Connect with us

Red Pill

News

Russian women don’t need your help Amanda Foreman. But let’s examine the UK’s liberal, feminist value system that you find so righteous and peace loving

The UK’s Sunday Times published a truly astonishing, hateful piece of garbage. Extraordinary even by Western standards, mocking Russian women, labelling the country as misogynistic, and trashing the Christian Orthodox faith. We could not let this post fly without a response.

Published

on

0 Views

Amanda Foreman’s article for UK’s The Sunday Times, entitled, “A view from afar: Chest-beating Putin aims his vilest weapon at the West — misogyny” is disturbingly misogynistic. It is also extremely misandrist and openly racists towards Russian and Orthodox Christians.

Their are 3 probable and logical explanations as to why someone of Ms. Foreman’s reputation would pen such a hateful and poorly researched piece.

1. She is simply folding into the Western MSM party line…writing yet another propaganda hit piece against Russia and it’s President, in order to move the needle one inch closer towards division, conflict and war. Maybe she will be rewarded for her loyalty by the neo-conservative/neo-liberal sociopaths behind the curtain.

2. She is an angry and jealous women filled with sadness and envy after visiting Russia. What she saw was a society where the neo-liberal value system did not stick, and they were happier for it. Seeing a country proud in its tradition, leadership, religion and history shook up the author…and in order to compensate for those feelings, this post was born.

3. Is a trick. Yeah that’s right. Her post all about fooling western women into believing they are happy (when study after study suggests they are not…please google it and you will see what I mean), and tricking Russian women into believing they should behave like their western neighbours. Don’t fall for it. Russian society and Russian women are on the right path towards a better, more fulfilling life. Don’t let people like Ms. Foreman fool you into thinking their Western cat filled, Kim Kardashian, bar hopping days are enviable. It’s a path to debt, over consumption and emptiness.

I tend to believe that all three of the above reasons influenced, and eventually drove Ms. Foreman into writing her Sunday Times attack piece. What is remarkable about the entire rant, aside from how factually off the entire article is, is how hypocritical and racist this women comes out looking.

First some of the facts, for which Ms. Foreman should have done some very basic research into before making the claims she made in her post:

As for the article itself, it should be read as a case study in Russophobia rather than as a discussion of the position of women in Russia. We do not recognize reality in the article’s descriptions of Russia, Putin or Russian women and men (even the article admits that “boys and girls receive the same education and the same access to healthcare. There are no legal barriers to women owning property, having bank accounts or participating in the economy”).

As a matter of historical record many Bolsheviks were early feminists including the feminist pioneer and Soviet minister and diplomat Alexandra Kollontai and Russian women obtained and fully exercised rights of divorce and abortion long before most western women did.

Today there are many successful women in business, the arts and politics including the Chairman of the Russian Parliament’s Upper House, Valentina Matveyenko, and the Head of the Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina. Incidentally the Judge who tried Tolokonnikova and Alyokhina (interviewed by the author) was also a woman.

Oh and just for the record, Victoria Nuland is indeed married to historian Robert Kagan. What Ms. Foreman forgot to mention is that Mr. Kagan is much more than a historian, he is a chief neo-con from a family of neo-cons (does the PNAC ring a bell?), directly responsible, not only for the Maidan coup, but also for the US – Iraq invasion of 2003…more on that later.

KAGAN-PNAC-FAMILY

Now the hypocrisy, oh the hypocrisy, where do I begin.

Amanda Foreman begins her post stating she has “visited a fair number of countries this year in the course of filming a documentary series on the history of women.” Well we suggest Ms. Foreman get on a plane and visit some countries that it appears she might have missed…or maybe she visited these places but was simply to wrapped up in her western ‘exceptionalism’ that she did not take time to notice the suffering of women and children, committed by her beloved neo-liberal value system.

Maybe Ms. Foreman should go to Iraq and speak to the millions of families torn apart by the US and UK ‘bombs of peace’  that have claimed the lives of 1,455,590 people. How many women died in Iraq? How many women lost their sons, daughters, husbands, fathers and mothers in Iraq? How many women’s hearts did your UK neo-liberal values break in Iraq?

Maybe Ms. Foreman should travel to Serbia. She should speak to the wives, mothers, and daughters who lost everything in NATO airstrikes that lasted from March 24, 1999 to June 10, 1999. How many women suffered, in the heart of Europe, so your neo-liberal values could flex their muscles, and ethnically cleanse thousands of Orthodox Christians. How many women’s heart did you break in Serbia?

How about Ms. Foreman visits Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and see the devastation, destruction and death that results from her neo-liberal dogma she champions so much.

Tired of the death your brand of feminism and social justice brings. Then Ms. Foreman should take a quick trip to Eurozone countries Greece, Spain, Italy, or Cyprus and see all the broken, homeless women pillaging through rubbish for something to eat…a direct result of European neo-liberal austerity.

Finally, let’s give Ms. Foreman a ticket to the Donbass, so she can live in a basement, in the dark with no heat, food or water…like the mothers and daughters of Novorussia do right now. Their homes get shelled day and night by this guy (below), who champions and kills in the name of Ms Foreman’s ‘European value system.’

After Donbass, Ms. Foreman can travel to Crimea and see a society that avoided the bloodshed her lovely Mrs. Nuland instigated, and bear witness to what real human rights and democracy look like…not one human life, not one women was killed thanks to Putin’s decision to protect Crimea.

Ms. Foreman’s path for women’s liberation is a path of death, debt and enslavement. If that is not misogyny, than I don’t know what is.

Ms. Foreman’s post is not only misogynistic, it is racist. It offends Orthodox Christians and Slavic people. Was it not enough to bomb Serbia to kingdom come, now you have to ethnically cleanse Orthodox Christians in Eastern Ukraine as well.

Tell us all Ms. Foreman, what is so wrong with a country wanting to embrace its history and religion, is this a crime. Last time I checked the UK was also a Christian country at its heart. What scares Ms. Foreman so much about ‘traditional’ religion? Is it because it gives people hope, love and inspiration…all qualities that the neo-liberal feminist despises, and can do without.

Why doesn’t Ms Foreman go to Saudi Arabia, or UAE, Indonesia or Turkey and explain to the Muslim population in those countries to do away with the teachings of Islam? I was under the impression that neo-liberal values were about acceptance and tolerance…unless of course you are of Orthodox faith, then in that case you either need to submit to western rule or be wiped out.

Be careful Ms. Foreman because Russians, Greeks, Bulgarians, Romanians, Serbians, and many more people subscribe to the Christian Orthodox faith, and when pushed, they will push back with a mighty force.

So next time, when Pussy Riot considers sticking rubber chickens in their vaginas, while inside the beautiful and sacred St. Basil’s cathedral, tell them to go to the Great Mosque at Mecca or The Wailing Wall in the Old City of Jerusalem and let’s see what fate will await them. Or maybe Pussy Riot can perform inside St. Paul’s Cathedral in London in front of 10 year old children, how would that make you feel.

In Cameronstan, Pussy Riot may not be sent to prison for such actions, but in Cameronstan everyone is under the watchful eye of the NSA, fearful of what trumped up charge might await them if they step out of line, or fight for truth and justice. Just ask Julian Assange how his quest for freedom and truth is going behind the protection of the Ecuadoran Embassy, in the 51st state of the U.S.A.

Ms. Foreman, stay away from Russia and stay away from Orthodoxy. Russia doesn’t need more snake oil saleswomen. Keep your reality TV shows that degrade women to yourself. They make UK women look like sexual toys, waiting for a beer drenched man to play with, as they twerk for the attention of a random penis.

Russian women prefer the entertainment of the greats, like Nikolay Gogol, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Leo Tolstoy, and Aleksandr Pushkin.

Contrary to your article, Russian women are not mindless bimbos, easily fooled by Western caricatures of an ‘evil Putin.’ Only Facebook zombies in your neck of the woods believe such nonsense.

Vladimir Putin was democratically voted into office, and is internationally recognised as the President of the Russian Federation. He represents the people of Russia, and has an approval rating above 85%. That’s a mandate Cameron could only dream of in his wettest of dreams.

Russian women have agency, they can judge for themselves what is right and what is wrong. Your post mocks the women of Russia and paints them as fools, who are too stupid to understand the politics at play, and now need the ‘all-wise British feminist’ to save them from the evils of their country, culture, and leadership.

Russian women do not need saving, they are stronger than you could ever imagine. Russian women are intelligent, capable and independent. They know how to survive, they have strong souls, full of passion, and can easily judge for themselves what is right and what is wrong.

And yes, much to your dismay, Russian women are full of beauty, culture, tradition, and femininity. While you are glued to the ‘Tele’ watching the Voice, they are at the Bolshoi or the Hermitage.

You want to change Russian women for the worst, take away their beauty, their brains, and their power, so that you can subjugate them to your rule. It will never happen. Russian women, hell all of Russia, is on to your game. So take your Russophobia, your Orthodoxphobia, your misogyny, and your misandry, and keep it away from MOTHER Russia.

P.S. Vladimir Putin will stop poking fun at Hillary Clinton when she stops calling Putin the new Hitler. Over twenty-five million Russians died in WW2 in order to defeat Hitler, and his Nazi army, so you and Hillary can enjoy the freedoms you take for granted…show some respect and learn some history.

References:

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/columns/article1483931.ece

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
22 Comments

22
Leave a Reply

avatar
22 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
13 Comment authors
xfwmrt5gzngfw5wtrjfgxe85mrwfqdcm59x4ctxckw54mtdfsgw9j5nwmtxm845wctfkdijtfdhskdsftrg83yrerxt5m8ct4ykwk7rdywx8t54w5ctxsdfmxdgecn5tbbn7w4bvt7xwn3554c5yt Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
johnpalissy
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: Russian women don’t need your help Amanda Foreman. But let’s examine UK’s liberal, feminist value system http://t.co/tzoS…

redpilltimes
Guest

A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http://t.co/tzoSh1ugib

PaulywarlyNews
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

paulsmith031158
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

Kupesa1
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

StephenFenton88
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

protivfachizma
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

LunaChavista
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

duncanmacmartin
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

MaartendeVries2
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

MaartendeVries2
Guest

@redpilltimes Hded by USA since 1948, ca 350 million human sacrifices, Violence of KKKapitalistic “Cannibalism” 2 quote many thru’ the Ages.

claugotz
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

bogomirbogolov
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

sasha031
Guest

RT @redpilltimes: A response to Sunday Times racist article on Russia. Let’s examine how many lives UK/EU neo-liberalism has destroyed http…

trackback

[…] Yes, Russian women have it rough without the vicissitudes of feminism. If only they lived in the more advanced and civilized United States, they could give up their maternity leave benefits. In fact, the United States is so far ahead of the curve in their lack of same that they are the only industrialized nation in the world that does not guarantee paid maternity leave for new mothers. […]

trackback

ccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb

[…]Sites of interest we’ve a link to[…]

trackback

3nvb54wnxd5cbvbecnv5ev75bc

[…]one of our guests recently encouraged the following website[…]

trackback

Title

[…]Wonderful story, reckoned we could combine several unrelated data, nonetheless genuinely really worth taking a appear, whoa did one study about Mid East has got far more problerms at the same time […]

trackback

Title

[…]usually posts some very fascinating stuff like this. If you are new to this site[…]

trackback

Title

[…]very few web-sites that transpire to become comprehensive beneath, from our point of view are undoubtedly effectively worth checking out[…]

trackback

Title

[…]Here is a superb Weblog You might Obtain Interesting that we Encourage You[…]

trackback

Title

[…]here are some links to web sites that we link to due to the fact we assume they are worth visiting[…]

Latest

WSJ Op-Ed Cracks The Code: Why Liberal Intellectuals Hate Trump

WSJ: The Real Reason They Hate Trump

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


As pundits continue to scratch their heads over the disruptive phenomenon known as Donald Trump, Yale computer science professor and chief scientist at Dittach, David Gelernter, has penned a refreshingly straightforward and blunt Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal explaining why Trump has been so successful at winning hearts and minds, and why the left – especially those snarky ivory-tower intellectuals, hate him.

Gelernter argues that Trump – despite being a filthy rich “parody of the average American,” is is a regular guy who has successfully resonated with America’s underpinnings.

Mr. Trump reminds us who the average American really is. Not the average male American, or the average white American,” writes Gelernter. “We know for sure that, come 2020, intellectuals will be dumbfounded at the number of women and blacks who will vote for Mr. Trump. He might be realigning the political map: plain average Americans of every type vs. fancy ones.”

He never learned to keep his real opinions to himself because he never had to. He never learned to be embarrassed that he is male, with ordinary male proclivities. Sometimes he has treated women disgracefully, for which Americans, left and right, are ashamed of him—as they are of JFK and Bill Clinton. –WSJ

Gelernter then suggests: “This all leads to an important question—one that will be dismissed indignantly today, but not by historians in the long run: Is it possible to hate Donald Trump but not the average American?“.

***

The Real Reason They Hate Trump via the Wall Street Journal.

He’s the average American in exaggerated form—blunt, simple, willing to fight, mistrustful of intellectuals.

Every big U.S. election is interesting, but the coming midterms are fascinating for a reason most commentators forget to mention: The Democrats have no issues. The economy is booming and America’s international position is strong. In foreign affairs, the U.S. has remembered in the nick of time what Machiavelli advised princes five centuries ago: Don’t seek to be loved, seek to be feared.

The contrast with the Obama years must be painful for any honest leftist. For future generations, the Kavanaugh fight will stand as a marker of the Democratic Party’s intellectual bankruptcy, the flashing red light on the dashboard that says “Empty.” The left is beaten.

This has happened before, in the 1980s and ’90s and early 2000s, but then the financial crisis arrived to save liberalism from certain destruction. Today leftists pray that Robert Mueller will put on his Superman outfit and save them again.

For now, though, the left’s only issue is “We hate Trump.” This is an instructive hatred, because what the left hates about Donald Trump is precisely what it hates about America. The implications are important, and painful.

Not that every leftist hates America. But the leftists I know do hate Mr. Trump’s vulgarity, his unwillingness to walk away from a fight, his bluntness, his certainty that America is exceptional, his mistrust of intellectuals, his love of simple ideas that work, and his refusal to believe that men and women are interchangeable. Worst of all, he has no ideology except getting the job done. His goals are to do the task before him, not be pushed around, and otherwise to enjoy life. In short, he is a typical American—except exaggerated, because he has no constraints to cramp his style except the ones he himself invents.

Mr. Trump lacks constraints because he is filthy rich and always has been and, unlike other rich men, he revels in wealth and feels no need to apologize—ever. He never learned to keep his real opinions to himself because he never had to. He never learned to be embarrassed that he is male, with ordinary male proclivities. Sometimes he has treated women disgracefully, for which Americans, left and right, are ashamed of him—as they are of JFK and Bill Clinton.

But my job as a voter is to choose the candidate who will do best for America. I am sorry about the coarseness of the unconstrained average American that Mr. Trump conveys. That coarseness is unpresidential and makes us look bad to other nations. On the other hand, many of his opponents worry too much about what other people think. I would love the esteem of France, Germany and Japan. But I don’t find myself losing sleep over it.

The difference between citizens who hate Mr. Trump and those who can live with him—whether they love or merely tolerate him—comes down to their views of the typical American: the farmer, factory hand, auto mechanic, machinist, teamster, shop owner, clerk, software engineer, infantryman, truck driver, housewife. The leftist intellectuals I know say they dislike such people insofar as they tend to be conservative Republicans.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama know their real sins. They know how appalling such people are, with their stupid guns and loathsome churches. They have no money or permanent grievances to make them interesting and no Twitter followers to speak of. They skip Davos every year and watch Fox News. Not even the very best has the dazzling brilliance of a Chuck Schumer, not to mention a Michelle Obama. In truth they are dumb as sheep.

Mr. Trump reminds us who the average American really is. Not the average male American, or the average white American. We know for sure that, come 2020, intellectuals will be dumbfounded at the number of women and blacks who will vote for Mr. Trump. He might be realigning the political map: plain average Americans of every type vs. fancy ones.

Many left-wing intellectuals are counting on technology to do away with the jobs that sustain all those old-fashioned truck-driver-type people, but they are laughably wide of the mark. It is impossible to transport food and clothing, or hug your wife or girl or child, or sit silently with your best friend, over the internet. Perhaps that’s obvious, but to be an intellectual means nothing is obvious. Mr. Trump is no genius, but if you have mastered the obvious and add common sense, you are nine-tenths of the way home. (Scholarship is fine, but the typical modern intellectual cheapens his learning with politics, and is proud to vary his teaching with broken-down left-wing junk.)

This all leads to an important question—one that will be dismissed indignantly today, but not by historians in the long run: Is it possible to hate Donald Trump but not the average American?

True, Mr. Trump is the unconstrained average citizen. Obviously you can hate some of his major characteristics—the infantile lack of self-control in his Twitter babble, his hitting back like a spiteful child bully—without hating the average American, who has no such tendencies. (Mr. Trump is improving in these two categories.) You might dislike the whole package. I wouldn’t choose him as a friend, nor would he choose me. But what I see on the left is often plain, unconditional hatred of which the hater—God forgive him—is proud. It’s discouraging, even disgusting. And it does mean, I believe, that the Trump-hater truly does hate the average American—male or female, black or white. Often he hates America, too.

Granted, Mr. Trump is a parody of the average American, not the thing itself. To turn away is fair. But to hate him from your heart is revealing. Many Americans were ashamed when Ronald Reagan was elected. A movie actor? But the new direction he chose for America was a big success on balance, and Reagan turned into a great president. Evidently this country was intended to be run by amateurs after all—by plain citizens, not only lawyers and bureaucrats.

Those who voted for Mr. Trump, and will vote for his candidates this November, worry about the nation, not its image. The president deserves our respect because Americans deserve it—not such fancy-pants extras as network commentators, socialist high-school teachers and eminent professors, but the basic human stuff that has made America great, and is making us greater all the time.

Mr. Gelernter is computer science professor at Yale and chief scientist at Dittach LLC. His most recent book is “Tides of Mind.”

Appeared in the October 22, 2018, print edition.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

How American propaganda bypasses the Constitution

While the First Amendment guarantees freedom of the press, this amendment only guarantees the government will not manage the news.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

We are in a propaganda war unlike anything anyone ever expected in the United States. As recently as the 1970’s and 1980’s, the common knowledge even among young elementary school students was that the Government of the United States cannot restrict the operation of a free press. Freedom of speech was taught and vaunted as one of our most precious rights, and the Soviet Union’s history of oppression was the catalyst by which love of the right of free speech was protected.

Do not let go of this freedom, or we will become like them, we were told.

But the most recent couple of years we are seeing media control in very clear obvious ways.

On October 11, Facebook’s internal news site noted that it was removing what it calls “inauthentic news sites”:

11 October 2018

Removing Additional Inauthentic Activity from Facebook

Today, we’re removing 559 Pages and 251 accounts that have consistently broken our rules against spam and coordinated inauthentic behavior. Given the activity we’ve seen — and its timing ahead of the US midterm elections — we wanted to give some details about the types of behavior that led to this action. Many were using fake accounts or multiple accounts with the same names and posted massive amounts of content across a network of Groups and Pages to drive traffic to their websites. Many used the same techniques to make their content appear more popular on Facebook than it really was. Others were ad farms using Facebook to mislead people into thinking that they were forums for legitimate political debate.

But on October 20th, with this information known, Google searches on “Facebook fake news midterm” elections first revealed absolutely nothing any earlier than August, and nothing related to the recent developments in October.

CLICK HERE to Support The Duran >>

In research for this piece, one known article on The Duran was found and brought up. By use of the specific search term “removing additional inauthentic activity from Facebook”, we were then able to get the Facebook news page. Subsequent searches on “Facebook midterms fake news” revealed quite a different response:

Oh! There it is! But several Google searches made before directly fingering the information yielded nothing, just as though the news of FB’s efforts didn’t exist.

We already know that Facebook has a core corporate culture that leans left. We also know that many groups have been removed for suspicions of being dishonest or fake news.

What we may not get is how well intertwined the majority of information services on the Internet are, and how they cooperate to manage information.

Google was the search engine used in this research. And indeed, the big four major purveyors of information and social media are Google, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. These sites are so widely used that they are easy to consider the first stop, the last stop and the only stop for anyone seeking information from the Internet about anything.

The absence of a search result is often enough to lead one to believe the story doesn’t really exist, or that it is a rumor. After all, if it is real news it must be on Google, right?

Wrong.

This would seem to fly in the face of the First Amendment, but it doesn’t, because the Amendment applies only to a limit of powers on the Federal Government. It cannot touch private industry, and indeed, the First Amendment actually protects the rights of individuals and companies to make any statements they wish, or to not make them.

Think of it this way: A newspaper that supports the conservative party writes and publishes news and opinion in such a manner as to bolster support for that party. The paper and its staff are entirely within their First Amendment rights to do so because the Constitution never said anything about reporting the truth. It only says that the press’ freedom cannot be abridged by the government.

So if a liberal paper wants to report the same news and give its editorial bias that supports its own causes, it may. There is not a soul in government that can stop them. But the owners of the company can.

However, those owners and editors can certainly be influenced by hidden efforts. While there is no law restricting free speech in the US, there is certainly a lot of power and money that can accomplish the same thing.

A sweetheart deal between a company CEO and his or her senator or congressman can subtly change the balance. There is no law to break involved here, though such efforts can rightly be called “collusion.” Collusion happens all the time, though, and it is always a cooperative effort so there is very little that can be done to stop it. It is not illegal in most situations, either.

Conservatives know this. They have seen the slant of mainstream media lean unerringly to the side of secular humanism, suppression or humiliation of traditional values and lifestyles, and the crazy, psychotic mixture of pacifism or warmongering as best suits the desires of the Left. We have observed this in stark fashion just this year, as critics hysterically railed at President Trump for his tough stance with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and as they hysterically railed at President Trump for going against his promise to get out of Syria, and then again for not attacking them, and sanctioning Russia even more.

The reasoning behind the Left’s attacks was simple: If Mr. Trump wanted it, they didn’t. This is simple reasoning, indeed but it is also hysterical reasoning, which means it is insane.

The most recent outburst of media control came during the Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination and confirmation events. The eleventh-hour attacks alleging that Brett Kavanaugh was a drunken would-be rapist and the testimonies of Dr Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnik were reported with a heavy emphasis on “believe the women” and they were also tailored for a time to target Judge Kavanaugh for his anger in his response, with CNN heads saying that this anger shows that the Judge is unhinged.

Conservative media efforts to give the truth to this story were certainly going full force on Fox News and with conservative media hosts like Rush Limbaugh, but they were heading for failure. The reason for this was that the conservative arguments were not fielded on mainstream media, so they were not heard or read.

The Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation might not have gone through because of this. But one move saved this nomination.

President Trump began talking about it in his rallies, which the media had to cover. When Mr. Trump noted in clear language that none of these allegations were corroborated by anyone, most significantly the named witnesses of Dr Ford’s, the widespread dissemination of that news (because the press had no choice) helped turn that debacle into the nothing-burger it always was.

When news gets around that someone is trying to suppress a story, that often can result in the story getting much bigger. Social media networks have to give the appearance of fairness, after all, and refusing to report a huge story because it runs counter to the political opinion of the network is a risk no network (except maybe CNN) is willing to take.

The First Amendment means the government cannot control our news media. But this also means that the responsibility lies with the American people to control it, to uphold its freedom and to uphold the freedom of speech, be it risky or offensive or politically perilous. There is a good reason for that need.

The most risky, offensive and politically perilous pieces of news are quite often the truth.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Hillary Clinton: Democrats have been TOO CIVIL with GOP (VIDEO)

Civil war becomes more likely as Clinton calls for greater civil unrest after weeks of absolutely insane behavior from leftist activists.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Former presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton just called for an end to civil behavior towards Republicans and conservatives. In an interview with Christiane Amanpour of CNN expanded on in a piece by USA Today, the failed candidate had this to say:

“You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about… That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and / or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again.”

Clinton said that Senate Republicans under Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., “demeaned the confirmation process” and “insulted and attacked” Christine Blasey Ford – who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee about a sexual assault she alleges Kavanaugh committed in 1982 – along with other “women who were speaking out.”

It should be pointed out here that Clinton told a lie. The Senate Republicans did everything possible to hear out Dr Ford’s testimony, and no one has gone on record with any sort of insults or demeaning comments about her. Every Republican Senator who stated anything agreed that something happened to her, but they also agreed that there was no corroboration showing that Judge Kavanaugh was actually involved in any misdoings. USA Today’s piece continues:

Clinton compared the handling of Kavanaugh’s confirmation to “Republican operatives shutting down the voting in 2000,” the “swift-boating of John Kerry,” attacks on former Arizona Sen. John McCain in the 2000 Republican primary and “what they did to me for 25 years.

“When you’re dealing with an ideological party that is driven by the lust for power, that is funded by corporate interests who want a government that does its bidding, you can be civil but you can’t overcome what they intend to do unless you win elections,” she told Amanpour.

Clinton compared Kavanaugh’s swearing-in ceremony at the White House on Monday to a “political rally” that “further undermined the image and integrity of the court.”

She told Amanpour the effect on the court “troubles” and “saddens” her “because our judicial system has been viewed as one of the main pillars of our constitutional government.”

“But the President’s been true to form,” Clinton added. “He has insulted, attacked, demeaned women throughout the campaign – really for many years leading up to the campaign. And he’s continued to do that inside the White House.”

Here, Clinton told at least two more incendiary whoppers.

CLICK HERE to Support The Duran >>

First, no one has been specifically after her, and second, President Donald Trump’s record with women including in the White House has been nothing short of stellar and gentlemanly. Nikki Haley, who supported Marco Rubio in the 2016 campaign and has at times been openly critical of Donald Trump, yesterday announced her full support of his 2020 campaign and her intent to campaign with and for him.

By all accounts, Mrs. Haley is a woman.

The first American Civil War had economic policy and states’ rights as its central focus. Slavery was a part of that issue, though slavery was practiced in the North as well in the South before this war began.

Now a new civil war is coming, but perhaps it should be called the American Social War. It is not about any real policy matter at all. It is hysteria, but it appears to be hysteria with a purpose.

The first American Social War has two apparent sides and allying forces and groups:

The Left:

  • pro-gay marriage
  • pro-death (in other words, pro-abortion)
  • anti-Christian, especially Christianity that says these first two issues are wrong
  • anti-GOP / Republican / Conservative
  • “victim class” – feminists, some millenials
  • supporters of legalized use of mind-altering / mood-altering drugs
  • appears to support overreaching socialist style government, featuring “fair” wages, such as a $15.oo minimum wage
  • anti-traditionalist
  • Mainstream media is strongly allied here
  • George Soros is a supporter
  • social media outlets, like Facebook and Twitter are supporters through “scrubbing” of media content
  • anti-white, anti-male, and if you are white, male and Christian, look out. You are Enemy Number One
  • supports and executes violence against all these people they are against, including family members.
  • very zealous, and very monolithic in terms of alignment and energy

The Right:

  • Conservatives
  • people who generally want the government to leave them alone
  • generally favors life, considering abortion tragic and to be avoided, though some consider that it should be made illegal
  • marriage has always been between one man and one woman and it should not be redefined to fit the whims of a few
  • God is sovereign (though many conservatives would never make this connection)
  • No real animus against the left, but at the same time, fed up with being hectored by the left all the time, as we saw in Senator Lindsey Graham’s explosive confrontation against Senate Democrats
  • Generally Republican by party affiliation, though many libertarian and conservatives are also present as well as a number of conservative democrats.
  • seeks to avoid violence. While there do exist a very few neo-Nazi types, their numbers are infinitesimal, and their behavior is rejected by the Right
  •  generally against drug use, though many have unfortunately moderated on the matter of actual illegality

The main characteristic of this approaching war, as stated before, is little more than some sort of outrage over identity politics and perceived victimization. This is something both new and old, as there is always a party in any war that claims that they are fighting because they are in fact the aggrieved party, under the other side’s aggression and suppression.

That factor exists with this war too. However, the reality of that aggression or suppression is that it does not exist, and this makes it very difficult for the “perceived aggressors” to ramp up the zeal needed to carry out the fight.

This factor is often very maddening for conservative people. As a whole they do not wish to fight. They wish to be left alone. The left on the other hand insists that everything must be fought for because the right has somehow managed to take it away from them, or is keeping it away from them.

This is purely fiction but it is almost impossible to convince a leftist that this is so. Tucker Carlson expands on this matter in this report. He makes reference at 6:37 about how Hillary Rodham Clinton is now openly calling for civility to the GOP to end (as if it hasn’t already!), but the entirety of this report begs to be seen to give perspective to the look and feel of this crisis:

This is unfamiliar territory in many ways, and it is unclear how far this will go. But one this is clear: it is testing all available limits, and it may come to real fighting, and real killing, for no reason better than perceived victimization.

It should be understood that the advocates for violence are all people that reject God and traditional values openly. There is certainly a connection.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending