Of feminazis and halal chickens

There’s a tweeter named Kassandra, a Dutch lady and close friend who is essentially a Deplorable like many of us.  She has just written:

Dit is hoe “de media” opereren, folks. Ze kunnen de info oorlog alleen winnen met geniepige trucs, propaganda en gemanipuleer met de naieviteit van het publiek.

Which in English might be:

This is how “the media” operate, folks. They can only win the info war with dastardly tricks, propaganda and manipulated with the naivete of the public.

How true but it’s not just the media, it’s the activist left as well who fall into two camps – those who know that what they’re doing is wrong and still they do it – a Catholic might see that as mortal sin – and then the sheeple who are sucked in over a single issue but then carry that feeling across to other issues, led by the minority of clever sheep … and that is a venal or forgivable sin.

“Clever sheep” here is a reference to that Monty Python sketch where sheep are up in trees and the farmer is asked, “But where did they get the idea from?”

And condensing the answer: “From Harold, he’s that most dangerous of creatures – a clever sheep.”

The analogy is apt because farmyard animals are involved in this story as well, plus it really does describe how the left operates at ground level as a whole.

I’d be the first to admit that because the Unethical Left and the Deplorable Sane are in two entirely different walled halves of this City of Humanity, we operate in entirely different ways, have entirely different values and have an altogether different approach to scholarship.  One side adheres to certain journalistic standards.

And neither can stand the other – how they operate, what they believe, also their foolishness.  And that is down to the elite muvvers, e.g. Tavistock, Round Tables, the ones you never hear of, who devise this constant flood of agendas to afflict the world with – see the Barcelona Declaration for an example.

Now, jump from that to one poor young lass with 52 followers who jumped into the bashing of me yesterday [so they thought], quite mindlessly as shall be explained.

I did not engage with the kid on it, nor with any of the other feminazis who jumped in, urged on by the ringleader, in fact I did not engage at all yesterday – and it went on all day.  Oh, one of the ringleaders calls himself Foetuses are not People – charming, eh?  Another calls himself “Slutty”, in solidarity, no doubt, with the woman who jumped up on the table to confront Berlusconi.

What was it all about yesterday, I don’t hear you say but shall tell you anyway.

One of my core personal themes is to be diametrically opposed to “women’s rights” as such, as presented by the UN and feminazism, also to “men’s rights”, which pretty much renders me friendless.  And as I explained in the tweet yesterday morning, using this picture below:

… I am against “women’s rights” and “men’s rights” because I am for men and women working together and not supporting divisive movements which play on the grievances of a demographic and try to pry open the fissures.  This is what Kissinger did in Rwanda and massacre followed.  Anyone read The Quiet American?

There are agents provocateurs who have got inside those movements and those people are trained, not unlike Common Purpose graduates, not unlike Demos, in how to con the sheeple, how to exacerbate division.

To that end, one particular man, not woman, had a group which I think is called Support Women and naturally, feminist leaning women, often not activists, together with the naive pussified males who virtue signal their support for “women’s rights” they swarmed to this like fireflies.

He’d trawled through my blog for anything he could use, not unlike Peter Hain in 2010 in order to call me a dangerous rightwing extremist.  The comment Hain used at the time was “the mosques will have to come down” and of course, it was taken out of the context of the whole post, which had followed a debate with a figure in the MCB whom I’d given rebuttal time to.  Quite extremist of me, that.

Hain ignored all that though, didn’t he?  Natch.

So this toerag yesterday had found a post of mine on feminazi women, entirely failing to understand that I was referring to the “modern” self-entitled, victimhood moaner, the wearer of pink pussies on necks during marches … and my language was scathing.

But my view of Deplorable women is entirely different.  This is typical of the gals I hobnob with on Twitter:

Or this:

Or this:

And that is what I was referring to.

But that was not what sent the Leftists out of their heads, it was my statement that Men and Women working together for real are the most powerful force known. If you need proof of that, look at the Italian result or look at us on our side of social media. A most powerful force when we’re not divided.

This clown had taken a couple of paragraphs of mine out of context, so now, here is the context:

Back when the post was written, there had been an issue that day of the halal method of slaughter, plus there’d been a pussy march, maybe in Washington.  I made the comment that why did the feminazis not address something important, like halal instead of imagined wrongs, long ago addressed?

This of course is not how this toerag presented it – he presented it that I’d drawn parallels between women and halal chickens.  You see the picture, you see where this is now going.  You see the use to which this is now going to be put.

Shorn of any context, and placed on a large traffic site, what were any of the feminazis and less gung-ho feminist women to conclude? And did even one of them bother to explore it?

And that was the subject of their attacks the whole day, with feminist after feminist quoting this bit only, entirely missing the point I’ve made in this post, about men and women.

But the toerag didn’t stop there.  He hashtagged my name beside his site’s and so, every comment made by one of these silly feminists also cced to me – very clever.  So all day I was getting this c**p coming through to notifications among my regular notifications, which fortunately swamped these “Support Women” people.

And every one of those deluded females went straight for the halal chicken bit and not at all about what I’d actually said. Natch.

Until just before bed when this came through, the first one actually addressed to me personally:

My responses: 1) True. Men and women should work together, but to fight for each other’s rights. 2) Ugh. Here we go. 3) What are you talking about? 4) All right. I’m done with you.

I’ve not a clue what those four points were but I can guess the first one.  As I did not write any of this clown’s strawmen, there’s not a lot I can do.  Ther eis no right of reply, natch.

This one just quoted essentially agrees with what I was saying about men and women, with one important difference.

And that difference is that he urges men to support the quite artificial and divisive “women’s rights” rubbish which has come down from above and seems oh so reasonable whilst not being so, and ditto with “men’s rights”.  Because however legitimate the grievances, there will never be any coming together as long as these muvvers above at Tavistock House, the UN, wherever, continue to suck people in.

It’s the oldest trick in the book, millennia old – to come in and play on a point of ire between two groups and then sit back to see the slaughter begin.  So no, all that bleating bleeding heart was doing in supporting “women’s rights” is to perpetuate “sides” and division.

Men and women had a hard enough job getting along even before this highly corrosive and inflammatory agenda was visited upon us.


I did not engage with any of them, nor shall I and I’ll continue to get along with the sane men and also women in blogs and on twitter, the Kassandras and Julias and Goodnight Viennas and we’ll all, together, continue to push the Deplorable cause and attempt to bring some factuality back into public life, exposing humbug along the way.

And we do seem to be making inroads here and there, though the enemy still holds almost all the cards.

4 comments for “Of feminazis and halal chickens

  1. Errol
    March 6, 2018 at 8:35 pm

    What I found quite funny, but also so, so sad was the Guardian rentamob complaining the DUP were just like the authoritarian religious movement in the TV show ‘The Handmaid’s tale’ yet before their very eyes, their own beloved muslims are happily carrying out FGM.

    It is quite ludicrous to the point of laughing out loud at how far they are up their own backsides.

    The link: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jun/11/the-handmaids-tale-recap-episode-three-the-most-brutal-yet

    • March 8, 2018 at 12:28 pm

      They live in a rarified world.

      • Ted Treen
        March 8, 2018 at 11:52 pm

        Whichever world it is, it sure as hell isn’t the one in which I live.

  2. March 9, 2018 at 1:01 am

    “Tis a Game called “Let’s you and him fight’.

Leave a Reply to Ted Treen Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *