Vile Hate Groups

A brief excursion into the increasingly turbulent political world.

The wave of sexual harassment and rape claims currently sweeping the USA now has at least one handy guide listing some of the casualties over the past couple of months:

I had the thought a day or two back that it was all actually part of a civil war that’s under way in the USA between the political right (principally Donald Trump and the American people who voted him into office) and the political left (Dems, mainstream media, and RINOs).

What’s happening is that a whole raft of people are being laid low as women come forward with claims of sexual harassment (and even rape) going way back. Harvey Weinstein was a major player in Hollywood, but he was also a friend of the Clintons. And so far the casualties mostly seem to be liberals in the media, although there are some conservatives as well.

It’s all happening so fast that the handy guide above is already out of date, and doesn’t include some of the latest casualties, like Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, Al Franken, John Conyers, and Garrison Keilor. Radio talk show host Michael Savage was warning people not to gloat over all the liberal casualties, because there would be conservatives caught up as well, and quite likely even Donald Trump.

It’s a war that has even spilled over into UK politics, with the recent resignation of Michael Fallon. Because in some ways this is a global civil war that’s under way. For there are just as many people outside the USA that hate Donald Trump as there inside it.

And perhaps no better example of the global nature of this war has appeared recently than the interview of Ann Coulter by Krishnan Guru-Murthy on the UK Channel 4 News last week.

The background of the story here is that Ann Coulter tweeted about a video showing Muslim violence, and her tweet got picked up and repeated by Donald Trump, and Krishnan Guru-Murthy was saying it was all just “fake news” that was being tweeted by a “vile hate group” called Britain First.

The Labour party sidekick of Krishnan Guru-Murthy then went on to unload on Donald Trump (who’s due to visit the UK in February) for his “noxious, vicious, right-wing, islamophobic agenda.” She didn’t think he should even be allowed into Britain.

That’s how much of the UK media (and the US media) see Donald Trump. But I don’t see him as either “noxious” or “vicious” or even “islamophobic”. And  I agreed with Ann Coulter that we’re in “a massive avalanche of Muslim violence”. Bataclan, Nice, and plenty of other events are the evidence of it. And Trump wants to do something about it, while the left wing media will call anyone who wants to do something about it “islamophobic.”

The above Channel 4 piece is a very good example of why I don’t watch mainstream media any more, and haven’t done for coming up on 10 years. I’m sick of seeing people being smeared and insulted and browbeaten, and one form of political correctness or other being enforced.

I don’t know anything at all about Britain First, but I’d guess that they’re a bunch of people who want to put Britain first (rather like Making America Great Again) and that’s probably enough for them to be condemned as “a vile hate group” by Channel 4.

But as far as I’m concerned these days, if you’re called a “vile hate group” or a “noxious, vicious, right-wing, islamophobe”, most likely you’re doing something right, because Channel 4 and the BBC and much of the political class certainly aren’t.

After all, these people threw Britain’s smokers under a bus a long time ago, and I for one haven’t forgotten it.

P.S. Krishnan Guru-Murthy was in the news a month or so back:

Channel 4 News Presenter Tells Hungarian Minister: ‘Christianity is Not Really a Fundamental of Europe’

Krishnan Guru-Murthy, a presenter for publicly-owned broadcaster Channel 4, left the Hungarian prime minister’s spokesman “stunned” after asserting that Christianity is “not really a fundamental of Europe”.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Vile Hate Groups

  1. Smoking Lamp says:

    Speaking of vile hate groups (and reinforcing my comment on propaganda from yesterday) the ‘since press’ (read healthist activist mouthpieces) are now claiming that the UK smoking ban increased ‘happiness’ among the populace… It appears that they have gone full newspeak on this… Check out: “For The British, Bans Increase Happiness” and Lancaster University. “How the UK smoking ban increased wellbeing: Married women with children benefited the most.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 4 December 2017. .

  2. jaxthefirst says:

    I do sometimes wonder whether, with all the political surprises which have occurred over the last few months – the Brexit vote, Trump’s election, the unexpectedly strong showing of Labour in the GE, Le Pen (nearly) becoming the French President, the rapid decline in support of the hitherto-unassailable Andrea Merkel etc, etc, etc – are all just signs that the masses had, finally, realised that the status quo just wasn’t working for them (although it always seemed to work swimmingly for those whom they elected!), and that they wanted something different. Anything different. And, in the absence of any real chance of change when voting for the same-old, same-old as they’d voted for for years (and never seen change of any magnitude) then anybody (or anything) offering the opportunity of a real shake-up of “the system” became something that – almost out of a sense of desperation – they decided to risk voting for. They’d played the “safe cards” for so long, and been disappointed so often that eventually they came to realise that, as the old adage has it: “if you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always gotten”. And they just didn’t want that any more. Hence all these “surprise” results. In fact, if politicians hadn’t allowed themselves to get so comfortable and to feel so untouchable and had got off their butts to connect with real people more, and to really listen to what they were saying – even when those views differed from their own – they wouldn’t have been a surprise at all, and may even have been avoidable.

