Our Compelling Witness!

Thousands upon thousands of Survivors of childhood sexual abuse could have written…

Calcified Corporatists: Dems Out-Lefted by Trump on Healthcare

The Democrats have placed on glaring display their lack of self-awareness as…

Ideology no longer rules

By 2353NM  As the superannuation advertising says — compare the pair. Alan Jones…

When we come out the other side of…

My father always said every experience in life, good or bad, teaches…

Coronavirus Socialism for the Wealthy

When capitalism screeches to a halt and starts its old business of…

COVID-19 child care crisis

By Melissa Underwood  I am writing to request your urgent assistance to ensure…

A Serf in the time of plague ...

Greetings, and salutations on vellum even, to my fellow manorial slaves. There…

University Bailouts, Funding and Coronavirus

In a set of stable circumstances, funding higher education should be a…


Media breaks silence over Yemen

“The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i) – Nuremberg principles 

I had to do a double take today when a story appeared in my newsfeed from the Guardian, titled “Questions mount over botched Yemen raid approved by Trump”. Seriously, since when does the liberal press give a god damn about Yemen? Apparently since Hillary lost the election it is now safe to talk about this monstrous war, which would have surely continued regardless of who was commander in chief.

Let’s recap.

Billed as yet another in a long line of “civil wars” sparked by the “Arab Spring”, the Saudi led invasion of Yemen has been met with resounding silence by the Western press. Typically, the war has involved the use of banned weapons and the targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, including not just roads, electricity and water, but homes and farms. These are war crimes by any measure, and while the official death toll so far is estimated to exceed at 10 000 plus 40 000 injured, a systematic blockade on food, fuel and aid means that 21 million Yemenis are now in need of humanitarian assistance. It is reported that a child dies in Yemen every 10 minutes of starvation or malnutrition.

Where the six year war in Syria has been acknowledged by the West as a regime change operation, the notional purpose of the campaign in Yemen has been to reinstate “legitimacy”, i.e., to restore the US-friendly government which was recently ousted by Shia Houthi rebels with the support of the majority of Yemen’s armed forces. ‘Restoration’, accompanied by the requisite changes to the Yemeni constitution would leave the “empty quarter” of the Arabian Peninsula, and significant oil and gas reserves in the Rub’ al Khali desert, under the effective control of the Gulf Cooperation Council. In short, this is just another case of Americans, British and French displaying their arrogant disregard for human life in the pursuit of empire.

Glenn Greenwald writes:

“In 2010, President Obama directed the CIA to assassinate an American citizen in Yemen, Anwar al-Awlaki, despite the fact that he had never been charged with (let alone convicted of) any crime, and the agency successfully carried out that order a year later with a September 2011 drone strike…Two weeks after the killing of Awlaki, a separate CIA drone strike in Yemen killed his 16-year-old American-born son, Abdulrahman, along with the boy’s 17-year-old cousin and several other innocent Yemenis. The U.S. eventually claimed that the boy was not their target but merely “collateral damage.””

Like much of the Nobel Peace laureate’s ironic legacy, the above mentioned incident received very little press at the time. What some might describe as reckless criminality, for example the murder of 35 innocent women and children using cluster munitions, appears to be perfectly acceptable when you’re following “due process” – never mind that this process may be little more than ready-aim-fire.

Five days ago US Navy Seal Team 6, using armed reaper drones for cover, carried out a raid on the heavily guarded home of an alleged al Qaeda collaborator in a mountainous village in remote central Yemen, killing 30 civilians, including at least eight women and seven children, ages 3 to 13. Among those killed was Anwar Awlaki’s 8-year-old daughter Nawar, who was shot through the neck and left to bleed to death. The raid had evidently been planned months in advance by Obama’s officialdom, but left for the incoming POTUS to approve and sign off on.

So why all the fuss? This war has been going on for years. Why has it suddenly become newsworthy?

Greenwald goes on to cite the late Yemeni writer Ibrahim Mothana, who told Congress in 2013:

“Drone strikes are causing more and more Yemenis to hate America and join radical militants. Unfortunately, liberal voices in the United States are largely ignoring, if not condoning, civilian deaths and extrajudicial killings in Yemen… During George W. Bush’s presidency, the rage would have been tremendous. But today there is little outcry, even though what is happening is in many ways an escalation of Mr. Bush’s policies.”

When it comes to war and peace, the left was silent under Obama, just as it was under Clinton in the 90s. Remember Yugoslavia? Sudan? Haiti? For eight years there has been no one to protest the starvation of Yemen, just as no one protested the coups in Ukraine and Honduras, the destruction of Libya, or the dirty war against Syria. All of this was conveniently swept aside by the liberal press while we celebrated gay marriage equality and insisted that black lives matter. Can you imagine if any of these war crimes had happened under Bush 43? I can. I was there in 2003 when we marched and burned flags in one of the biggest anti-war demonstrations in history.

The monstrous atrocities perpetrated under the guise of the War in Terror have been part of a political continuum which existed long before the inauguration of Donald Trump, Barack Obama or George W Bush. Make no mistake, Trump is evil, but there is something refreshingly authentic in his manner compared to the suave yet sinister Obama who pursued exactly the same policies, but with apparent grace and charm. I am reminded of this quote from historian Carroll Quigley:

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy… Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”

It’s easy to scoff and jeer at the women’s march – literally nothing but an outpouring of politically correct outrage. It’s easy to call out the hypocrisy of Trump’s travel ban on people from seven Muslim countries which the US has either threatened or directly attacked in support of the genocidal Saudi regime. But when it comes to protesting war I am the first to acknowledge we must all rally to the call. I suppose we should be grateful that the anti-war left has finally begun to stir from its 8 year hibernation, but we must also tread carefully. It’s important that we don’t allow our protest to be co-opted by liberals who have proven time and again that they stand for nothing; who would have eagerly embraced the warmongering Clinton and said not a word when she continued to prosecute the same foreign policy agenda as her predecessor. This is not about Trump. It’s about the whole rotten political establishment.

A final word of caution. Of course one should always call out hypocrisy wherever it is found, but when approaching liberal lefties, it is wise to exercise care and restraint. As tempting as it is to poke and prod, such creatures tend not to like having their darling little feathers ruffled, and have been known to attack viciously.


Login here Register here
  1. Florence nee Fedup

    I believe the raid wasn’t arranged by Obama. According to one at meetings a wide ranging proposition was put to them. Not individual action. Maybe Trump jumped the gun.

  2. Steve Laing

    Whilst in no way being an apologist for any such behaviour, can you shed any light as to who was President when these US operations started? It is one thing to start a conflict, quite another to dealing with the shit that your predecessor left behind – quite often a damned if you do and damned if you don’t scenario. And Dubya sure left a lot of shit behind.

  3. bobrafto

    Merchants of death and who stands to profit? Oil companies?

  4. Sean Stinson

    Steve, the War on Terror, tho not always known as such, has been active since the Carter administration first began arming the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, and was in all likelihood masterminded by George HW Bush back when he was CIA director under Gerald Ford. From then it was a matter of just biding his time. There’s certainly evidence to suggest that the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq had been planned by Paul Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby back in 1991. That’s what I mean by “continuum”. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

  5. Kaye Lee

    “Seriously, since when does the liberal press give a god damn about Yemen?” “the Saudi led invasion of Yemen has been met with resounding silence by the Western press. ”

    I don’t think you read the liberal media Sean. They have been reporting on Yemen for quite a while. A couple of examples pre-Trump:

    The UN human rights chief has accused the Saudi-led coalition of causing twice as many civilian casualties as all the other forces fighting in Yemen.


    a US navy destroyer fired a barrage of cruise missiles at three radar sites controlled by the rebel Houthi movement in Yemen. This attack marked the first time the US has fought the rebels directly in Yemen’s devastating civil war.


    Saudi Arabia is leading a military campaign against Shiite rebels in Yemen, bringing the wider region directly into a complex conflict that has festered for months.


    Anwar al-Awlaki was also extensively reported on. It is interesting that the FBI employed the same tactic against him as the Russians allegedly did with Trump – even though they didn’t use it, it seems they threatened to.


    “This is not about Trump. It’s about the whole rotten political establishment.”

    Maybe…but focusing on Trump right now is important. Laying past blame for the Middle East is an endless and circuitous task with plenty to hand out to many players.

    To call Trump “refreshingly authentic” is alarming in itself. It shows you seem unwilling to actually look at what he is saying and doing in your never-ending obsession with Clinton and Obama. Hold him to the same account. Scrutiny of the present is far more important right now. Trump is liable to do anything. He has already said that he expects war between Saudi-Arabia and Iran and that he will back the Saudis. Yemen is the cage match for that so far and Trump has put Iran on notice and imposed sanctions – how much further is Trump prepared to go? How will he react if provoked? Pretty much every arms manufacturing country is selling to the Saudis. Can they be convinced to stop? Will Russia side with Iran?

    That propaganda group that you hate, Medicins sans Frontieres. has also been desperately trying to get out the message about Yemen


  6. Sean Stinson

    So you do not agree that Yemen has been under reported? Because that is certainly my read. Perhaps we need our own independent fact checker.

    Of course I hold Trump to account. As usual you completely ignore, or choose to overlook, the whole effing point of my argument – that democrats are never held to account by the left. I am of the left, and it is natural for me to want to cast the log out of my own eye before I go complaining about the splinter in others, or however bloody saying goes. Clean up your own back yard. Or something.

  7. Kaye Lee

    Ok but history is one thing…a clear and present danger is another. It”s kinda like blaming Labor for reopening the offshore detention centres. It’s true but it doesn’t help the people stuck there now.

    I cannot speak for how widely people have read about Yemen, just that there is a shit load of reporting about it from the very sources you usually decry like MSF, Amnesty International, HRW, and publications like the Guardian and the BBC and countless others. Australia might not be up with the times. Not sure about press here.

    ” As usual you completely ignore, or choose to overlook, the whole effing point of my argument ”

    Sorry. I thought it was about Yemen. I hope I am not “ruffling your darling little feathers”

  8. Sean Stinson

    Stop editing your comments before i can reply

    Oh go ahead. Who am i to spoil your fun.

    Detention camps is a great example. What is Labor doing about them now?

    Guy Rundle wrote a scathing piece in Crikey the other day in which he flat out accused the government of practicing a deliberate policy of extermination. I don’t hear any calls the opposition benches to close the camps, and hence I can no longer support Labor.

    THAT is the nature of the beast we are dealing with.

  9. Sean Stinson

    incidentally i dot think Australia is following America in this. I think we are the vanguard. Or at least ‘prototype’. Or have we all forgotten Abbott so soon?

  10. Kaye Lee

    I can only agree about our gulags. Shorten has talked about the distress caused by Trump’s immigration and refugee ban. Trish said on a recent article “Bill Shorten will be stating with conviction that these victims are human beings. That they are workers and family people. They are the casualties of an ugly right wing populist nationalism that we don’t need here and that we don’t accept. he will clearly state these actions towards others are unacceptable and he will detail how he will oppose it and condemn it.” If only he would do that about our own shameful policies.

    Sorry for editing comments. I just keep thinking of more things. I am not doing it to annoy you.

  11. Sean Stinson

    Be my guest

    ps – I like it when we agree on stuff.

  12. Kaye Lee

    Obama was disturbed (bad word) enough about what was happening in Yemen to take some steps but they were baby ones.

    The United States has decided to limit military support to Saudi Arabia’s campaign in Yemen because of concerns over widespread civilian casualties and will halt a planned arms sale to the kingdom, U.S. officials told Reuters.

    The United States will also revamp future training of the kingdom’s air force to focus on improving Saudi targeting practices, a persistent source of concern for Washington.

    The decision reflects deep frustration within President Barack Obama’s government over Saudi Arabia’s practices in Yemen’s 20-month-old war, which has killed more than 10,000 people and sparked humanitarian crises, including chronic food shortages, in the poorest country in the Middle East.

    It could also further strain ties between Washington and Riyadh in the remaining days of Obama’s administration and put the question of Saudi-U.S. relations squarely before the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump, who takes office on Jan. 20.

    Earlier this year [2016], the U.S. military reduced the number of U.S. military personnel coordinating with the Saudi-led coalition’s air campaign, slashing it to six people from a peak of 45 personnel.

    In May, Washington suspended sales to Riyadh of cluster munitions, which release dozens of bomblets and are considered particularly dangerous to civilians.


    We agree on a lot more than you realise. I know I speak about the parts with which I diagree but surely you don’t want me to just say I agree all the time. I like our discussions when you aren’t mistrusting my motives. I like learning so I ask questions…often it is “prove it” or “how do you know that”. Annoying, I know

  13. Sean Stinson

    Here’s an interesting fact. Its not just the US supplying the Saudis. Saudi Arabia actually have more British jets than the British Air Force. Think about that.

  14. bobrafto

    A lot of feather ruffling going on here.

  15. Kaye Lee

    Not just the UK

    France: Saudi Arabia’s New Arms Dealer


    Canada defends record $11bn arms sale to Saudi Arabia in court


    Russia and Saudi Arabia: $200 Billion Dreaming


    China and Saudi Arabia’s Burgeoning Defense Ties


    Germany approves arms exports to Saudi Arabia and Oman: ministry letter


    In another corner of the Japan Aerospace 2016 show, Saudi Arabian military officers pored over military transport and patrol aircraft brochures handed out by Kawasaki Heavy Industries.


    And just for entertainment value….

    Promoting Australian defence exports has underpinned the Minister’s visits already to the United States and the Middle East and will be his key priority for his visits to Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom, France, and Austria next week.


    Christopher must have been in need of another luxury holiday.

    The Saudis have pot loads of money. Countries are clamouring for it. Trump has significant personal interests to protect. It’s a cauldron.

    bobrafto, I thought Sean and I were doing ok?

  16. Ricardo29

    I am enjoying the exchange between Kaye Lee and Sean Stinson mostly because I haven’t seen much about Yemen in the news sources I read (also ive been out if the country fir a month) butI am one of those lefties you disparage, but not one who is unable to see the evils you say we condine. For example I want our gulags closed, I want Labor to accept its role in their existence and instead of supporting the pathetic deal Malcolm is pushing, bite the bullet and commit to bringing them here. Such views dont get much traction in the MSM. Regarding Yemen, it seems to be just another in the many rotten conflicts the warmongerers of the US have initiated or supported around the world in protecting their oil cartels. Had Bernie Sanders been elected we might have seen some change. I was never a supporter of Clinton and the fact that we have Trump is a classic own goal by the corrupt Democratic National Committee. Don’t generalise about lefties.

  17. Sean Stinson


    Nothing is new. The DNC pulled exactly the same stunt back in ’44 when they stole the VP nomination from Henry Wallace and put Truman on the ticket. Truman, as you might recall, officiated over the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Wallace would never have allowed this atrocity, and I’m yet to find a historian who would argue differently.

  18. Roswell

    Kaye, I think your comment was caught up due to the number of links in it.

  19. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, You quote Carroll Quigley: ‘The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy… ‘ You’ve quoted this before, quite recently. What kind of rubbish is this? The parties should be almost identical..’? Good grief – the parties are what they are. They represent groups within the community. Should they not do that? The word ‘should’ in this context is plainly ridiculous.

    You also say, ‘It’s easy to scoff and jeer at the Women’s March – literally nothing but an outpouring of politically correct outrage.’ Easy for YOU, Sean, and easy for Trump, but I find nothing to scoff about, and everything to applaud about the Women’s March. Plenty to be outraged about, though, in your ignorant, misogynistic remark.

    About the dearth of information you complain of – I have a Google Alert for Yemen that updates daily – oceans of information! Far more than I rightly know how to deal with on a daily basis.

  20. Kate Ahearne

    Ricardo 29. Yemen is the poorest country in the region. It never did have very much oil. When I was there in 2011, the oil was predicted to run out n 2015. So the US is not protecting oil interests IN Yemen. They’re not worth protecting.

  21. Kaye Lee

    Was it? I am too busy talking to notice 🙂 Thanks for fixing it.

    Ricardo, I am not sure Yemen is a US initiated war – enabled yes…but everyone is enabling it by selling the Saudis weapons.

    “The Saudi-led coalition has attacked the positions of the Houthi militia and loyalists of the former President of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh, which are supported by Iran, in response to a request from the internationally-recognized but domestically opposed government of President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi.”

    Trump says Iran wants the Saudis’ oil.

    I am surpirised at Sean’s support for an insurrection against the recognised government considering how he feels about Syria.

  22. Roswell

    Sean, historians don’t win wars.

    The decision to drop the bombs wasn’t the only option. The other option was to invade Japan, but the expected loss of American lives was too great to risk putting troops on the ground.

    Don’t quote me, but the expected loss of American lives was in the vicinity of 250,000. (I’ll have to check that).

  23. Kaye Lee

    kate, I ignored the gratuitous dismissal of the Womens’ march. But I shouldn’t.

    Men must be made to understand the visceral affinity women feel for their sisters suffering subjugation, discrimination, personal violence, sexual abuse, poverty, and all the responsibility for rearing children they may not have felt able to support. Society expects a lot from women and men should recognise the economic benefits our entry into the workforce have given them all.

    They must understand how women must be given rights over their own body.

    They must recognise the struggle we have fought and how we remain ever vigilant against attacks on our right to have opportunity and choice,.

