There is this story going around about a knife attack on children in the French town of Annecy. The "hero" is some guy with backpacks, who by the descriptions of the "chase" seemed to me to be more concerned about not losing his packs than actually being mobile enough to stop the knife attacks.
The perpetrator is a described as a “Syrian refugee”; you wouldn’t think that a “refugee” would attack the people giving him sanctuary, but then again maybe he doesn’t really want to be there; maybe he just wanted to take out his “frustrations” on anyone who are fool enough to let him. He isn’t talking, but according to Reuters, “He was examined by a psychiatrist who considered that he was fit to be held in custody.” I wonder what would be considered grounds not to be held in custody.
It is a very confusing world we live in. People live in different realities where their actions are deemed “justifiable” when others deem them abominable and hypocritical. We see this “open letter” by a Nobel Prize-winning French feminist author (hey, if Bob Dylan can win the Prize for literature…) named Annie Ernaux, which was co-signed by other French “luminary” feminists and assorted hangers-on at the one-year anniversary of the Virginia trial verdict in support of Amber Heard. The letter claims it doesn’t “question” the verdict, but then goes about suggesting that it does.
According to Deadline, the letter waxes outrageous over the continued “vilification” and “ongoing online harassment” of Heard. Of course this is absolute hypocrisy; the usual “suspects” don’t really want to talk about Heard—it is just that some people (Eve Barlow) just can’t shut-up with their ridiculous ongoing accusations against Johnny Depp and supporting Heard with clearly phony and self-serving statements about how great her life is (come on now, paid for by her child’s “daddy,” Elon Musk) that are just too much not to comment on.
It goes on about how “vulnerable” women are, when in fact what we often see from the MeToo movement is that it is men who are the vulnerable prey of certain vindictive women who know that a mere accusation is sufficient to destroy someone’s life and livelihood. But the cynicism and hypocrisy goes way over the head of these people:
Much of this harassment was fueled by disinformation, misogyny, biphobia, and a monetized social media environment where a woman’s allegations of domestic violence and sexual assault were mocked for entertainment.
Do we have to go over this again and again with these willfully ignorant people? Ernaux and her cohorts must really hate being confronted with the truth. The campaign of “disinformation” has been wholly from their side, and name-calling doesn’t change that. Heard's offensive testimony was at complete odds with her smug, snide 2016 deposition that was proof enough of her own abusive personality—even before we heard those audios—and was so laughably faked (as at least one juror has already testified to believing) that why should anyone be blamed for lampooning it, as it we saw often saw on TikTok?
Why shouldn’t people comment on the phony banners being flown in support of Heard like the one below during the Hollywood writers strike that is so laughably obvious because not only do you not see the plane (which also has that "3-D" CGI look that is pasted-on to a background) during its approach (it never actually lands) with anything attached to it, but when the banner does appear it looks way too dark and starts pixelating way too early as it goes:
Meanwhile, Heard stans are proving once again that they can hardly be accused of having the moral high ground by “rejoicing” over Depp breaking his ankle, while claiming that Heard's Hollywood career revival is right around the corner, even though she hasn’t actually done any “work” in three years and has nothing even in pre-production, according to IMDB. So that is something else people can comment on with the facts at hand—no “disinformation” or “misogyny” need to be applied.
We are told that Tim Burton has decided not to cast Depp in Beetlejuice 2. We can “speculate” why; I’m not leaving out the possibility that a cast member or two is a Heard stans who doesn’t want to work with Depp. A top Disney exec, meanwhile, says that Pirates of the Caribbean will be “rebooted” to have something “new” to say, which of course means changing the demographics around. Depp’s participation is “noncommittal,” but the Daily Mail says that Depp is adamant that he won’t work for Disney again.
Meanwhile, you got this phony “news” website TheThings posting “The Truth About Evan Rachel Wood’s Private Life With Her Son After Divorcing Jamie Bell” which tells us absolutely nothing that we haven’t heard before from Wood, insisting that her son was not taken away from her by a judge because of her bizarre psychological issues, rather insisting that she “voluntarily” gave up custody “temporarily.” You want to talk about “disinformation”? It’s all coming from one particularly side.
Then you have Colonel Kurtz on the Rammstein case. I
admit I never heard of the band before, but then again I am not a fan of heavy
metal music any more than I am of rap. Apparently this is “big news” in Germany,
where the band originates. But why? The accuser never claimed that she was sexually
assaulted by a band member (he allegedly asked if she wanted to have sex with him,
and just waved her off when she demurred). She claims she "blacked out" and that is how she rationalizes that "something" could have happened--and of course you have the gender victimology types quite eager to help her fill in the blank portion of her memory.
Frankly I’m suspicious of an accuser who comes off as an attention-seeker and more than a little "odd" in the various videos of her before, during and after the concert in question. Witnesses variously claimed they saw nothing untoward by the accused, and one witness confessed to finding the accuser’s behavior off-putting and offensive. In normal times a pretentious egotist is worth no more than an eye-roll; today in these “abnormal” times, this person is being held up as “evidence.”
One other thing. Ever wonder what happened to Michele Dauber? Well, I’m not sure because we haven’t heard from her in a long time, and many have suspected that she is somehow involved in the suicide of Stanford student-athlete Katie Meyer. The most recent information on the case, according to Palo Alto Daily Post, is that a judge dismissed 6 of 8 claims made by Meyer’s parents in their wrongful death lawsuit.
Meyer allegedly deliberately spilled hot coffee on a football player, who allegedly kissed one for her teammates “without permission,” causing a burn that required medical attention. The school notified her that “she could potentially be kicked out of school and that her degree was being put on hold while the case was resolved. The Meyers said that Stanford employees failed to check on Katie even though she responded to the email saying she was 'shocked and distraught.' The Meyers said the notice caused Katie to have an acute stress reaction that led to her suicide.”
Some people, however, suspect that Dauber's habit of "intervening" in wherever she could make a case for her particularly brand of radicalized politics may have played a role in the Meyer case, accounting for her social media accounts being either shutdown or lacking in input, preventing her from making comments about the case and other issues, such as in regard to Depp (she suggested that NASA hire him to go on a “spacewalk” to Mars in which he likely admittedly would die), as well as threatening male students.
So anyways, that is the some of the stuff being seen on social media, and of course if you don't trust the mainstream media supplying the "whole" truth, you at least have alternatives you can get your news from, which at "worst" provide a different interpretation of the evidence at hand that comes out as "fact" at the other end.
No comments:
Post a Comment