    But surprises they were. Massive surprises – even for those of us who voted (or would have voted) in that surprising way (most of whom actually expected to lose, as I did over Brexit). The thing is, all of these things are quite earth-shaking for the old, established order. It speaks of a huge unrest that people in the UK voted for something which will, without a shadow of a doubt, be a huge upheaval for our economy, our trade, our finances and possibly our attitudes and our way of life. Despite the finger-pointing of Remainers that all leavers were just idiots who didn’t understand what was at stake – something which I am sure in many cases was true – there were many of us who knew exactly what was at stake, but who simply felt that staying in the EU was likely to be worse. It speaks of huge dissatisfaction, too, that the people of the USA voted for a wild-card like Trump. Like him or loathe him, he definitely wasn’t the safe option with his off-the-wall comments and his seemingly rash Twitter comments and his radical proposals. He seemed to speak for the people who had been ignored for many years, saying things that political correctness had stifled for generations, rather than at them, and that one difference was, I believe, what swung it for him come election time.

    So I think a storm is brewing whereby politics will morph into something more like what people want it to be. It won’t happen overnight and the existing established orders will fight tooth and nail to stop it from happening at all, but ultimately I think that a new kind of politics will emerge. What form it will take I don’t know, but I think it will be very different from what we’ve got now. Because what we’ve got now no longer works for enough people for them to want to endure it any more. In the process, I think Governments are going to go through some very tough times as they get to grips with actually having to run their countries like grown-ups rather than leaving everything to the same old backroom boys to run as they’ve always done. And I believe that many, many single-issue lobbying campaign groups of all sorts are aware of this, and aware, too, that for them the good times are coming to an end. Politicians will no longer be able to indulge in pandering to their favourite “causes,” pushing forward meaningless little small-beer laws and rules and regulations in order to feel that they’ve Done Something Really Important, because they will, literally, be too busy actually doing genuinely important things. Hence the rash of Stupid that we are currently seeing. At the moment, it’s largely the anti-sexual-harrassment bunch who are making the most noise, as they scramble to get onto the bandwagon before it finally stops, but the others are all trying to establish a foothold, too, before they miss their chance. The anti-sugar brigade have been out in force, with their efforts to ban the Coca-Cola lorry and get sugary-food adverts banned before the watershed. Anti-alcohol, of course, have upped the anti with its “drink a bit less adverts” being extended beyond the terminally-boring Sober October. Then, of course, we’ve had all that furore over trans-gender, or fluid-gender, or querying-gender people, and the howls of outrage about which toilets they should use and whether or not the terms “boy” or “girl” or “man” or “woman” should still be permitted. Campaigners for that group, in particular, seem to be actively searching out things to be outraged about in order to ensure their own place on the bandwagon. Indeed, to my mind, even the resignation of the Committee for Social Equality (or whatever it was called) is symptomatic of a little group which knows that its days are numbered and thinks that a mass hissy-fit will scare the Government away from very important Brexit talks to pay more attention to them. And that’s just a few. They’re all at it. And they’re all at it because they know that change is in the air, and it isn’t change that is likely to be positive for them. Which is pretty bad news if you’re a single-issue campaign group – but it’s really good news if you’re one of the millions of people who aren’t members of such a group, but who are, all too often, identified as the “bad guys” that such groups target as the villains of the piece.

    Exciting times ahead, methinks!

    • waltc says:

      It will be a Fight to the Finish, and the old guard, which still holds powerful weapons (the courts, the bureaucracies and the mass media) is dragging out the heavy artillery. In America, they’ve managed to stymie even undeniably constitutional moves by the president with a hundred little law suits, tilted “investigations” and a barrage of propaganda. It remains to be seen if a fragmented, unorganized population has the wherewithall and the will to continue fighting back or if, under the pressure of weaponized kitchen sinks and alleged Public Opinion, they’ll be convinced to accept futility. Change may be coming but it might be the change of total demoralization and total capitulation.

  3. beobrigitte says:

    What’s happening is that a whole raft of people are being laid low as women come forward with claims of sexual harassment (and even rape) going way back.
    Sometimes I think that the radical feminists encourage this outlandish idiocy in order to divert from their next aim: “freeing” women from their children and “freeing” women from womanhood in order for the women to “free” themselves in work 24/7.
    Governments do like this; the woman is employed and pays tax. Then, day care employees pay tax, a house cleaner pays tax and if there is an elderly relative living with the family, care people pay tax. I hear no radical feminists ranting about this, demanding a stable economy in which it would be possible for a woman to stay at home with the children as the wage earned by the man would be sufficient for the family to survive.
    WHY would a government encourage a mother to stay at home with the children? When she works at home looking after the family she ISN’T paying tax.

    Feminism isn’t about equality; if it was, the radical feminists would see the exploitation as work drones facilitating tax pays multiple times over to the various governments and they’d stop boring the world with rape/groping claims. Sure, these things have happened and do happen, but the media cannot make it undone, can it?

  4. Pingback: Stanton Glantz Faces Sexual Harassment Lawsuit | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s