    No Mr President…I would not appreciate being groped by you regardless of how famous you may think you are. Passing that off as “locker room talk” is kinda funny considering I doubt you have ever seen the inside of one. My father, husband and son all played representative rugby. They would NEVER entertain such a thought let alone brag about doing it. That is NOT ok. And it is not your right to decide whether I may have an abortion or who I may marry so don’t even try to send us back there.

  24. Rinaldo

    “………..The article about the Yemeni raid describes the decision-making process and the horrible consequences:
    “With two of his closest advisers, Jared Kushner and Stephen K. Bannon, joining the dinner at the White House along with Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., Mr. Trump approved sending in the Navy’s SEAL Team 6…
    Vice President Mike Pence and Michael T. Flynn, the national security adviser, also attended the dinner.As it turned out, almost everything that could go wrong did. And on Wednesday, Mr. Trump flew to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to be present as the body of the American commando killed in the raid was returned home, the first military death on the new commander in chief’s watch
    The raid also destroyed much of the village of Yakla, and left senior Yemeni government officials seething. Yemen’s foreign minister, Abdul Malik Al Mekhlafi, condemned the raid on Monday in a post on his official Twitter account as “extrajudicial killings.”
    Congratulations OM. You are now officially a member of the distinguished Presidential Murderers Club. Are you proud of having signed the order which blew up of a village, killed a handful of women and children, created a new batch of traumatized Yemeni refugees — all as you cracked jokes at a prayer breakfast? Same sick and twisted stuff that Obongo and Bush used to get away with. Orange Man has shed innocent blood and no amount of entertaining liberal-bashing, tax cuts or wall-building can fully compensate for that — at least not in our eyes and souls. ………..”

  25. Sean Stinson


    The other option was to do nothing and Japan would have surrendered within a couple of weeks. Unfortunately they would have surrendered TO RUSSIA, which neither Churchill, nor whoever was running the US at the time (the office of POTUS was well above the rookie Truman’s pay grade) wanted.

    Also, they needed to test out their new toys. Cynical I know, but the results were impressive.


    FFS. I am not advocating this stuff. Critical thinking please. Must be read “against the grain”. This is exactly what Quigley wrote in 1966, and exactly how the US political system of coin-operated serf-farms is designed to work. It’s also the reason why approximately a third of Tragedy and Hope was redacted from print until recently. I am fortunate enough to have the complete version in hard cover.

  26. Sean Stinson


    Awful isn’t it?

    Far and away the most barbaric, murderous regime on earth, and yet everyone is bending over backwards to supply them with arms.

    Tillerson’s appointment will be one to watch. A possible game changer. I hesitate to put my ideas forward in this forum (haha, yep, i have even crazier theories than the ones i write about) but regime change in Saudi Arabia is not out of the question. New, intensive extraction techniques (twice as environmentally destructive) means the US can now match the Saudi oil price by basically burning rocks. The Shanghai Gold Exchange is the last nail in the coffin of the petrodollar (China is the worlds second biggest oil consumer) – but the clincher is this – the US, for all intents and purposes, is now directly owned and operated by Exxon.

    Does not bode well for the environment, but first things first. A new US/Russia oil deal could be the end of both the petrodollar AND the Saudis. Might sound farfetched, but it wasn’t that long ago you couldn’t buy a stake in Russian oil production. So when Trump says he is going to cooperate with Russia to wipe out ISIS, he may mean business. On his first day in the office he spoke for an hour with Sisi, supposedly about dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

    This could be a new chapter in US foreign policy, depending on Trump and his handlers’ (I am not so naive as to think he got there by himself) ability to rein in the CIA.

    My guess is the military-industrial complex will still hold sway, but I don’t think we are going to see war with Iran any time soon. I am however deeply concerned about Venezuela. The one to watch tho, in my opinion, is Ukraine. Poroshenko may try to start a war to test Trump’s loyalty.

  27. Kate Ahearne

    Kaye, Thanks for those remarks about the Women’s March. It troubles me deeply that the millions of women who marched,. and the countless others they represented who didn’t or couldn’t march, should be dismissed in the way that Sean has dismissed them/us.

  28. Sean Stinson

    Kate, KL. If the Women’s march had been about Roe vs Wade I would have gone out and marched myself. When it’s a bunch of women parading with knitted vaginas on their heads holding up signs saying “this pussy grabs back” – that’s not a protest, it’s a parade.

    It was a flippant remark which I should have couched in better terms, and I am truly sorry if my words caused offence.

    btw, I believe Russia has all but eliminated the gender pay gap and now has something like 47% of executive positions filled by women. Not perfect, but it’s better than capitalism has achieved. You can thank Lenin for that 😉

  29. Roswell

    Sean, tell me, do you think it better if Japan had have been invaded by Russia and have them live under Communist rule?

    I hope you don’t think so. I really do.

  30. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, the women who marched were not a homogeneous group. There were as many individual perspectives as there were women who marched. For instance, roughly what percentage of those women do you reckon were carrying placards saying, ‘This pussy grabs back’? As many as one percent, would you say? More? Not that many? And those vaginas that some women were wearing on their heads, honestly, Sean, it never occurred to me that they were vaginas. I thought they were pink, to designate that the march was about women, by women and for women. And I thought the ears referred to pussycat ears – a reference to Trump’s ‘pussy’ remarks, certainly. But actual representational vaginas? I’ve just been looking at the hats, and I honestly can’t see vaginas. And looking at some of the photos of the women who marched, I find it impossible to believe that some of those women would have been wearing the pink hats if they thought they were wearing vaginas.

    You say, ‘It was a flippant remark which I should have couched in better terms, and I am truly sorry if my words caused offence.’ No, it’s not a remark that you ‘should have couched in better terms’. It’s a remark that needed never to have been made. You do a lot of this sort of thing, Sean – tossed-off remarks that undermine your credibility. I’d really like to accept your apology, but from what you say,you don’t seem to understand the nature of the offence that was given.

  31. Sean Stinson


    you can’t please everyone, and maybe there are some people you can never please.

    re Yemeni oil which you questioned me on before? there is a massive oil and gas prospect in the Yemeni sector of the Rub’ al Khali. The Saudis also want to secure the port of Aden, and build a bridge connecting al Noor in Yemen with al Noor in Djibuti which will link Ethiopia into their oil empire.

  32. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    regarding the Women’s Marches, even knitted vaginas on women’s heads make statements about how women expect they should lead the conversation rather than be objectified by it.

    Your earlier articles have made me more aware of which Muslim countries are under-scrutinised by the MSM and why that might be the case. Yemen has been subjected to human rights abuses which seem to go under-reported.

    As for your identification of “the liberal left” and their “easily ruffled feathers”, I would dare to suggest that they are not truly the Left, especially if they were supporters of Clinton and the DNC power machine. They are Neoliberalist Centralists which makes them not quite as repugnant as the Neoliberalist Republicans.

  33. Kate Ahearne

    Kaye, Yes, the women who marched were marching for everyone.

  34. Sean Stinson


    Interesting hypothetical question.

    I’d argue from geographic determinism. Japan is pretty remote, so far as both empires are concerned.

    It’s July 1945. The bombs have not been dropped.

    Would Japan have “fallen to communism”? Alternately, would there have been no Cold War?

    There was already a strong socialist movement in Japan. Going out on a limb here, but my hypothesis is Stalin would have kicked the fascists out of Japan and left them to their own affairs.

    So maybe, instead of a “wall” in Berlin, Japan could have become a “bridge” across the Pacific.

    Ask a hypothetical question, get a hypothetical answer…

  35. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    If so, Sean,

    the World lost a wonderful opportunity.

  36. wam

    if you knew anything about japan you would hypothesize that the bridge was there for the taking, in the first world war but little black, slope eyed asians were not welcome in europe in 1919.

    Who gives a f*ck what women believe when they worship a male god who at best made them unclean to destroy any semblance of equality and at worst forgives and rewards men who kill them and their children.

  37. Kate Ahearne

    Wam, What an ignorant and disgusting remark.

  38. Kaye Lee

    Whilst I may not have phrased it that way, I agree with wam that religions were designed to subjugate women.

  39. michael lacey

    “Seriously, since when does the liberal press give a god damn about Yemen? Apparently since Hillary lost the election it is now safe to talk about this monstrous war, which would have surely continued regardless of who was commander in chief.”

    Totally agree suddenly it is an item when before total silence the war in Yemen has been a disgrace and the mainstream media reached another low in its coverage!
    Yemen has been grossly under reported and looking at some of the comments it is obvious people do not delve too seriously into alternative media!

  40. Kaye Lee

    michael lacy,

    There has been a lot of reporting on Yemen. I provided a link to a few articles before but there are literally thousands and you do not need to go to alternative media to find them.

    It mightn’t feature in the Daily Telegraph in Australia or on Ray Hadley’s 2GB but it certainly has been widely reported.






  41. Kate Ahearne

    Kaye, for once I have found a response from you inadequate. A rare event. It is true what you say about religions, but it’s not the point, is it? Wam’s remark was misogynistic, no ifs, no buts. I, for one, do care what women believe.

    Wam, I might just as easily say, ‘Who gives a f*ck what’ men ‘believe when they worship a male god who at best made’ women ‘unclean to destroy any semblance of equality and at worst forgives and rewards men who kill them and their children.’ But I do care what men think.

    Men who write women off in the way you have done always have an excellent reason for doing it – excellent to them, at least.

  42. Rinaldo

    “…………..So allow us to conclude with one more (two-pronged) inquiry: Will Donald J. Trump drain the Zio-swamp? Or Will The Zio-swamp drain Donald J. Trump? If the opening days of the Oompa Loompa President’s reign are any indication, from the attacks on Yemen to the transfer of heavy vehicles to “Syrian” opposition forces, the new aggression against the people of Eastern Ukraine (Donbass) to the fresh sanctions on Iran, the bellicosity towards China to the propaganda against Russia over the liberation of Crimea at the UN, it should be rather clear. Whether Trump is “Hope and Change” 2.0 with a populist/nationalist twist remains to be seen. Only time will tell, obviously. But the six-pointed-star-stamped evidence presented herein speaks volumes. And as much optimism as there might’ve been, it’s simply too damn loud to be drowned out any longer by Trump’s usual amusing soundbites.

  43. Sean Stinson


    Interesting source. Very outside-the-box. 🙂

  44. Sean Stinson

    Kate, Kaye, I think I’ve figured it out. For my next post I will write about Oompa Loompas. Maybe this will lead to a discussion around the crimes of empire, who the real criminals are, and how to bring about revolution.

  45. Sean Stinson

    “Calling it a “Women’s March” (a) imbued it with a grassroots aura, (b) obscured the larger power struggle between the neoliberal establishment and the neo-nationalist Trump regime, and (c) rendered it impossible to criticize without coming off as a misogynist creep. What kind of monster, after all, would want to criticize millions of women dressed as vaginas and other reproductive organs for “being proactive about women’s rights,” and “joining in their diversity,” and so on, because they accidentally happened to organize their protests in a way that perfectly aligned with the aims of the global neoliberal establishment, which is relentlessly delegitimizing Trump for reasons that have nothing to do with women? Imagine, if they had called it a “Liberals’ March,” or a “Deep State March,” or a “March to Restore the Democrats to Power as Soon as Possible.” It wouldn’t have been anywhere nearly as effective, in terms of framing the official narrative.” – C.J.Hopkins

  46. Kaye Lee

    Excuse me if I think your “fearless muckraker’s” opinion is crap. Women all over the world marched for different personal reasons and what men think of that is, quite frankly, irrelevant. The patronising putdowns, the dripping condescension, the complete failure to recognise the struggle women endure shows we still have a very long way to go before we make them understand.

    Their concerns aren’t valid when we have war to talk about? Is that it?

    I had not thought you such a stereotype Sean. Very disappointing

  47. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, ‘Calling it a Women’s March…’ What the hell else COULD it be called? When millions of women march, it’s not a ‘Liberal’s March – that would be a People’s March, a Women’s and Men’s March… Whatever.

    ‘…delegitimizing Trump for reasons that have nothing to do with women?’ EH? It’s very difficult not to conclude that you think Trump’s horrible attitude towards women is perfectly natural, normal and acceptable. All the concerns that motivated all those women are neoliberal nonsense? All those women were neoliberals pretending to be what?… Women?

    What a very clever way C. J. Hopkins has of ‘delegitimizing’ the concerns of the millions of women who marched, and the many. many millions more they represented. But, hey, they’re just tools of the ‘neoliberal establishment’. All those millions of foolish tools! No need to take any notice of them!

    ‘…the global neoliberal establishment, which is relentlessly delegitimizing Trump for reasons that have nothing to do with women?’
    Sean, everything Trump does has everything to do with women, and with women’s concerns, which, by the way, include children and men.

    Kaye, Thanks.

  48. Sean Stinson

    Jeez. How to even respond. “its very difficult not to conclude” that you are a bourgeois, anti-revolutionary apologists for capitalism and a shameful status quo, passing yourself off as feminist.

    Too harsh?

    This is courtesy of a facebook friend, because i’m sick of having to restate my argument over and over again

    “And now because of milquetoast liberalism, and 30 years of “lesser of two evil” hostage negotiations passed off as elections, we ended up with full throated fascism, in it’s infancy still, but the camps didn’t take long in germany.”

  49. Kaye Lee

    Gee they used to call me a communist pot-smoking lesbian in the 70s. Men just love to pigeonhole women. I assume it makes them feel safer – oh she’s just a feminist, we know what they are like

    Edwina…back in bowl

    And the really disappointing part…in the 70s we were making forward progress. Women were optimistic. Here I am almost 60 years old marching for the same things

  50. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, ‘i’m sick of having to restate my argument over and over again.’ Then why bother? Maybe your argument needs you to take a good look at it. Maybe there are people who don’t agree with it, and never will. Maybe they have good reasons.

    And name-calling and stereo-typing, Sean, really doesn’t help your cause. ‘“its very difficult not to conclude” that you are a bourgeois, anti-revolutionary apologists for capitalism and a shameful status quo, passing yourself off as feminist.’ Why do you need to stoop to personal attack?

  51. Sean Stinson

    Jesus Kate. You didn’t even notice that I was throwing your exact words and mode of accusation right back at you?

  52. Deanna Jones

    CJ. Hopkins is full of shit. The first point is wrong, it was grassroots. The second point can be decoded to read “it ignored men’s struggles with other men”, yeah kind of the whole point, and the third point, FFS it made it impossible to criticise women?? Since when in this patriarchy is it ‘not possible’ to criticise women? Not only criticise, but rape abuse and murder women, with impunity. Women were mocked and threatened relentlessly over the marches. What world does CJ Hopkins live in?

    See, this is why feminism. Because historically, men from the left and right have always been able to demonstrate that they hate us pretty much equally.

  53. Sean Stinson

    FFS. I wrote a piece on Yemen. I tried once again to make the point which I often try to make. i.e. that the liberal-left is as bad as the right (or worse) when it comes to war and peace. But as usual, the point doesn’t get through and i end up being attacked for something else entirely. I don’t know why i bother. Did you know thee is a black bloc now? That’s right, the Democrats are now promoting violent civil disobedience. How far to the right does the left have to swing before people WAKE THE F*CK UP?

  54. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, You are not in any position to be telling me what I noticed and what I didn’t. You might think you are, but you are not inside my head and you cannot read my thoughts. Perhaps you mean that I didn’t ACKNOWLEDGE your quote. (And here’s a clue – the quotation marks were a dead giveaway.)

    What you might have done, of course, would be along the lines of actually making a genuine attempt to answer the objections that were raised.

  55. Roswell

    Sean, Steve Bannon is on record as saying he wants a Holy War against Islam, and you’re worried about civil disobedience.

    I know what I find more concerning.

  56. Sean Stinson

    A little more worried about the US turning into a fully fledged fascist police state and throwing people into FEMA camps TBH, mostly because it will finally give the government free rein to do whatever they want.

    As I have argued repeatedly, this war has been planned for AT LEAST 30 years, and its not a war against Islam, Islam is a patsy. Iran is the next target. Iran will be Trump’s war, by hook or by crook. The US has been under a government of continuity since Bush was head of the CIA. This was all planned decades in advance. Iran is also the heartland of the Shi’ia, socialist, reformist brand of Islam, incidentally – still the old cold war strategy.

    Anyway, likely we’ll see war with Iran in the next 4-8 years. That will be pitched as Bannon’s War against Islam. How Russia responds to this will depend on what happens next in Ukraine.

  57. Sean Stinson

    also, i’m not worried about civil disobedience, i’m worried about the democratic party actively promoting violence.

  58. Harquebus

    Yes. Abandoned Walmarts make great emergency prisons. There is also the militarization of law enforcement, the demonizing of and call to abandon cash and asset forfeiture.
    Dunno if you read Kunstler.

    “The political Right failed in its role as prudent conservator of values, resources, and practical custom; the political Left has taken refuge in sentimental fantasy, using the semantic ploys of the graduate school seminars to pretend that reality is whatever they wish it to be.”
    “Oddly the way it’s actually working out is that America is simply shedding its whole middle class and all its accustomed habits and luxuries. At least that’s how it adds up in effect. Naturally, that produces a lot of bad feeling.”


  59. Kaye Lee

    Sean, I find you very confusing at times. Earlier in this conversation when I was expressing concern about Iran you said “I don’t think we are going to see war with Iran any time soon.” Why the change now? Is it impossible to agree with a woman on such matters?

  60. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    I am not deluded by the DNC and the establishment darlings of the Democratic Party.

    However, there are decent people among them like Bernie Sanders and Elisabeth Warren still, who need support in leading The ALLiance with the Greens’ Jill Stein, like is needed in Australia between the Greens and Labor.

    Both sets of The ALLiance are the best that either America or Australia can expect at this stage in the dying duopoly systems that both offer.

    Both need overarching change in our political systems, so that diverse, multi-party and multi-candidate political representation can be achieved much like Sweden, Denmark and other better democratic systems.

    When there are better domestic political systems in both countries, our communal knowledge of the war crimes happening in Yemen, Syria (and hopefully not Iran again), will form the basis for the new democratic socialist governments to galvanise ways against such human rights abuses.

  61. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Unfortunately Sean,

    you diverted your readers’ interest by making a negatively gendered criticism of the wonderful Women’s Marches to reinforce your argument. That’s why you’ve copped flak from your potential women allies in this discussion.

  62. Roswell

    I have to agree with JM-S, Sean. It was your attack on the women’s marches that caused the angst.

    Btw, I too am not seduced by the Democrats. And I too don’t like the idea of civil disobedience.

    And I think you’re letting Bannon off too lightly.

  63. Rinaldo

    I fully agree with you Sean. Those with insight are always in the minority.

  64. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    Sean shines the light on important under-reported geo-politic issues and human rights abuses. Hence the interest in his articles.

    However, I stand by my aforementioned observations [as hard as that might be for which others to agree ;)] …

    … so keep your put-downs to yourself too.

  65. randalstella

    CNN poll of Presidential count:
    53% of white women voted Trump
    63% of white men.

    These are people with power in their hands, for one part of one day.

  66. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    then how does that fit into how the Electoral College decided?

  67. randalstella

    That’s not the point.

  68. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I can see the stats but what are you saying?

  69. Deanna Jones

    JMS, and aren’t you a woman?

  70. Roswell

    Rinaldo, the stats from randalstella just proved your point: “Those with insight are always in the minority”.

  71. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Ok, I’ll answer myself then, shall I …

    Neither % is gratifying, although one is bigger than the other.

    Trump’s appeal to white women is unfathomable to me too considering 53% voted for the misogynist, perverted, fascist arsehole.

    I’m not surprised more white men would support him coz many men support his sexist behaviour. However I acknowledge there are many decent men also and 37% white men obviously have brains and reasonable standards that don’t sink to Frump’s base level.

  72. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    So Deanna Jones,

    does my latest observation answer your impertinent question?

  73. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    my question about the Electoral College was genuine coz I’m still trying to work out that weird voting system. I was under the impression that the People’s vote counted first and then the Electoral College decides second and depending upon the majority in the Congress, the majority there has greater sway. Isn’t that how it happened with Trump?

    Obviously, white women and white men were not happy with business as usual before Trump.

    But there are other angles to decipher in how to overcome Trumpesque influences on voters and the electoral system.

  74. Kate Ahearne

    About war with Iran. At the current rate of knots, it won’t take 4 years. It mightn’t even take 4 months.

  75. Sean Stinson


    Iran is Trump’s war, so far as the power behind the throne is concerned anyway.

    I personally think it is too early yet, but that never stopped them before. Iraq and Syria are still a mess, but if the final goal is simply destruction, rather than “nation building”, then why not.

    I also think there may be a way it can be circumvented through trade – a wildly optimistic view, but considering the alternative, one which i’m quite happy to entertain. Impossible to predict what Trump will do tho.

    “Is it impossible to agree with a woman on such matters?”

    Has nothing to do with women. My gripe is not with women, or feminists, but with liberals, and in particular bourgeois feminists. Liberal feminism is me-too feminism. Michael Parenti says it best for me. “When feminists challenged patriarchal militarism, the resulting concession was not an end to militarism but the emergence of female generals.”

    My gripe is with status quo centrists, particularly the type who would have happily voted for Hillary, or who see Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders as potential saviours.

    When the steering wheel is broken you don’t fix it by changing the driver. Its not a matter of changing parties, the whole system needs to be brought down. Bad analogy but its a stinking hot day and my brain isn’t working well,

  76. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    you’re right for the medium and longer future term but in the short term, America needed Sanders or Stein or both.

  77. Rinaldo

    “……….Torture and Water Boarding – plus
    Already back in February 2016, Trump said, “torture works, water boarding  will be back; it will be soft in the light of other interrogation enhancement tactics – we will do much worse — water boarding is fine, but it is not really tough enough.”
    Under a three-page draft order, titled “Detention and Interrogation of Enemy Combatants”, Trump would also bring back ‘rendition’ and dark prisons (i.e. CIA’s ‘black sites’), which Obama banned. If signed, the draft order would also revoke Mr. Obama’s directive to give the International Committee of the Red Cross access to all detainees in American custody. The new Trump rule might lead to a blatant infringement against the Geneva Convention of Prisoners of War.
    “These practices of torturing detainees and ‘disappearing’ them in ‘black sites’ are serious crimes which must never be repeated,” Ian Seiderman, Legal and Policy Director of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) stated.
    Much worse, according to Michel Chossudovsky , Mike Pompeo, the new head of the CIA, favors the reinstatement of “waterboarding, among other torture techniques”. He views Muslims as a threat to Christianity and Western civilization. He is identified as “a radical Christian extremist” who believes that the “global war on terrorism” (GWOT) constitutes a “war between Islam and Christianity”.
    The GWOT is not just fought abroad; it will continue being a major task for the Homeland Security Department, hence guaranteeing their work for years to come. – It is already now hard to believe that anything regarding the absurdly paranoid US security position will change under Trump. He receives orders from above. And the ‘above’, or the Deep State’ has an absolute interest in preserving the status quo. This is the one way towards the extremely lucrative aim of Full Spectrum Dominance. War and destruction are highly profit-oriented; believe it or not, the US economy depends on it. If there was peace tomorrow, the US economy would collapse.

  78. Sean Stinson

    Is been a permanent war economy since 1948. but why even draw the line there. was it really FDRs New Deal that pulled the US out of the depression of the 1930s? or was it 10 million men under arms? Not a rhetorical question.

  79. Rinaldo

    Jeremiah 17:5-8New King James Version (NKJV)

    5 Thus says the Lord:

    “Cursed is the man who trusts in man
    And makes flesh his strength,
    Whose heart departs from the Lord.

    For he shall be like a shrub in the desert,
    And shall not see when good comes,
    But shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness,
    In a salt land which is not inhabited.

    “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord,
    And whose hope is the Lord.

    For he shall be like a tree planted by the waters,
    Which spreads out its roots by the river,
    And will not fear[a] when heat comes;
    But its leaf will be green,
    And will not be anxious in the year of drought,
    Nor will cease from yielding fruit.

  80. Rinaldo

    Henry Kissinger/Quotes
    No one will ever win the battle of the sexes; there’s too much fraternising with the enemy.
    The task of the leader is to get his people from where they are to where they have not been.
    Power is the great aphrodisiac.
    ‘Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.’

  81. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    FDR’ New Deal and/or 10 million male fighters does not acknowledge the unacknowledged women 50%, who are no longer silent.

    Whatever argument you make, if it fails to acknowledge that important women 50%, then it will sink.

  82. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    who said anybody wanted to fraternise?

    Acknowledgement of powerful contributions in all walks of life would be a good start.

  83. Sean Stinson

    again, totally misses the point. could have just as easily been 10 million WOMEN under arms

  84. Kate Ahearne

    Sean ‘again, totally misses the point. could have just as easily been 10 million WOMEN under arms’. But it wasn’t, Sean. And women will never be as fast to take up arms and go to war as men have always been. A few will, of course, but the majority of women never have and never will.

  85. Sean Stinson

    According to your Logic Kate, we should just let women run the world and all our problems will be solved. Women like Merkel. Le Pen, Clinton, LeGarde… Yes I can see that working out well.

    This was NEVER an argument about feminism. Why do you insist on making it one?

  86. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    YOU’re missing the point. Equality principle 101, use inclusive language!

    Yes Kate,

    50/50 representation of women and men will dilute the he-man language about taking up arms. A balanced-gender political world will see better political decisions where war is a later or last resort.

  87. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, No, that’s not where my logic takes us at all. It’s where YOU want to take it. My logic takes us towards equality and respect.

    Being a woman is no guarantee of being a decent human being any more than being a man is any guarantee of being right.

    I take it that your list of ‘representative’ women is a list of women you have no time for. I’m not going to waste time and effort arguing the merits of the individual women on that list, but I will point out how dangerous it is to use a handful of individuals to stereotype half the human race.

    Thanks, Jennifer.

  88. Sean Stinson

    i am not interested in either attacking or defending your bourgeois notions of feminism, or playing pedantic word games around gender inclusion. my interest is in discussing geopolitics in the broadest possible terms: politics, economics, militarism, and the role of media in all of the above.

    i offered an apology for my remark in the article but you weren’t interested. since you haven’t addressed any of my other concerns it seems you are just here to troll. i find that quite boring, and rather sad.

  89. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, ‘bourgeois notions of feminism’? Well, you would certainly know a whole lot more about feminism than I would, wouldn’t you? Stands to reason, right?

    I think we all understand what your interests are, including some that you haven’t listed here. But there are several women amongst the writers and commenters on these pages whose interests don’t entirely coincide with yours, and while YOU might not be interested in certain issues that are core issues for them, they will continue to articulate their concerns whenever it seems necessary.

    You say, ‘…my interest is in discussing geopolitics in the broadest possible terms: politics, economics, militarism, and the role of media in all of the above.’ Funnily enough, Sean, all of these matters concern women.

    If you don’t want to be constantly annoyed by these pesky members of half the human race, why don’t you just stop belittling them? You never know, you might learn something.

  90. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    I thought you were a better man than what you are revealing yourself to be.

  91. Sean Stinson

    and now i find myself being attacked by a bunch of liberal feminists who seem to think that women are less warlike than men, which seems to be substantiated on the grounds that women are are gatherers and not hunters, or because they child roarers, or some other essentialist claptrap.

    Like i said, if i though the women’s march was about roe vs wade i would have marched myself. Lenin did more for women’s rights than liberal feminism ever achieved, Even the suffragette movement sucked up to the patriarchy by demanding voting rights, not of ALL women, but for women of property. Think about that. Liberal feminism is me-too feminism. It belongs to a bourgeois class which sucks up to the very system that maintains its own privilege.

    I do not care for identity politics. The only war I care about is the class war. That does not make me a misogynist. Far from it.

  92. Sean Stinson

    JMS feel free to judge my character, by all means, but can you name for me a single female regent/autocrat who hasn’t waged war?

  93. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Again Sean,

    why harp on about “liberal feminists” when it is already pointed out to you that ‘liberal’ anything is dubious when it equates to neoliberalism?

    Besides, whatever part of history you want to draw out, where women protesters have made themselves known, they had far, far, far more barriers than any of their male counterparts, so their achievements are far, far, far more profound.

    Also, if the suffragettes couldn’t break the patriarchy as much as you conveniently reckon (in the comfort of the 21st century), you would be wise to study just how restrictive that patriarchy was and still is on women’s achievements.

  94. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Female regents/autocrats are not the focus of my argument. (The reality is they are puppets of the male puppet masters anyway.)

    Their female subjects, who happen to be women and girls like me and your mother and other women of our communities, they are the focus.

    These are the people who make up the 50+% of our population, who should be well represented in every decision.


    If you wish to continue this discussion, it will have to be tomorrow, as I’m off to sleep now.

  95. Sean Stinson

    i must have slipped through a trans-dimensional portal. in my universe words like ‘liberal’, ‘neo-liberal’ and ‘patriarchy’ have very specific meanings

  96. Kate Ahearne

    Jennifer, Yes, by all means. ‘Feel free to judge’ Sean’s character. What’s good for the gander must be OK for the goose.

    Sean, I don’t know where you get the hunter gatherers from. Out of your own head, apparently – No woman here has tried to substantiate anything by reference to hunter-gatherers.. ‘Child roarers’? Freudian slip?

    There is so much utter garbage amongst your remarks that I really can’t do more than address one or two points. So just let me assure you that I am not a liberal feminist, I am a plain vanilla feminist who believes that women are entitled to equality. And here’s a corker – I don’t believe that only women of property should be allowed to have the vote!

    Anyway, Sean, I’m getting pretty sick of being pigeon-holed, stereotyped and called names. I’m sick and tired of the way you routinely give offence to women in general and the women here who disagree with you in particular. And what you don’t seem to understand is that your demonstrated inability to think in logical ways about the points that women here have been making to you undermines anything you might want to say on any other subject. You play fast and loose with facts, you make broad, unsupported claims, and when you don’t like what’s being aid to you, you belittle, besmirch, abuse and bully. What’s to like about any of that? What’s to trust?

  97. Kate Ahearne

    Yes, Sean, you must have slipped through some kind of portal. I’m off to bed, too. Beauty sleep, you know.

  98. Sean Stinson

    Please get over yourself and stop making this about women. The article was about Yemen. I can see the words look similar. Women. Yemen, so perhaps you need to adjust your reading glasses. I will engage with anyone, of any gender, and without prejudice, who wants to critique my arguments. On the other hand, if you just want to make disparaging character judgements when you don’t even know me, you can go and join Mr Shaw.

  99. silkworm

    I’m sick of Stinkson’s misogyny and homophobia, and he has become an embarrassment to this site.

  100. Kaye Lee

    “if you just want to make disparaging character judgements when you don’t even know me,”

    “you are a bourgeois, anti-revolutionary apologists for capitalism and a shameful status quo, passing yourself off as feminist.”

    What was that about specks and planks?

    “Liberal feminism is me-too feminism”….or what we like to call equality of opportunity and choice and to have our voices heard, to be treated as partners rather than vassals and vessels. How terribly bourgeois, darling, she says as she sips her latte whilst getting her nails done before tennis. Give me a break.

    Do you subscribe to the Alan Jones theory

    “She [Gillard] said that we know societies only reach their full potential if women are politically participating. Women are destroying the joint”

    Seems to me it is mainly men advocating anarchy.

    “the whole system needs to be brought down”

    I would like to hear what it is being replaced with before we knock down the house. Renovations seem a better plan to me.

  101. Kate Ahearne

    Sean, You say, ‘Please get over yourself and stop making this about women. The article was about Yemen. I can see the words look similar. Women. Yemen, so perhaps you need to adjust your reading glasses.’

    You are the one who made it about women. It was this profoundly dismissive remark about millions of women in the body of your article that ignited the outrage of the women here who have dared to disagree: ‘It’s easy to scoff and jeer at the women’s march – literally nothing but an outpouring of politically correct outrage.’

    Silkworm, Thank you,

  102. Deanna Jones

    I have no wish to lecture anyone, Sean and I’m not a liberal feminist, I’m a radical feminist, which is probably why I normally love your work here.

    Silkworm you don’t get to lecture anyone about misogyny. Seriously.

  103. Robert G. Shaw

    You really want to call me out, now?
    You really think that’s your best play, now?
    You really think your train wreck of an argument needs further catastrophe?

    Say the word.

  104. Robert G. Shaw

    And now we’ve got this guy dropping links to ICH and Return of Kings as if to make an argument on the substance of the critique on Woman’s March, woman, or equality.
    Return of the Kings?!?!

  105. Rinaldo

    @Robert G. Shaw

    So what is wrong with the argument they put up?

  106. Kaye Lee

    I made the mistake of clicking on that link. I now feel dirty. You ask what’s wrong with that link? You can’t be serious? Let’s start with anti-semitic misogynistic bigotry.

  107. Sean Stinson

    Looks like someone obviously didn’t get the memo.

    Thanks Deanna, i think. and thanks for clarifying your position re feminism, which incidentally is mine also. The system is beyond any hope of repair or reform. Gender ‘norms’ and the institutions which sustain them must be completely abolished. The same goes for the political system. This is why I can’t support the Greens or any other reform party.

    I don’t believe gender is the foundation of inequality, but I strongly believe it’s a symptom of a very arse-about set of values which underpins society. Time to rub it out and draw it again.

  108. Sean Stinson

    @Rinaldo. They like to play the man, not the argument. It’s called argumentum ad hominem.

  109. Kaye Lee

    Play the man? Hasbara troll? You asked what was wrong with the article. I gave my opinion. The first paragraph gave a clue

    “In the 1970’s, a movement known as “Jewish feminism” started in the American Jewish community. It was a movement that originally sought to make Jewish woman superior to (equal to) Jewish men. One of the first major issues tackled by these feminists was the power to optimize hypergamy (initiate divorces).

    Perhaps these Jewish ladies were becoming jealous of the growing “liberation” of non-Jewish women in United States.”

    But it gets worse….

    ” disproportionate Jewish involvement in politics is part of a more organized conspiracy to intentionally destroy the moral fabric of mostly white, traditionally Christian societies. I’m not here to answer “the reasons why,” but rather to simply point out the obvious disproportional representation of Jews in the feminist movement.”

  110. Kaye Lee

    Sean, could I suggest you made your “play the man” comment without having read the article in question which I actually had done.

    Would that be called playing the woman?

  111. Sean Stinson

    I doubt there are any “ZioNazi paid agents” here. Just your regular garden variety trolls.

  112. Rinaldo

    @Kaye Lee

    “Why should we believe in God? We hate Christianity and Christians. Even the best of them must be regarded as our worst enemies. They preach love of one’s neighbour, and pity, which is contrary to our principles. Christian love is a hindrance to the revolution. Down with love of one’s neighbou
    r; what we want is hatred. We must know how to hate, for only at this price can we conquer the universe…The fight should also be developed in the Moslem and Catholic countries, with the same ends in view and by the same means.” (Lunatcharski, The Jewish Assault on Christianity, Gerald B. Winrod, page 44)

    “The fact is that the Jews were known only as destroyers in ancient history, not creators. They have developed no science, have produced no art, have built no great cities, and alone have no talent for the finer things of civilised life. The Jews claim to be the torch bearers of civilisation, but thorough their parasitic habits have deteriorated or destroyed every nation in which they have existed in large numbers.” (Charles A. Weisman, Who is Esau-Edom?, p. 28).

  113. Kaye Lee

    Can I say anti-semite yet?

  114. Rinaldo

    @Kaye Lee

    What is the origin of the term anti Semite, what message is it trying to convey or is it just a meaningless smear word designed to shut peoples mouths?

  115. Kate Ahearne

    Rinaldo, Surely you mean AN american woman is as evil as SOME men.

    In any case, your remarks have become more and more repulsive. At this point, I think your remarks need to be referred to the Moderator.

    Kaye, Yes I think now would be a good time to say, ‘anti-semite’.

  116. Sean Stinson

    @Rinaldo – You beat me to it. Interesting usage considering the ethnic origins of the European Jews.

    “You (the Jews) will never be able to live here in peace, because you left here black but came back white.” – Gamal Abdel Nasser

  117. Sean Stinson

    Sorry Kate, who appointed you hall monitor?

  118. Kate Ahearne

    We’re all hall monitors, Sean. It is a responsibility that we all have.

  119. Kaye Lee

    The term anti-Semitism was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns under way in central Europe at that time.

    The message I am trying to convey is that I find discrimination and smear against people because of their religion repugnant.

  120. Harquebus

    Here are a couple of articles that I have read some time ago. I do not know enough to comment on them and am only submitting them for information sharing. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable on the subject can confirm.

    “Abraham was a descendant of Shem – hence the term Semite or Shemite”
    This is the gist of both:
    “the true Israelite nation no longer exists, and their land inheritance expired with them.”

    Someone mentioned Jews.

  121. Rinaldo

    @Kaye Lee

    The Victory of Judaism over Germanism

    Viewed from a Nonreligious Point of View


    Wilhelm Marr

    “………Under any circumstance this pamphlet will be able to claim originality.
    Free of any and all religious bias it will allow you to look into the
    mirror of historical-cultural facts and it will not be the fault of the
    “pessimist” if what you view in this mirror are….slaves.

    I wish two things for this pamphlet.

    1.) That Jewish critics will not hush it up,
    2.) that it will not be disposed of with the usual, smug

    I shall announce, loudly and without any attempt to be ironic, that
    Judaism has triumphed on a worldwide historical basis. I shall bring the
    news of a lost battle and of the victory of the enemy and all of that I shall
    do without offering excuses for the defeated army. …………”

  122. Rinaldo

    My brief thoughts on the ethnic origins of those who say they are Jews –

    You cannot call yourself a Jew being under a curse and be a follower of Christ as well.
    Canaan the son of Ham took the land allotted to Shem by force.
    The Edomites married into the Canaanites.
    Judah married a Canaanite.
    The pure blood line beginning with Judah/Tamar [ Gen. 38:14-19 ]ended with Jesus Christ.
    Judah married and had sons to the daughter of foreign gods——a Canaanite woman. Malachi, chapter 3 & 2:11., Genesis 38:1-10

    Canaan: a son of Ham, [Genesis 10:6]., Cursed by Noah, [Genesis 9:20-26]., Idolatrous, [Deut. 29:17] ., Defiled, [Lev. 18:24-27]
    “Canaanite”, Strongs Hebrew Concordance 3669, a merchant, a trafficker.
    In Talmudic tradition the mother defines identity so then the people who are today identifying as Jews are in reality Canaanites if not in the flesh then in spirit.
    The “Jews” Babylonian Talmud says: “Five things did Canaan charge his sons: love one another, love robbery, love lewdness, hate your masters, and do not speak the truth” The Last Will of Canaan, Babylonian Talmud, Peshachim 113b.
    To be an Orthodox Jew is to agree with the Talmud that, “It is permitted to deceive a goy.” (Baba Kama 113b) ,
    No blemished Judah blood [Judah/Canaanite] was allowed in the line of those chosen to antecede Jesus Christ.
    Revelation 3:9,”Behold, I give out of the synagogue of Satan those saying themselves to be Jews, and they are not, but they lie,. Behold, I will make them them come and bow down before your feet, and they shall know that I loved you.”
    Romans 2:28-29 “……….For he is not a Jew that is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that outwardly in the flesh; but he is a Jew that is one inwardly and circumcision is of the heart, in spirit, not in letter; of whom the praise is not from men, but from God.”

  123. Kaye Lee

    Marr’s conception of antisemitism focused on the supposed racial, as opposed to religious, characteristics of the Jews. His organization, the League of Antisemites, introduced the word “antisemite” into the political lexicon and established the first popular political movement based entirely on anti-Jewish beliefs.

    Marr’s often-reprinted political tract, “The Victory of Judaism over Germandom,” warned that “the Jewish spirit and Jewish consciousness have overpowered the world.” He called for resistance against “this foreign power” before it was too late. Marr thought that before long “there will be absolutely no public office, even the highest one, which the Jews will not have usurped.” For Marr, it was a badge of honor to be called an antisemite.

    Marr and others employed the word antisemitism in the largely secular anti-Jewish political campaigns that became widespread in Europe around the turn of the century. The word derived from an 18th-century analysis of languages that differentiated between those with so-called “Aryan” roots and those with so-called “Semitic” ones. This distinction led, in turn, to the assumption–a false one–that there were corresponding racial groups. Within this framework, Jews became “Semites,” and that designation paved the way for Marr’s new vocabulary. He could have used the conventional German term Judenhass to refer to his hatred of Jews, but that way of speaking carried religious connotations that Marr wanted to de-emphasize in favor of racial ones. Apparently more “scientific,” Marr’s Antisemitismus caught on. Eventually, it became a way of speaking about all the forms of hostility toward Jews throughout history.

  124. Kate Ahearne

    Kaye, Yes, but I would add ethnicity to religion..

  125. Kaye Lee

    Oh puhlease….bible passages about ethnicity?

    “You cannot call yourself a Jew being under a curse and be a follower of Christ as well.”

    Sean, do you still think Rinaldo is presenting a well-reasoned argument for persecution?

    You call me a troll….I think Rinaldo has an agenda that has nothing to do with Yemen or anything else you mentioned. White Christian male supremacy is not really my thing but it seems to be his.

  126. Kate Ahearne

    Kaye, I read that last lot from Rinaldo, and I’m still groaning. With a friend like Rinaldo, Sean is in even deeper trouble than he already was. Credibility down around his ankles.

  127. Kaye Lee

    Shades of George Christensen who, writing for a newspaper in 1998, expressed concern that new versions of the Bible were “removing accusations that the Jews killed Christ.” And Malcolm Roberts who thinks the Jewish bankers and the UN have this conspiracy thing going with climate scientists.

  128. Rinaldo

    Genesis 12:7King James Version (KJV)
    7 And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him.
    Galatians 3:16King James Version (KJV)
    16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

    Israel is a secular state, totally anti Christian. How can its claim to Palestine be based on the Bible?

  129. Rhonda

    You must be exhausted KL, but I greatly thank your efforts

  130. Robert G. Shaw

    Rinaldo, piss off with your vile propaganda. The simple fact of linking the ReturnKings blog immediately forfeits your right to be taken seriously.
    Your just a pedestrian.


    You couldn’t help yourself, could you?
    “like Mr Shaw…..”
    I stayed away to watch your slow motion train wreck unfold, lest the conversation turn to, yet again, the ‘Mr Shaw ad hominem’.
    And you pulled that one out also!
    Congratulations – a retreat from my challenge with a throwaway line. Better than actually accepting the challenge, right?

    And so here we are.

    My thoughts:
    More Stinson spitballs from the stands. More shrill temper tantrums from the Impotent Sideline Screecher, telling everyone within earshot how important he is, how right he is….how relevant he is.
    Even the dogs on the street have turned their heads.

    How is the Revolutionary Communist Party, or any one of its 4,376 breakaway groups going these days Sean?
    Any accord? Any simpatico beside the Class Cause that people only seem remember in whispers?
    I haven’t heard a friendly word since ’85. Remember ’85 Sean?
    Boy oh boy, were there some ‘ruffled feathers’ there.
    Did I say ‘ruffled feathers’?
    God damn son , that whole bird exploded like it had been hit with 12 gauge buckshot from close range.
    The Miners Strike. Healy. The Women. The Traitors. The Poseurs.
    Exploded I tell you. Into a million shards.

    But I digress: your musings.
    Yes, yes, yes, Greenwald, plagiarizer and beneficiary of every advantage of Liberalism telling me how awful the whole world is. How awful my ideology is.
    How awful everyone’s ideology is.
    Except his.
    Except his.
    And yours. Probably. You just can’t tell with the Left Hypocrites anymore.
    It’s getting hard to distinguish them from the Right ones.

    So to Yemen.
    What’s the problem here? What’s your beef? Don’t bore me with your incessant victim tales of media bias when you yourself are point man for Propaganda.

    Don’t critique the Left without critiquing your place in that Left and your complicity, by the irrefutable fact of your own impotence, in their dastardly machinations.
    You think you’re removed from the madness because you whine about it?!
    You think dropping a link to the Cuban Communist Party, or parading a Nasser quote, separates you from this muck we’re all swimming in?

    Where on earth did you learn such hubris?
    Where on earth did you think that such fetid arrogance was an argument?
    An argument against anything???


    An Observation and a Reckoning:
    your critique of the Left appears to me to be without the gravitas necessary for serious consideration. Whilst it’s certainly true the there is much within Left practice that needs correction, much there that I’ve personally spent the better half of 20 years contesting, it is nonetheless the only available, realised and practical, path open to us in this present situation.
    There is no other.
    And the reason your critique is without weight, sobriety, or consequence?
    Because you argue from the abstract, like the first year undergraduate political science student, hell bent on Revolution by tomorrow afternoon!
    No, not tomorrow, I’ve got band practice tomorrow, let’s make it Friday.
    Yes, Revolution on Friday! Everyone get that? Friday!! Make sure you turn up!!
    C’mon guys….please.

    It’s a poisonous idealism that will always, always, see you on the wrong side of any (political/social) engagement.
    Because you are powerless. Your critique is, at the very best I’m prepared to offer – impotent.
    You have no political muscle worth the name – no constituents, no policies, no members, no working base, no program, no rank and file, no redemptive ideology, no core outside of a handful of very young idealists and a few sentimental oldies remembering their time on the Uni “picket lines”… between beers, tutorials on Weber and Gramsci, and an old embarrassing Che t-shirt fondly remembered because it was a gift from the buxom and brooding Goth post grad who held your hand through the grueling initiation period, not the hard grim slog on a frozen picket somewhere in a wintery Leicester, but in the campus courtyard, selling Socialist Worker, and offering your newly acquired revolutionary cred to wide eyed Sociology debutantes in jeans and Doc Martens.

    That’s it Sean. That’s about the size of it.

    You’re just tossing spitballs from way up high in the stands.
    I look up but can’t even see you. I can feel your barbs as I would a fly landing, for a moment, on my arm, then off again.
    Swiped. And forgotten.
    Like the million other spawned Revolutions conceived and buried in those bedrooms of lonely young men and woman, bourgeois to the core, who have never felt the pang of hunger beyond the time it takes to walk downstairs to their parents fridge.


    Here’s my advice: you want to affect change? Political change?
    Enter the fray of mainstream politics – canvas a position, argue hard, persuade even harder. Gather about yourself a raft of policies that centre on the immediate concerns of the electorate. Run for a seat. Get elected.
    Once in, canvas, persuade, argue, canvas some more, argue even more, persuade yet more.
    Demonstrate political sophistication.
    Demonstrate the capacity for bold, principled action.
    Assume or insinuate yourself into policy planning.
    Make policy.
    Affect policy.
    Deliver policy.

    Make change.
    Make it from within.
    From within.
    From within the site of real power.

    It’s either that….or…..a series of frustrating, embarrassing, self-defeating articles on AIM bemoaning the fact that no one “understands you”.

    I especially liked the fact, you could probably see my smile from there, that it was you who took on the subject of woman. Was then roundly criticized for your attitude only to then retreat to the cowardly plea ‘but, but, but….this article is about Yemen’. Only to then cheer on a wholesome round of anti-semitism!!
    Youre hitting winners all over the place!

    No Sean, you really didn’t need me at all to make the case that you’re a thin skinned writer of extremely suspect opinions, dubious assumptions, and petulant responses.

    But if you’re keen, I could join in now and have a real crack at the 9, count them, 9, extremely contentious points you’ve raised.
    Whaddya say???
    You did call me out, after all.


    C’mon, whaddya say??

  131. Kaye Lee

    Why, in 2014, did Australia and the US vote against a proposal in the United Nations Security Council demanding Israel end the occupation of Palestinian territories within two years?

    Why again, in 2016, did Australia speak out against a UN resolution condemning Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem when even the US abstained?

    Forget biblical references and abide by the international courts. There is a history of violence on both sides which has solved nothing. The hatred and revenge go back too far to decide who to blame – there is fault all around including from the division of the ME by France and the UK.

    The violence from all sides must stop. An agreement must be negotiated. It is heartbreaking that generations of children are brought up surrounded by such violence.

  132. Kate Ahearne

    Robert, Oh My Gosh!

    Anyway, looks like a shift change. I’m off to do some desperately needed chores.

    Thanks, Kaye. Yes, it’s a vicious cycle of violence. I, too, have been deeply ashamed by Australia’s behaviour at the UN.

  133. Sean Stinson


    What part of go f*ck yourself don’t you understand?

  134. Rinaldo

    @ Kaye Lee

    “Forget biblical references and abide by the international courts”

    “Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants.” – William Penn

    “Government” is a religion. (Larken Rose)
    This is an excerpt from Larken Rose’s new book, The Most Dangerous Superstition.
    The Religion of “Government” (TMDS pp. 28-32.)
    “Government” is neither a scientific concept nor a rational sociological construct; nor is it a logical, practical method of human organization and cooperation. The belief in “government” is not based on reason; it is based on faith. In truth, the belief in “government” is a religion, made up of a set of dogmatic teachings, irrational doctrines which fly in the face of both evidence and logic, and which are methodically memorized and repeated by the faithful. Like other religions, the gospel of “government” describes a superhuman, supernatural entity, above mere mortals, which issues commandments to the peasantry, for whom unquestioning obedience is a moral imperative. Disobedience to the commandments (“breaking the law”) is viewed as a sin, and the faithful delight in the punishment of the infidels and sinners (“criminals”), while at the same time taking great pride in their own loyalty and humble subservience to their god (as “law-abiding taxpayers”) And while the mortals may humbly beg their lord for favors, and for permission to do certain things, it is considered blasphemous and outrageous for one of the lowly peasants to imagine himself to be fit to decide which of the “government” god’s “laws” he should follow and which it is okay for him to ignore. Their mantra is, “You can work to try to change the law, but as long as it’s the law, we all have to follow it!”
    The main factor distinguishing the belief in “government” from other religions today is that people actually believe in the god called “government.” The other gods people claim to believe in, and the churches they attend, are now, by comparison, little more than empty rituals and half-heartedly parroted superstitions. When it comes to their everyday lives, the god that people actually pray to, to save them from misfortune, to smite their enemies, and to shower them with blessings, is “government.” It is “government” whose commandments the people most often respect and obey. Whenever a conflict arises between “government” and the teachings of the lesser gods — such as “pay your fair share” (taxation) versus “Thou shalt not steal,” or “duty to country” (military service) versus “Thou shalt not murder” — the commands of “government supersede all the teachings of the other religions. Politicians, the high priests of the church of “government” — the mouthpieces and representatives of “government,” who deliver the sacred “law” from on high — even openly declare that it is permissible for the people to practice whatever religion they wish, as long as they do not run afoul of the supreme religion by disobeying “the law” — meaning the dictates of the god called “government.”……

  135. Robert G. Shaw

    Ah, of course…the revolutionary miaow of the bedsit dissident.

    Was there ever any doubt?

  136. Sean Stinson


    I’m confused. Do I live in a bedsit? Or my parents attic?

    Anyway, thanks for the autobiography. Btw what was her name? (the buxom postgrad goth you never got to shag)

  137. Robert G. Shaw

    First the attic, then you made the revolutionary step to get your own bedsit.
    Bold move.
    On such axes does History turn.

    Her name? Dunno. You were the one holding her hand. You were the one spluttering “class struggle”.
    Poor thing, she just wanted a shag but you were so intense…..so sensitive.

    Bloody hell, I must’ve been really close.
    But then again, I could have closed my eyes, spun 4 times, and that dart would still have hit bullseye.


    See that? See your “I will engage with anyone, of any gender, and without prejudice, who wants to critique my arguments”.

    I’ve never seen it happen.

  138. Sean Stinson

    Shaw, if yours does not constitute an ad hominem attack, I don’t know what does. An entirely inappropriate degree of personal comment. Your public display of verbal masturbation is embarrassing. Please put it away. Nobody wants to see it. And no, not even close.

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: