government is hostile and the rebel groups are hostile. There is no way the UN could put refugee camps inside Syria.”
_________________
The war in Syria was created by the West, your gonna tell me that the most powerful war machine on the planet Nato can’t defend a section of Syria to house Syrian citizens..utter bollocks Fred.
They could easily do it if they wanted too they just don’t want to. Instead they want to make political hay through they’re obedient propaganda machine the media. By broadcasting the suffering and injustice inflicted upon the poor Syrian people by Assad, which to the greater extent is complete bollocks.
Besides Fred Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council I’m pretty sure even Putin wouldn’t bomb a refugee camp, the fall out would end his career.
Mind you Obama bombed Afghani hospitals and he’s still president even a dog has more morals.
As for the starving Syrians, (probably starved out by Western proxy troops) the West created the war the blood is on their hands, Russia was invited into Syria the West wasn’t and it doesn’t have a UN mandate (and if it did it would not be worth the paper it was written on) to be in Syria.
Fred says the “Syrian government is hostile” Wouldn’t you be Fred if thet were trying to usurp and kill you?
This was written in 2010, but I have only just read it. If it was on Veterans Today, I would take it with a pinch of salt – cos even Gordon Duff openly admits that around 30% of the content is not completely true (or is basically a load of made up nonsense..he suggests reading between the lines). But this was written by Thierry Meyssan – who is a French intellectual living in Syria. This guy has such good contacts, that if it is anything to do with Syria, he both knows and writes about it – weeks before it has actually happened (e.g. The Russian intervention.)
The following involves Germany’s own miniature Nuclear Weapon ( I didn’t really cover Nuclear Weapons in my physics class but I know it is extremely difficult to blow an enormous great crater in the ground using conventional explosives ), and total corruption in the UN discussed and sanctioned by The Bilderberg Group ( I have seen some of the minutes of their meetings and thought they were idiots at the level of Sugar’s Apprentice )
Is all this really true? If so, they are all mad, and there is very little hope for the future..
Revelations on Rafik Hariri’s assassination
by Thierry Meyssan
http://www.voltairenet.org/article167553.html
Summary
“While western media have announced that indictments against Hezbollah will be issued shortly by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, it is the entire UN investigation that Russian magazine Odnako is calling into question. Thierry Meyssan posits that the weapon used to assassinate former Prime Minister Rafik Hairiri was supplied by Germany. Former German prosecutor and first commissioner in charge of the UN probe, Detlev Mehlis, seemingly doctored evidence to cover up his country’s involvement. These revelations embarrass the Tribunal and reverse the tide in Lebanon.”
Voltaire Network | Moscow (Russia) | 29 November 2010
Republicofscotland
The question was: “I’m interested in learning how you see your own comments and those of the other Eminences.”
Your “reply” was mainly about what you thought of my posts.
Therefore still waiting for an answer to my question, I’d like to get a glimpse of how your mind works.
Thanks.
From the Wisdom of the nocturnal Tony Opmoc:
“But this was written by Thierry Meyssan – who is a French intellectual living in Syria. This guy has such good contacts, that if it is anything to do with Syria, he both knows and writes about it – weeks before it has actually happened (e.g. The Russian intervention.)”
________________________
Yes, Thierry’s a veritable Nostradamus, isn’t he. Or perhaps a Mystic Meg.
But before we all swoon with admiration, I suggest readers look up Monsieur Meyssan on, for example, Wikipedia.
They will be surprised at many of the things they read about the man and his “beliefs”.
And they will then also understand why his vapourings are treated as Gospel by some on this blog.
It appears to be true. I seem to recall that some contributors to this blog, have detailed extensive knowledge of such matters..
http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0509205.pdf
Meanwhile, I personally am extremely cautious – of even microwave ovens, and have never had one in my house. I am not suggesting they are not safe when new…but when they are old and battered and Grannie is peering in to see how her jacket potato is doing…it may well contribute to her macular degeneration.
Have you tasted what these things do to food..Yes very quick…but the result tastes like shit.
Tonight traditionally cooked Roast Beef in a rather old British oven. (very hot for 30 mins – Gas Mark 9 – then Gas Mark 1/4 for a couple of hours)
Served with a nice Australian Shiraz.
Tony
I imagine that Craig is not posting because he is otherwise engaged on more constructive matters and not because he has decided to let the blog die a lingering death caused by ennui and the silliness of most of the “comments”…..
I for one would be very happy if Craig continued blogging – he often has thought-provoking things to say – but closed the “comments” section.
After all, Craig has said that he doesn’t read the comments very much and suspects that most of his followers don’t either; they are interested in what Craig has to say and not in the ravings of Fedup and Guano or the pro-Putin propaganda of Comrade Goss or the anti-UK and anti-Israel guff blown around by “Republicofscotland”
Tony, I’ll have a glass or two of Shiraz, prefer something a bit more mellow. Leave me out of the chicken though. I’m a bird-lover.
I saw Turkeys on a wall when I was cycling through New Zealand. It was getting dark with the Southern Cross overhead and a whole different sky to what we’re used to the Northern Hemisphere. It was shortly before Christmas so I doubt they are still with us. It was 2000, Millenium year, the reign of the anti-Christ, across west of Ireland.
Opmoc
“Served with a nice Australian Shiraz.”
___________________
Sounds good, but you should also consider one of the worthier Cabernet Sauvignons.
From Israel, for instance.
Anyone know what’s happened to the “commenter” who called himself N_ ?
He appeared on my list of the dozen or so most vociferous posters but curiously enough appears to have fallen completely silent soon after appearing there.
“The war in Syria was created by the West, your gonna tell me that the most powerful war machine on the planet Nato can’t defend a section of Syria to house Syrian citizens..utter bollocks Fred.”
They could if they declared war on Syria,I think Russia might have something to say about that. The peaceful solution is the best solution, I don’t think starting WWIII would be in anyone’s interests.
It worked with the no fly zone in northern Iraq, but only because there were Peshmerga on the ground as well. It would only work in Syria if some country put in troops in significant numbers, which so far no one is willing to do. Also simply “protecting” it is not enough. You have to assure basic services and some kind of economy, which the Kurds had in Iraq, but an arbitrary patch of Syria would not
Don’t need nukes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misznay–Schardin_effect as used against German bankers and Lebanese Presidents
I agree with Habbabkuk about closing the comments and have thought about the improvements such a measure would bring to the blog a number of times myself. Of course I would disappear along with everyone else so there could be no accusations of wanting to silence opposing views.
The blog comments have run their course with the same loons recycling their obsessions over and over again. Much of the time this is to the detriment of Craig’s standing as a whistle blower and human rights activist, as his enemies can easily point to the crackpots and conspiracy theorists who occupy his blog as evidence that he attracts losers, weirdos and worse.
The time has come to deal with the trolling. It’s time to evolve the whole concept of the blog towards a comment-free environment, in which Craig can put forward his original and thought-provoking arguments without having to worry about a below-the-line nutter degrading them by association with his blog. I would certainly continue to read it. It would also save Craig a considerable amount of time.
“I agree with Habbabkuk about closing the comments”
_________________
Anon1 if Habb declared that the sun shone out of his arse, you’d agree with him. Ergo any mutterings over blog closing reiterated from your pie hole are annulled instantaneously.
Moreover, the obsessives and weirdo-website-readers would surely be much happier elsewhere on the internet?
I imagine that there are any number of anti-West/anti-USA websites out there; ditto with websites dealing with the Rothschilds, the Masons, the alleged “genocide” being carried out by Israel, the J**s themselves, the true Islam, etc, etc…
Surely those no longer able to post their stuff here would find a nice home on those websites, a bonus being that they could rabbit away to their heart’s content to each other and like-minded obsessives without fear of contradiction or being laughed at (as on here).
It’s a win-win, I tell you.
“Anon1 if Habb declared that the sun shone out of his arse, you’d agree with him. Ergo any mutterings over blog closing reiterated from your pie hole are annulled instantaneously.”
______________________
Th above – from the egregious Englishman living in England who calls himself “Republicofscotland” – is an excellent example of the sort of thing Craig’s blog and we would be spared if the comments section were to be closed down.
One for the bankers’ trollops.
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2016/01/07/switzerland-declares-war-against-rothschilds-commercial-cockroaches/
“They could if they declared war on Syria,I think Russia might have something to say about that. The peaceful solution is the best solution, I don’t think starting WWIII would be in anyone’s interests.”
_____________
What do you mean “if” they declared war on Syria, the West led by the USA, has done just about everything they can do bar put boots on the ground (officially anyway).
The peaceful solution is the best solution says Fred. Fred, the only reason the USA and her minions are getting around a table in Geneva with Syrian opposition, is because they’re getting their arses handed to them on a plate by Russian/Syrian/Iranian forces.
If the numero uno war mongering nation on the planet the US, and her obedient impotent little weasel states had the upperhand Assad would now be Gaddafized and Netanyahu would be taking a dump in the new Shaab palace.
“Therefore still waiting for an answer to my question, I’d like to get a glimpse of how your mind works.”
____________________
Habb you’ve glimpsed it now for over two years and you still haven’t got a clue. Inspector Clouseau’s got nothing on you.
If however you’d have said you’d want to have a glimpse of Anon1’s mind or Alcyone’s mind or even ResDis’s mind, I would have said they’re minds are akin to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
They sound promising but on further inspection it’s all, just hot air.
Those who wish to see the comments closed might assist their wishes on a voluntary basis and simply cease to post. Habbs I missed your posts when you were otherwise disposed, but it is regretted that time away does not seem to have inspired you. Why not tread lightly with the personal attacks and instead entertain and provoke thought. Don’t view everyone as your enemy. If you think they are misguided find some clever strategy, reasoning and metaphor. Be the sourdough yeast in their minds, but sledging is tedious.
Anon1 offers a teeny weeny example also know as taking the bait, Christ these muppets are soooooo predictable.
Still reading their divetsionary nonsense, is supposed to keep our minds from berating America’s compliant little sidekick Britain and its utterly illegal activities in Yemen.
Of which the official narrative is “oh no no no we’re not involved in the war” whilst secretly (not so much now) Britain sells weapons to Saudi Arabia and devises strategies to kill Yemeni citizens and trains Saudi pilots.
The UN a bought and paid for advisory body moonlighting as a caring humanitarian assembly, turns a blind eye to murder and crimes against humanity (Yemen and Palestine are prime examples) on a daily basis, because they don’t fit in with the agenda.
“What do you mean “if” they declared war on Syria, the West led by the USA, has done just about everything they can do bar put boots on the ground (officially anyway).”
They would have to be putting boots on the ground and lots of them if they were to create a safe zone in Syria. That’s called an invasion.
I’ll tell you what to do. Start writing to MPs, see if you can get one of them to table a motion to send tens of thousands of troops into Syria to create a safe zone. Considering the opposition to air strikes against IS in Syria I don’t think it would stand much of a chance.
The UN has set up camps for refugees in Turkey and Jordan, there is no need for our troops to be killed going into Syria.
Why curious? You should know by now that Internet is continually being scrubbed and cleaned and re cleaned, in fact the best examples on this site has been the continual demands for links, as though the forwarded contentions are part of a dissertations or court admissible evidence. Fact that the forwarded links are then targeted for the treatment and cleansing including complaints to the various blog structure providers that in turn turf out the offending blogger, and the data is lost or suppressed.
Why do you think the various acts and provisions are in place to block any and all clips or sites or even the range of IPs? Probably you have heard of “chinidits” and brigade 77, if not then carry out a search, and read on. Why do you think the current bunch of keyboard warriors are for ever fishing for links? They never forward a link but are the first to fish for one, I am sure you have noticed by now. In fact in this very thread there are those opining the wet dreams of this current blog/board to be closed off to the outsiders, and the blog owner to only engage in publishing his thoughts without any other feed back or external input, kind of an extension of the echo chamber of the oligarch owned media.
Significant evidence you say, the courts of the land are declaring not guilty the accused for statuary rape despite his admission to having had sex with a 13 year old girl, in the company of another fifteen year old girl and you are contending that dead Leon Brittans taking a kinky photograph with a 12 year old boy sitting on his lap in a weird French Maid outfit as significant evidence for what reason? The DPP ruled that Janner ought not be tried, and later in the face of overwhelming evidence it made a U turn and set up a court to try the facts!!! Significant evidence you say?!!
Surely you are familiar with the Elm House and the sordid tales thereof that includes reports of the said photograph. Therefore as a starting point pick up that lead and start your search. As for the sites out of the UK clearly you are not aware that 25 percent of the web is not searchable and is not presented in any of the search engines, ie censored!
“Still reading their divetsionary nonsense, is supposed to keep our minds from berating America’s compliant little sidekick Britain and its utterly illegal activities in Yemen.”
In 2012 28 MPs signed an early day motion urging the British government to intervene in Yemen. This is how it read.
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/118
Three SNP MPs signed that motion including Angus Robertson.
Craig displays a commitment to freedom of speech which is both commendable and inspirational.
He doesn’t ban 9/11 comments but confines them to one thread, which I think is very sensible as they would without question take over the blog if he did not.
He permits the posting of very cutting criticism of his own views.
He does not permit Holocaust denial – a difficult area. Personally I am strongly against the criminalization of Holocaust denial, or revisionism, as I think it is wholly counter-productive to put people in jail for expressing opinions the state does not like. Who’s next? Anyway, I assume that Craig does not want a reputation for hosting Holocaust deniers on his blog. I think that’s fair enough.
I think the decision on whether or not to close comments is best left up to Craig and I doubt that he will do it. I intend to mind my own business about it.
Kind regards,
John
Fedup
30/01/2016 8:26pm
I’ll take your word for it. But, why isn’t the Elm House guest list continually scrubbed and cleaned off the Internet?
Kind regards,
John