frightfulhobgoblin.bsky.social
Sometimes antisocial but always antifascist
🟥 Libertarian communist
🦋♾️ AuDHD
🚻 he/him
🏳️⚧️ Trans liberation
🇵🇸 Palestinian liberation
⚒️ Working-class liberation
6,247 posts
1,230 followers
481 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
You dug through *four months* of this guys tweets to find... that?
Extremely weird.
comment in response to
post
If you look up bald in the dictionary, it's a picture of you.
comment in response to
post
Herman and Chomsky wrote a book about this called Manufacturing Consent three decades ago, Wancil.
comment in response to
post
Asine, bald comment.
comment in response to
post
You're seeing correlation (convergence on a pro-Zionist political position for their own cynical reasons) and declaring correlation (that Starmer is an Israeli asset; that he is 'owned' by Israel etc).
There is absolutely a functional difference. For one, there is no conspiracy of powerful Jews.
comment in response to
post
In other news: Witchfinder General Matthew Hopkins appointed to pursue the very real problem of people being turned into newts.
If a Labour government is implimenting fascist policy anyway, what alternative do they pose to Reform?
The same except without nationalised water.
comment in response to
post
Extremely bald.
comment in response to
post
Bald.
comment in response to
post
Stalin, Mao and Kim Jong-Il watching this like:
comment in response to
post
Newsflash: it's an extremely silly and transparently ridiculous point.
comment in response to
post
OP's original contention was that Starmer is 'owned' by Israeli intelligence. This is usually explained by appealing to some donations made by pro-Zionists. Now you're claiming he does Israel's bidding because... He wants to go to dinner parties? It's all very thin, isn't it?
comment in response to
post
What does that have to do with 'the Israel lobby'? Those sources of patronage are overwhelmingly white, British, domestic, conservative state elites. Not 'foreign Jews'.
comment in response to
post
That shit doesn't fly here mate.
comment in response to
post
It is neither his exclusive nor even a particularly significant source of funding.
He supports Zionism because he's an awful right wing islamophobic imperialist bigot. Not because The Jews Made Him Do It.
comment in response to
post
I wonder how many Chinese lobbying firms donated to Starmer's cabinet members?
I'd bet you it's more.
But are you here whining about how Starmer's 'owned by the China lobby'? No. Because the point is ✨rebranded antisemitism✨
comment in response to
post
Starmer would be vocally pro-Zionist regardless. There is a degree of pro-Zionist lobbying that takes place - as there is for every state interest in the UK. It determines the shape, not the fact, of his support.
Idk what you're implying, that Mossad would execute him if he didn't? Daft.
comment in response to
post
Starmer looking at the precedent set by Cameron's consultative votes around Syria which forced non-intervention:
comment in response to
post
Israel doesn't 'own' Starmer. Boring rebranded antisemitic conspiracy theory. Starmer supports Israel for entirely cynical geopolitical and domestic reasons.
comment in response to
post
You literally made directly transphobic comments, sir. You said 'trans people are single issue people', we all know what that means. I tried to draw your attention to your hypocrisy by making a comparison you might understand.
Sorry you're offended when your own words are quoted back to you.
comment in response to
post
This also includes the securitised, digitised, AI-fascism embraced by Starmer's government - future historians will not distinguish between those who goose-stepped in person and those who outsourced their goose-stepping to computer algorithms and dawn police raids.
comment in response to
post
So your thesis is that Black people deserve more rights and respect than trans people?
Explain, in detail.
comment in response to
post
Would you say a Black person complaining of racism is a 'single issue person'?
Who am I kidding, you pasty white mf, of course you would.
comment in response to
post
You've literally got AI fake image as your pfp. Take media literacy classes please Mr Johnson.
comment in response to
post
(The answer being, of course, that motivations are always relevant when the arbiters of public opinion are searching for exculpatory reason to acquit one of their own. The rules only really apply to outgroups.)
comment in response to
post
So what you're telling me is that capitalism sucks even worse?
comment in response to
post
The founding fathers were literal slave owners, Gavin, they would be *enthusiastic* about using military force to roll back a multi racial democracy.
Liberal nationalist mythology is the height of cringe.