Showing posts with label Russell Brand. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russell Brand. Show all posts

Sunday, 27 October 2013

Brand: The Attacks Begin

Brand is sleeping with Princess Diana's Sister.

I felt an immense affinity with comedian and would-be revolutionary vanguardist Russell Brand as I watched his BBC Newsnight interview with dismissive interlocutor Jeremy Paxman. In a highly public forum, Brand ran the frustrating gauntlet of explaining the very basic tenets of radical politics to a defender of the status quo. It’s a maddening position to occupy — as Brand’s intensifying eyes and harried stares at Paxman evidenced — and it’s a position all too familiar for those of us who have ever identified with anarchism or a radical politics that refuses a predefined program.
Like Brand, I don’t vote (I’m British, but even if I were American, I wouldn’t). Like Brand, I will not give my mandate to this festering quagmire of a corporate political system (any more than living in it already demands, that is). A thorough anti-voting argument is beyond the remit of these paragraphs; suffice to say there are other ways and hows to enact politics. And, like Brand, I refuse to say what I propose instead when badgered by staunch defenders of capitalism. Brand patiently explained to his pompous interviewer that, no, we can’t offer you a pragmatic alternative program — we’re too entrenched in the ideology of the current one. We have to live, act, think differently, dissentfully, for new politics to emerge. I’m simplifying, of course. But the point is, I’ve learned to leave conversations when the “what do you propose instead?” question is posed to me qua anti-capitalist. If you had a blood-sucking monster on your face, I wouldn’t ask you what I should put there instead. I’d vanquish the blood-sucking monster. And it seems Brand is committed to do the same.
I have no interest in a detailed discourse on the comedian’s radical politics as expounded in his editorial essay this week in British left-leaning news magazine the New Statesman. He’s not a theorist, he’s a well-intentioned, wildly famous performer with a “fuck this” attitude and some really nice thoughts; he’s self-aware and self-deprecating. He’d probably even be there on the barricades pushing off riot cops. And that means something to me and a number of my comrades (yes, comrades; deal with it). But, no, I’m not jumping wholeheartedly on this Brand-wagon. The reasons are two-fold:
Firstly, if we want to challenge an inherently hierarchical political framework, we probably don’t want to start by jumping on the (likely purple velvet) coattails of a mega-celeb with fountains of charisma and something all too messianic in his swagger. “No gods, No masters,” after all. Brand is navigating the well-worn conflict facing those with a public platform in the current epoch (myself among them): We have to be willing to obliterate our own elevated platforms, our own spaces of celebrity; this grotesque politico-socio-economic situation that vagariously elevates a few voices and silences many millions is what Brand is posturing against. Would he be willing to destroy himself — as celebrity, as leader, as “Russell Brand”? I think he’d struggle, but I don’t really know the guy.
But beyond this — the general furor and excitement around famous-person Russell Brand saying not-dumb political things on TV should give us pause for thought. If we’re so damn excited to hear these ideas in (in their slightly haphazard form) from a boisterous celebrity, then clearly we have some idolatry and “Great Man” hangups to address (lest we reinstate a monarchy with Brand as sovereign, Kanye as chief advisor). Everything Brand has said, I’ve heard before, especially since Occupy’s 2011 heyday; the radical suggestion that, yes, “Shit is fucked up, and bullshit,” was not first uttered by Brand and should not be more exciting nor appealing by virtue of emerging from his cheeky smile. As has often been pointed out, there is a constant conflict at play when radical or militant ideas or images enter the popular imaginary under capitalism (I’ve noted the example here before of a riot scene in a Jay-Z/Kanye music video): At the same time radical ideas might spread and resonate across mainstream and pop media platforms (and thus provide the potential for rupture), these ideas and images are recuperated immediately into capital. Brand calls for revolution, and online media traffic bounces, magazines sell, bloggers like me respond, advertisers smile, Brand’s popularity/notoriety surges, the rich, as ever, get richer.
Secondly, and more immediately worthy of attention given current Brand fever: His framing of women is nothing short of the most archetypal misogyny. I’m not asking Brand to be perfect, but I am asking that we temper celebrations of him according to his very pronounced flaws. Writer Musa Okwonga, responding to Brand and possibly coining the term “Brandwagon” was swift to elevate feminist concerns, too often ignored in the excitement around a celebrity appearing to have good politics. Okwonga noted:
… what the writer Sarah Ditum has identified as [Brand's] “lazy sexism,” evident both in his celebrated MSNBC appearance and in the opening line of his New Statesman guest editorial. Right there, beneath a sub-heading which states that “before the world, we need to change the way we think,” Brand writes that “When I was asked to edit an issue of the New Statesman I said yes because it was a beautiful woman asking me.”
See, here’s the thing. I and others will run the risk of sounding like killjoys for pointing this out, but if you’re advocating a revolution of the way that things are being done, then it’s best not to risk alienating your feminist allies with a piece of flippant objectification in your opening sentence. It’s just not a good look.
Brand, admirably, is not proposing a program. But Okwonga is right: In our excitement for even a hint of revolutionary fervor ostensibly permeating mainstream debate, we’ve enabled misogyny and Great Man narratives to go unchecked. This is troubling ground to build if we want to fight from it. And, of course, it’s not only through this week’s Brand hagiographies that “lazy sexism” has been troublingly permitted in the name of radical politics — it’s pervasive. Take, for well-worn example, the ongoing yet baffling difficulty many supporters of WikiLeaks and pro-transparency projects seem to have with any criticism of Julian Assange; the willingness with which thousands of Assange acolytes outright rejected sexual assault claims against him. To avoid another maelstrom myself, I simply posit: It is at least logically possible for a man to both be a sexist creepbag and espouse some good political ideas and projects. I don’t mean to draw any strict equivalences between Brand and Assange. I could list a whole host of examples: Recall the viral spread of the “Stand with Rand” sentiment, when Sen. Rand Paul mounted an epic filibuster of John Brennan’s nomination to CIA director. I too stood with Rand’s critique of the Obama administration’s unchecked executive power when it comes to drone kill lists. But I don’t stand in any solidarity with the racist Kentucky Republican.
But the point of rethinking new political and social spaces together — as was felt profoundly by many of us engaged in Occupy’s headiest, fiercest days — was that we don’t need to align with, elevate, celebrate (nor indeed wholly reject or detest) any one person. Yes, we will continue to struggle against vanguardism and sexism and so many co-constitutive problems within ourselves and each other. We will fail and fail better and fail. We will struggle to know and reconstitute what “we” even really means. And I take Russell Brand at his word that he wants to fight too. This is no referendum on the comedian or his intentions. But this is no time to forgo feminism in the celebration of that which we truly don’t need — another god, or another master.

Tuesday, 16 July 2013

Johnny Rotten Vs. Monarch

"That's Dad....??!?"

The CIA's Monarch Programming takes its name from the Monarch butterfly. 

"They begin as worms (underdeveloped and new) and after the cocoon stage (programming) it is transformed into a completely different creature—a high-flying butterfly (aka the Monarch slave). 

Also, when someone is given electroshock therapy, a feeling of light-headedness occurs and the person feels like they are floating, like a butterfly."

Rotten was always ahead of the curve.

There's nothing I can't get and there's nothing I can't do.


[On the grand tour of Louis' Luxury Penthouse in Leeds, Savile welcomes his guests into his boudouir where he gestrures over to his double-bed with a flourish]

"Here we are... The Altar..!"

"....why do you call it "The Altar"..."


Louis [Jokingly]: 
"It's not where you sacrifice people, is it...? 


[Louis reaches up to examine a Charles and Di commemerative tea caddy from Savile spartan kitchen cupboard]

Charles and Diana... Who you know...Can we talk about that...?

We can talk about anything.

You... don't want to talk about that....?

You'll find out how tricky I am...!

When Louis Met Jimmy.

Monday, 15 July 2013

The Murrays of Dunblane

He's no reet i' th'heid....

DUNBLANE UNBURIED - Sandra Uttley from Spike1138 on Vimeo.

According to Andy Murray, tennis is 'fixed' and everyone on the professional circuit knows matches are being affected by gambling.

According to Andy Murray: 

"It's pretty disappointing for all the players but everyone knows it goes on."

"Sitting in the front row was Britain’s tennis-playing prime minister, David Cameron – just behind him was Alex Salmond, the Scottish first minister.

"With a referendum on Scottish independence coming up next year, both political leaders would dearly love to wrap this new sporting hero in the flag – the Scottish saltire in Salmond’s case, the Union Jack in Cameron’s case."

"Andy Murray referred to himself as the 'first British winner' in 77 years. 

"Advantage Cameron."

The politics of Andy Murray’s victory - Gideon Rachman

"Andy Murray won Wimbledon in London on 7/7. Same date and place as the London bombings, just different year. 

"He won the New York Grand slam in New York on 9/11. Same date and place as the Twin Towers, different year. 

"He was in Dunblane school on 13/3/96 when the massacre actually happened. 

"He seems to be scripted to win to mark major illuminati controlled massacres. 

"And the press are going on about how it's 77 years since a British win, just to rub in the 7/7 numbers a bit more."

Much more here: Andy Murray's career marks major Illuminati massacres

TAP - 

"Friends at local tennis club were suspicious about his win when chatting yesterday. The matches against Federer last year were very suspicious. Funny how top seeds make hasty exits from Wimbledon early in contest in recent years. 

As for Virginia Wade winning in 1977, the SIlver Jubilee, she was a very average tennis player."

Anonymous said...

"The BBC had the perfect opportunity for a propaganda push on Sunday during the Wimbledon Final. 

There was however no minutes silence for the London bombing dead, as far as I am aware, and very little mention of this. 

I wonder if this was to stop people making the connection about the dates of Murray's GS victories. 

Or is it another disrespectful arrogant gesture(non) by the Govt. 

Eveybody knows it was a false flag attack, but there was still victims, the non recognition of this speaks volumes.

 I get such a strange vibe from Murray, hard to say what, but something does not ring true."

Dunblane is on the 77th Easting on the Ordnance Survey Grid of the UK.

Its Northing is 00.

Dunblane, Elevation above sea level: 77 m

Julia said...

"Found another link for the New York win. The Wimbledon win was 77 years after the last win. 

The New York win was 116 years after the last win, according to this... 116 is 911 upside down. And 911 seems to be a good date for Scotland."

Someone has pointed out that his New York win seems to be on 10th Sept. But because it was so late in the evening, it was already the 11th Sept in the UK when he won. The media were concentrating on linking him to 911 anyway."

Andy Murray and his elder brother, Jamie, attended the Dunblane Primary School. They were on their way to the school gymnasium and survived by hiding under a desk in the headmaster's office.

"Mr and Mrs Ogilvie know that the men who regularly turned up in large flashy cars to visit Hamilton continued doing so right up to 13 March 1996. They saw them.

"Another neighbour, Cathleen Kerr gave a statement to the police that she saw Hamilton getting out of a grey saloon car on that final fateful morning. He was cheerful, she said."

The official story is that, on 13 March 1996, a mad loner called Thomas Hamilton shot dead 16 children at a primary school in Dunblane in Scotland.

The unofficial story is that Thomas Hamilton was supplying pornography, and possibly young boys, to top people including policemen and politicians; and Thomas Hamilton may have been murdered, to shut him up.

It has been suggested that Thomas Hamilton was a brainwashed patsy and that the real shooters were working for the security services. 

In the Dunblane shootings, "none of the survivors would have been able to obtain a good viewing of the gunman." 

The Murder of Thomas Hamilton | Dunblane Exposed

Glenn Harrison was a housemaster at Queen Victoria School, in Dunblane.

"He told me the (sexual abuse) was done by a clique of paedophiles connected with the school (teachers etc. and their friends) and another group of 'toffs' who visited the school and took carefully targeted boys away for weekends."

Six weeks later....

The Port Arthur massacre of 28-29 April 1996, was a killing spree in which 35 people were killed and 23 wounded, mainly at the historic Port Arthur prison colony, a popular tourist site in south-eastern Tasmania, Australia.

Martin Bryant, a mentally disabled 28-year-old from New Town, a suburb of Hobart, eventually pleaded guilty to the crimes and was given 35 life sentences without possibility of parole


Judy Murray calls him Deliciano – and it's not hard to see why. 

Posing for a photoshoot, Feliciano Lopez shows off the sporting physique and Spanish good looks which have earned him that nickname. 

But although Mrs Murray, who is divorced, has admitted to being a Lopez admirer, she'll have to put aside her crush when the 29-year-old plays her son Andy today in the quarterfinals at Wimbledon.

'I'm just one of a lot of Feliciano female fans,' 

she admitted yesterday. 

'But of course family loyalty comes into it hugely.' 

The 50-year-old said she was still recovering from the embarrassment of Murray telling Lopez: 

'My mother thinks you're beautiful.' 

Not that it stopped her tweeting about him yesterday – or swooning over him as Murray, 24, was preparing for practice. 

'He is kind of Roman god-like,' 

she told Sky Sports News.

'We were in Rome a few weeks ago and they had the god statues there and I'm sure he was there. '

Some bookmakers had me at 20/1 to wolf whistle at him. 

'Well, that's not going to happen – I don't know how to.' 

Mrs Murray let her views be known when she tweeted: 

'Oooooooooh Deliciano........looking good out there. As always. 

'It's a FeliFest at Wimbledon tmrw. Twice in one day. Too much.' 

Lopez, whose photoshoot took place before the tournament, had posted in a good-natured reply: 'I guess it's a "delifest" instead.' 

Her son obviously wishes Mrs Murray keep her attention on his game. He has joked: 'It's about time she stopped that nonsense. It makes me want to throw up.'

Andy Murray is not an attractive wee cunt.

The phrase "spare prick at a wedding" springs instantly to mind.

What should they call it...?

I can think of a good name....


Pedophilia within the British establishment

A Pie n' Mash Films Production

"How would the tiny island and its 88,000 residents hold up? They pride themselves on their traditionalism (the pound note survives here) and an independent spirit that locals refer to as the Jersey Way. The mantra, reflecting a closed community that knows how to look after itself, is credited with transforming the place from a bourgeois bucket-and-spade resort in the 50s into the oyster-shucking tax haven it is today.

So potent is the lure of the island's low-tax, non-intrusive regime that the level of wealth required of prospective settlers has risen to stratospheric levels: only those who can pay a residency fee of about £1m and show assets in excess of £20m need apply. The lucky few include racing driver Nigel Mansell, golfer Ian Woosnam, broadcaster Alan Whicker and writer Jack Higgins, as well as hundreds of reclusive tycoons, who have made the island the third richest compact community in the world, after Bermuda and Luxembourg."

2 June 2011
Attack 'devil' Liddell was Dunblane massacre survivor

Ryan Liddell was put in intensive care at Yorkhill Hospital in Glasgow suffering gunshot wounds

Dunblane man guilty of rape bid

Man slapped 'hysterical' victim

Rape bid accused 'like the devil'

Ryan Liddell's victim, a 76-year-old retired nurse, described him as a man who looked like the devil.

What the jury in his trial did not hear was that as a five-year-old child, Liddell was one of the survivors of the Dunblane Primary School massacre on 13 March 1996.

The school gym shooting spree by Thomas Hamilton killed 16 Primary One children and their teacher, and left another 12 pupils and two staff wounded.

Liddell's link to the massacre was not revealed in the trial at the High Court in Dumbarton, which ended with him being convicted of assaulting the woman with intent to rape.

However, the jury was told he was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) at the age of six and that he had sleeplessness and anxiety since childhood.

Following the massacre at his school during a gym class, Liddell was placed in intensive care at Yorkhill Hospital in Glasgow suffering gunshot wounds.

Liddell might have been left distressed and traumatised by the Dunblane massacre, but so would all the others involved, and nobody else has behaved like this”

Dr Vince Egan
Forensic psychologist:-

"He was hospitalised for more than a week while he had surgery to repair a collapsed lung and broken right arm."

Five-year-old Ryan was an only child being brought up by his mother Alison Curry. His father had died of meningitis when Liddell was a baby.

Ms Curry, a secondary teacher who had previously worked at Dunblane Primary School as a trainee, was one of the first on the scene after Hamilton appeared in the school gym.

She was in the playground on her way to meet a teacher when the shooting started.

In a newspaper interview a year later, Ms Curry said a man appeared at the gym fire exit, tried to shoot her then went back into the building to kill himself.

It was only when she ran to her son's classroom and saw piles of school uniforms that she realised Ryan had been in the gym.

She later described the attack as an "incomprehensible horror".

Troubled life
In a front page story on 13 March 1997, the anniversary of the killings, The Mirror ran a photo of a smiling six-year-old Ryan with the headline: "His smile is proof that Dunblane can face the future."

Ms Curry told the paper that although her son had healed physically, he still bore mental scars.

Liddell lived alone and his friends described him as "strange"
"He was frightened at first that the bad man might come back and get him. I had to explain that Thomas Hamilton had killed himself," she said.

"When he heard I was shot at, he had terrible nightmares. Ryan's dad died of meningitis when he was 10 months old. I think he was terrified of losing me too.

"A lot of people assume the injured children are better now, but things can never get back to normal for them."

The survivors were offered support throughout their school lives, including counselling, and psychologists were on hand when they moved up to secondary school in 2002.

However, Liddell continued to lead a troubled life.

The court heard that he had very few friends and lived alone, having fallen out with his mother and stepfather.

Even his own friends described him as "strange" and he described himself as "an idiot" and "naive".

After the verdict Dr Vince Egan, a forensic psychologist at Leicester University, said: "Liddell might have been left distressed and traumatised by the Dunblane massacre, but so would all the others involved, and nobody else has behaved like this.

"It doesn't provide any excuse for what he did to that elderly lady, and post-traumatic stress syndrome isn't going to lead to a reaction like this 15 years on.

"This is certainly the most extreme behaviour I've heard from anyone after a traumatic event."

"How's Annie...!!?"