Connect with us
// (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});


Witch-hunt: Britain’s ‘liberal’ Guardian blasts popstar Taylor Swift for not being anti-Trump

The Guardian slams a popstar for being apolitical while then accusing her of being pro-Trump simply because she is not overtly anti-Trump. The Guardian’s disgusting attack on someone who makes teenage style pop music is demonstrative of the low-grade guttural agenda of the western liberal elite.




Britain’s Guardian newspaper, a media outlet that has consistently supported Takfiri sectarianism in Syria and Lebanon, the occupation of Palestine, the fascist regime in Kiev and Hillary Clinton’s losing but nevertheless continuous campaign to become US President, has hit a new and peculiar low.

This time they are not slamming RT, the government of Iran, Syria or China, but Taylor Swift, the American pop star whose music is popular among teenagers and young adults.

What is Taylor Swift’s crime? Her crime is staying out of politics.

The hit-piece on the hit-maker begins in the following way,

“In the year since Donald Trump was elected, the entertainment world has been largely united in its disdain for his presidency. But a notable voice has been missing from the chorus: that of Taylor Swift, the world’s biggest pop star. Her silence is striking, highlighting the parallels between the singer and the president: their adept use of social media to foster a diehard support base; their solipsism; their laser focus on the bottom line; their support among the “alt-right”.

Swift’s songs echo Mr Trump’s obsession with petty score-settling in their repeated references to her celebrity feuds, or report in painstaking detail on her failed romantic relationships (often, there is crossover). The message is quintessentially Trumpian: everyone is out to get me – but I win anyway. Seeded with clues to the identities of her famous associates, her lyrics reel in and solidify a hardcore fanbase – usually young, female followers known as “Swifties” – who passionately defend her honour on social media by attacking her detractors”.

Already, one can see the flaws in the coming argument.

By admitting that Swift’s fan-base is young, which is about the only true point made in the article, all subsequent arguments are rendered increasingly absurd as a consequence.

In the US, those under 18 – a demographic who make up a substantial part of Swift’s fan-base –  cannot vote, whilst those just over 18 – also a substantial part of Swift’s fan-base – statistically rarely vote, though they legally can.

The article’s anonymous author then offers a list of offences which attempt to prove that the apolitical Swift is somehow subliminally offering a pro-Trump message.  Thus we read of such ‘Trump like’ misdemeanours as:

— Swift refusing to make her new album available on the streaming service Spotify, but instead forcing a one-time digital purchase via Spotify with whom she cut a deal some years ago.

–Integrating her online fan-club with proportional sales for concert tickets, recordings and other items such as meet and greets.

–Winning a lawsuit against another music industry professional for a matter unrelated to party politics.

–Writing songs about initially heartbroken women feeling better after a romantic break-up

–Being white

–Being successful

–Noting that she once vaguely mentioned that she supports the Republican party, while also noting that she once gave an equally vague statement supporting Barack Obama.

The charges against Swift, like her music, are incredibly unpolitical. It really all boils down to the fact that in an age where the music industry has declined as a commercial force, she has managed to either invent or implement a successful on-line business model and sing the kind of bubble-gum pop songs that have always been popular among girls and young women.

The idea that as a popular singer, Swift has some sort of obligation to be political is not only nonsense; it smacks of Mussolini’s idea of totalitarianism wherein “either you’re with us or against us” (“o con noi o contro di noi”).

The idea that a singer should be forced to adopt a political ideology in a supposedly free country or else be accused of some moral wrongdoing, is a deeply unethical mindset.

But then there is the wider question of political pop. While I am aware that a handful of anti-Trump songs have been produced by major stars, these songs represent a small percentage of the overall pop charts when compared to anti-war songs and pro-civil rights songs of the Vietnam war era in the United States.

As someone whose first ever job was selling records and music playing equipment, I could easily think of several dozen anti-war/pro-civil rights songs from the Vietnam era in a matter of seconds. When it comes to anti-Trump songs, all that comes to mind immediately is Eminem doing a free-style rap in a parking garage. I am aware there are others, but they just don’t seem to be as prominent as the political pop and rock music of the 1960s and 1970s.

Because the United States was a capitalist society in 1968 and remains so today, the fact that anti-war records sold well in the 1960s but anti-Trump songs are not dominating the charts today can only mean that today’s liberal elite have less influence on the tastes of mostly young pop consumers than that anti-war movement did on college and high school campuses in the 1960s.

What’s more, in the Vietnam War era there was no attempt to criticise apolitical musicians on the basis that they did not engage in politics. In 1970, Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young released the song Ohio which proclaimed, “Tin soldiers and Nixon’s coming, we’re finally on our own. This summer I hear the drumming, four dead in Ohio”.  That same year the Carpenters, light pop favourites of the day, released the song (They Long to Be) Close to You, which had entirely zero direct or indirect references to Nixon, but plenty of lyrics about wanting to be near a loved one.

It seems that the western media in the Cold War was more tolerant of those who would rather sing about love than about Vietnam, Martin Luther King or Richard Nixon, and I say this as someone who owns plenty of protest records from the 1960s and 1970s.

To quote the singer of another band once called “fascist” for engaging more in theatricality than in punky politics, Freddie Mercury of Queen, “I’ve done my sentence, but committed no crime”.

In the case of Taylor Swift her sentence is having the wrinkled finger of Guardian “journalism” waved in her face and her non-crime is singing about the kinds of things on teenage girls’ minds, which statistically are not Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton.

For a newspaper like The Guardian that has supported all of the major western led neo-imperialist wars throughout the wider world from Iraq to Syria, maybe someone ought to write an anti-war song about the Guardian?

But that person shouldn’t be Taylor Swift. Swift sings songs made for young people who aren’t interested in politics, and there is absolutely nothing sinister about that.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement // (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Notify of


NXIVM Sex-Cult Prosecutors Have Evidence Of Illegal Clinton Campaign Contributions For “Political Influence”

NXIVM’s Clinton connections have been known for some time.




Via Zerohedge

US Attorney Richard Donoghue asked a federal judge last month for permission to present a mountain of new evidence in the NXIVM sex-cult trial – including evidence of an “illegal scheme to exceed contribution limits to a presidential primary campaign,” in the “hopes of obtaining political influence to advance their own agenda,” according to a March court filing.

“At the suggestion of a political operative, who has since pleaded guilty to an unrelated New York state bribery charge also involving campaign contributions, the contributions were “bundled” and presented to the candidate at a fundraising event attended by conspirators,” the filing continues.

And whose “presidential primary campaign” did the group allegedly attempt to buy influence with?

None other than Hillary Rodham Clinton, according to former NXIVM publicist-turned-whistleblower Frank Parlato, who told Big League Politics “I was there, and I knew that the contributions were made by more than a dozen NXIVM members to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

At present, the judge overseeing the case has not responded on the case docket.

Founded by accused pedophile Keith Raniere, NXIVM started out as a multi-level-marketing self-help business for people who wanted to “reach their potential” through various courses.

NXIVM’s Clinton connections have been known for some time 

After being run out of Arkansas in the early ’90s by then-Governor Bill Clinton’s attorney general on charges of fraud and business deception, Raniere and NXIVM executives emerged a decade later only to donate $29,900 to Hillary Clinton’s 2006 presidential campaign a decade later. At least three NXIVM officials are (or were) “invitation-only” members of the Clinton Global Initiative, according to the New York Post.

Meanwhile, NXIVM’s ‘inner sanctum’ turns out to have been sex-cult known as ‘DOS’ – which Parletto says stands for “dominus obsequious sororium,” or “master over the slave women.”

A 2009 photo of Raniere in Albany, New York, where Mack bought a house to be closer to the Nxivm founder.

Raniere’s inner cadre included Seagrams heiresses Clare and Sara bronfman, who joined NXIVM in 2002 and subsequently contributed $150 million of their inheritance to the organization, while Claire bought 80% of Wakaya island off the coast of Fiji for $47 million in 2016, according to Vanity Fair.

Female members of DOS – such as former Smallville actress Allison Mack, would procure women for Raniere – who required that prospective “slaves” upload compromising collateral into a Dropbox account. One such recruit-turned-coach was India Oxenberg – daughter of Dynasty actress Catherine Oxenbergwho met with prosecutors in New York in late 2017 to present evidence against Raniere.

Allison Mack

Raniere and Mack were arrested on federal charges which include sex trafficking, forced labor, wire fraud conspiracy, human trafficking and other counts. Most recently, Raniere was accused of having sex with children and producing kiddie porn, to which he has pleaded not guilty.

Mack – who allegedly held the second-most-senior position in NXIVM, pleaded guilty earlier this month to racketeering charges and manipulating women into becoming sex slaves.”I believed Keith Raniere’s intentions were to help people, and I was wrong,” a tearful Mack told a Brooklyn judge. “I know I can and will be a better person,” she added.

Prior to his death, Clare and Sara’s father, Seagrams founder and former president of the World Jewish Congress Edgar Bronfman (whose funeral Hillary Clinton spoke at), told Vanity Fair of NXIVM “I think it’s a cult.”

Edgar Bronfman Sr. receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Bill Clinton in 1999

A cult which tried to buy favor with Hillary Clinton, allegedly.

(March filing below, P. 24)

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


Tulsi Gabbard: Trump is ‘Saudi Arabia’s servant’ as he refused to end US support of Yemen war

Tulsi tweets: “By vetoing War Powers Act, Trump again proves he’s the servant of Saudi Arabia.”





Via RT…

Tulsi Gabbard, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, has called President Donald Trump’s decision to veto a bill seeking to end US support for the Yemen war nothing less than proof he serves Saudi Arabia.

By vetoing the bill dubbed the War Powers Act, Trump again “proves he’s the servant of Saudi Arabia – the theocratic dictatorship spending billions spreading the most extreme and intolerant form of Islam around the world, supporting al-Qaeda & other jihadists, and waging genocidal war in Yemen with US help,” Gabbard said in an emotional tweet.

The War Powers resolution, approved in the House of Representatives in April and the Senate in March, was vetoed by President Donald Trump, who said it was an “unnecessary, dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional authorities, endangering the lives of American citizens and brave service members.”

In the video that accompanies the tweet, Gabbard is heard saying that the US is complicit “in this genocide that’s causing millions of people to starve and suffer.” She accused Trump of being “more interested in pleasing the Saudis that doing what is right.”

This is by no means the first time Gabbard has attacked Trump over Saudi Arabia. Last year, she tweeted: “Hey @realdonaldtrump: being Saudi Arabia’s b*tch is not ‘America First.’”

Since a Saudi-led coalition started the military offensive against Yemen in 2015, an estimated 60,000 Yemenis have died due to the conflict, and another 85,000 have succumbed to famine and malnutrition. Airstrikes conducted often with munitions supplied by the US and its allies frequently target areas with civilians. The Saudis say they are acting in support of the exiled president, Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi, against the Yemeni Houthis who control most of the country. Riyadh and its Western allies accuse the opposition group of being proxies of Iran.

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


Is Lori Loughlin’s Daughter Olivia Jade Now Under Investigation?

Both Olivia Jade and Bella are technically still University of Southern California students whose accounts are on hold while the university reviews their cases.

The Duran



Via Yahoo News…

Another day, another “ruh-ro” in the ongoing Operation Varsity Blues saga. After Lori Loughlin and Mossimo Giannulli pleaded not guilty to conspiracy charges in the college admissions scam on Monday, the Daily Mail now reports one of their two daughters—either influencer/vlogger Olivia Jade, 19, or Bella Giannulli, 20—has received a “target letter” declaring her the subject of an investigation by the Department of Justice.

As The New York Times reported earlier this week, “at least some children of the parents who were charged in the scandal have received so-called target letters, which notify people that they could be targets of a criminal probe.” So far, no students (read: kids of the dozens of parents) allegedly involved in the scandal have been charged.

Internet sleuths are now, inevitably, speculating that the daughter in question could be Bella, who deleted her Instagram account this week. (Her sister’s remains active.) Both Olivia Jade and Bella are technically still University of Southern California students whose accounts are on hold while the university reviews their cases; their parents, Loughlin and Giannulli, stand accused of paying $500,000 to Operation Varsity Blues ringleader William “Rick” Singer to pass their daughters off as crew recruits. Some of the high-profile parents charged, including Felicity Huffman, have pleaded guilty in hopes of reduced sentences, though prosecutors are still seeking a four- to 10-month jail sentencefor the actress. But on Monday, Loughlin and Giannulli entered not guilty pleas to conspiracy to commit mail fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering, and are vowing to fight the charges.

One potential line of defense? Loughlin and Giannulli—because, reminder, it wasn’t only the moms who were allegedly involved in the scam—were just trying really, really hard to help their kids, according to the L.A. Times, in this cultural moment of “parenting on steroids.” For future reference, though, steroid possession is also illegal.

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


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...


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter