Julie Bindel - article on allies

The antisemitic conspiracy theories of the 1930/40s claimed that Jewish people were not only secretly running the world, or attempting to secretly run the world, but also the infamous blood libel - that Jewish people used the blood of Christian children in occult rituals. We can now see that same libel playing out in contemporary conspiracy theory with the claims of satanic or luciferian paedophile or genocidal plots being orchestrated by powerful people behind the scenes who in many cases just happen to be Jewish such as Bill Gates or Soros. They have become more sophisticated over the years as open antisemitism has become less tolerable but the intention is the same, to incite hatred towards Jews in the main, although they have increasingly been used to target other minorities.

This

There are also many highly dubious "whistleblowers" and anti-trafficking and anti child abuse activists who are not what they appear to be.

Nazi propagandists published vile material depicting Jewish pimps and procurers exploiting German women and girls.

In India various Hindu nationalists have instigated lynchings of minority Muslims based on false accusaitons of child abduction and the "murder" of cows that are sacred to Hindus.

The blood libel was the foundation for countless pogroms.

It is extremely easy to create social discord, chaos and infighting by accusing people of being traffickers, paedos, satanists.

Of course evil cults exist, child abusers and animal abusers exist and traffickers exist but it is the easiest thing in the world to generate a pitchfork weilding mob based on false allegations of these kinds of things.

I think there's a difference between someone casually speculating about singular events like Diana, although there is no evidence it was anything other than a tragic accident, and people promoting an entire worldview based on a hidden nefarious elite controlling world affairs

Well yes. Hence, conspiracy theories are not all alike, as I said Regardless of the rest of it.

For readers unfamiliar with Beatrix Campbell's long term promotion of batshit insanity there is some interesting archival video here

@NRatched

By their very nature conspiracy theories are theories without credible evidence to support them and so at best are speculation which often rely on a distorted worldview which assumes there is some kind of hidden hand working behind the scenes to plot world events or disasters.

And it is this belief that is used, sometimes overtly, sometimes covertly, by antisemites. If you can get people to believe there is a secret cabal governing human affairs then you are one step closer to getting them to believe this cabal is made up of Jews and that something must be done about it.

The antisemitic conspiracy theories of the 1930/40s claimed that Jewish people were not only secretly running the world, or attempting to secretly run the world, but also the infamous blood libel - that Jewish people used the blood of Christian children in occult rituals. We can now see that same libel playing out in contemporary conspiracy theory with the claims of satanic or luciferian paedophile or genocidal plots being orchestrated by powerful people behind the scenes who in many cases just happen to be Jewish such as Bill Gates or Soros. They have become more sophisticated over the years as open antisemitism has become less tolerable but the intention is the same, to incite hatred towards Jews in the main, although they have increasingly been used to target other minorities.

I think there's a difference between someone casually speculating about singular events like Diana, although there is no evidence it was anything other than a tragic accident, and people promoting an entire worldview based on a hidden nefarious elite controlling world affairs which is what those involved with sites like Brand New Tube do. In fact they will use speculation about unusual events such as the death of Diana or 911 to draw people into that way of thinkig which is not just dangerous for society but also individuals mental health in my view. I knew one person who went down this rabbit hole and whose mental health deteriorated to the point he committed suicide leaving an awful tragic garbled note about how he couldn't cope with the Zionist plot against him and all humanity.

There should be no place for them rational political discourse, they are utterly toxic on every level, not least the people currently going round putting lives at risk by insisting COVID is a hoax.

Crikey, this really is a very transparent attempt at guilt-by-association.

I am finding this to be very much the case. And it is a very extreme broadbrush approach to describing conspiracy theories.

Like, a conspiracy theory could be attributed to the fact that a certain lobbyist group has somehow managed to have a misinterpretation of the EA2010 spread through government and other organisations. AND were involved in a 'back room' deal with an MP who complained when their 'deal' was ignored. Oh... wait....

pushed for time but briefly

For those clinging to the idea that Brand New Tube is not a conspiracy site with sinister agendas....

This video is interesting and relevant

It features the CEO of BNT opining about Shaun Attwood's so called "prank" videos including the Daddygate video that lead to Attwood being referre to as Prince Attwood (an ironic reference to Prince Andrew)

Shaun Attwood and his apologist and good chum Sonia Poulton also feature in the video

There are lots of new YouTube channels, many created by former subscribers to Attwood's channel, exposing his lies and bullshit.

Here's a video from an interesting such channel (highly recommended) - this one explores some of the less savoury aspects of Attwood's activities when he was a drug dealer, not just an "ecstasy king pin" but a crystal meth dealer and addict.

Serious Allegations - Against Shaun Attwood by ''In Plain Sight'' alleged Underage US Girlfriend!

Astute readers who check out Attwood's channel will discover a collection of conspiracy themed videos promoting the same kind of batshit claims about Satanic Ritual Abuse that Beatrix Campbell has promoted over the decades.

Which brings me to the Bindel article in which she promotes Beatrix Campbell.

The batshit has infected the Left and the Right

It really is no longer about Left and Right it is about trying to stay thinking and skeptical and open minded and not jumping to conclusions until you have evidence.

Most things are nuanced and complex. Most people are nuanced and complex. There may be many layers to a thing.

The reason I promoted the books of Peter Pomerantsev to readers here is because they describe in a meticulous and detailed manner the way in which nation states, cults and criminal networks astroturf all kinds of community groups, including groups opposing one another and then set them against each other to create chaos.

These kinds of political cold wars are like a virus. They spread like a virus and usually you don't know that your community is infected until you are powerless to fight off the epidemic and are adversely affected by symptoms.

I would recommend this excellent video should readers be interested to study further - it is highly informative

Crikey, this really is a very transparent attempt at guilt-by-association.

"Some people believe in conspiracy theories. Among those people are some people who are gender critical. Among those people are also people who believe in anti-semitic conspiracy theories. Historically, anti-semitic conspiracy theories led to the Holocaust. Therefore..."

I presume at this point, someone on this thread is wanting the lurkers to leap to the worst possible therefore imagineable. Not realising that most people lurking on here probably have a nodding acquaintance with what counts as a logical argument and what does not.

It's interesting that some gender critical activists seem to support conspiracy theories.

Surely this depends on the theory. Apparently something like 40% believe the Princess Diana one, and there does seem to be a lot of questions there to me anyway (mind, someone who thinks its nonsense, will deny the many questions..such is the nature of CT really!)

'Support conspiracy theories' is a bit of nonsense to me, given the difference in theories, depending on topic. Hell, some 'conspiracy theories' have in the past been proven to be true too. So, they are not all alike. And certainly not all total nonsense.

And that link has already been successfully made in the minds of the general public ever since conspiracy theories were used to justify the mechanised slaughter of 6 million people.

I actually think often conspiracy theories result from people not being able to process traumatic events in the usual way, so looking for links with smething else makes them feel better somehow, people don;t want to believe horrible things can happen seemingly randomly, so look for a 'bigger plan' to feel better about it. I guess that could maybe come into both covid denial and sandy hook thinking about it. Its still a horrible thing though, for the parents f those kids to possibl come across videos claiming 'crisis actors' and 'no kids died' and stuff, its just..awful.

I don't have a issue with conspiracy theories as such. Infact, a few of them have a lot of merit in my mind. But stuff like, for a current example, covid denial..I think is dangerous to have 'out there' circulating in the public.

Dangerous might be the wrong word, I know exactly what I mean here but am having issues putting it into words..sme are 'dangerous' and others are outright offensive, take the Sandy Hook thing as one of the offensive nonsense stuff.

I think people will come a that from their own moral compass though really. As usual. ITs a hard topic though, for sure. I would NOT write off all CT as 'wrong think' but some of it seems obviously offensive and false. Mind, others could easily disagree with which ones I write off as offensive and false I guess. Interesting topic really.

@OvaHere

The channels by Russell Brand and Dave Chapelle appear to be scraped cotent from their youtube channels and as such are not likely to be officially endorsed. I assume they are there to pull in the punters and will last as long as it takes their respective lawyers to get round to shutting them down.

Sonia Poulton's channel is not just scraped from her youtube. It carries BrandNewTube branding. She is billed as one of the main presenters of Brand New Tube by the founder of the site who she appeared alongside to defend fellow presenter Sean Attwood from allegations of dubious sexual conduct:

If certain aspects are not mentioned, then its more likely to survive. But certain important parts of the whole convo, seems to be instant deletion. Especially when regarding child transition. Meanwhile videos encouraging children to actively leave their families and find a 'glitter family' if the family have any doubts, is fine apparently

Nothing to see here. Nope. Just paranoia.

Russell Brand and Dave Chapelle both appear to have verified channels on that site. I hope you are just as busy writing to them and their management as you are being very concerned about Harry Miller, Kelly Jay and Stephanie Davies Arai. None of whom appear to have channels there but just appeared in an interview with someone else who uploaded them there.

It is a bizarre site and not one I'd bother with personally. Sonia Poulton is an odd character and someone I find myself in disagreement with roughly half the time.

A lot of her stuff veers (IMO) into tin foil hat territory yet there are some cases where I find myself in agreement - such as the death of Stuart Lubbock. Very obviously a cover up with the perps never being brought to justice. I recall this was one of her pet conspiracies.

It should be noted that her channel on BNT is a duplicate version of her Youtube channel who appear not to have banned her.

It's not that your points don't have merit jj1968 it's just most of us can see the disingenuous concern trolling for what it is.

If the far right start rounding people up in camps it won't be because TT linked a video without checking the source or even because Dave Chapelle uploaded comedy clips there.

I don't think avoiding someone you disagree strongly with on many topics is quite part of the left 'eating its own' tbh. I know some would class it as that, but I actively do avoid some peoples 'work' because some other stuff has been really shitty IMO. What I wouldn't do though, is expect everyone else to avoid them also, unless they had their own reasons. And their reasons might not cover the same as mine, or they might even be able to put stuff off the side and ignore everything but the current topic. Many can do that, I can sometimes, I cannot other times as the person involved just disgusts me THAT much in general. I also cannot find it in me to berate others for using platforms I might disagree with, when they have been banned from more mainstream ones as others disagree with them (and think their very opinion in general should be unheard). While I also do think some stuff shouldn't be in the public eye as much as possible (terrorist support, racism, inciting violence, the usual generally agreed on horrid views) I 100% disagree with relegating genuine concerns about womens rights/children to this group. Mind I do sometimes think that while it seems obvious the views I despise should be 'banned', others obviously think that about MY views on protecting womens rights and safeguarding kids. But the I think, nah, thats not the same, AT ALL and making it out to be is quite shitty. While this purity stuff is not for me, I do actively avoid some people who others might find benign..I think thats entirely usual tbh. Maybe this makes me a huge hypocrite too. Am open to that possibility, but still am unlikely to change it, bit of a stubborn bitch these days I have to say

Taken a while to get to this position though. From a good little leftie who would sometimes go along berating others for even slightly differing views even if I agreed with the slightly differing views myself in private just to get backpats and assure me that I am a 'good person' unlike all these others, mainly 'the right wing'(boogeyman)

While I always disagreed with 'purity politics', I did often pretend it was my thing, to fit in with other 'right thinkers'. Honestly, sometimes looking back it almost seems like a cult. I started breaking away from this properly around the time Corbyn came into public view properly. Long long road and a lot of reflection!

I liked her in the beginning when she was writing in the press about benefit claimants and disability etc

Indeed her slide into conspracy theories was depressing to watch, not least because she was managing to get anti-austerity views published in her column in the Daily Mail of all places.

There are hundreds of gender critical videos on youtube including Posie Parker's channel which has thousands of subscribers. If videos contain copyright material, outright hatred or libel people they are likely to be removed. This applies to everyone not just gender critical activists. To claim that the universally applied rules are forcing GC people to turn to conspiracy and hard or far right websites by being asked to keep to the same standards as everyone else is frankly nonsense.

I think David Icke may be banned from T now, but I disctinctly remember a few years back, a video on his about proof of 'false flag' crisis actors at the Boston Marathon (please do not look into that if anyone is interested, the theory is quite vile) was on the top videos part, with hundreds of thousands of views also. Was ages ago, yes, but it wasn't uncommon and I suspect, loking at YT videos with less views now would unveil some..unsavoury (to say the least) stuff also.

On a smaller site, this will seem more common. If this site had as many users as YT, then this kind of stuff would (usually, except for the above type situations where a theory seems to take off a lot) generally drop to the bottom and be ignored.

I find it quite depressing in all honesty, that womens rights videos, and stuff about safeguarding kids is being removed/banned from YT, and kind of forcing use of alternative sites in order to get videos uploaded. Its a shitty situation, in which concern about women and kids, is written off in the same vein as total conspiracy or outright racism and such, to me anyway. That needs to change, quickly.

I didn't know a lot of this about Poulton tbh. But it doesn't change the fact that I do agree with her on this one topic and she has done some good work in this area. Her (seemingly very awful at times, to me) views in other areas do not concern me really, I will never agree with her, nor fight with her for stuff thats against my own moral compass. Again, purity politics really is not my thing at all.

In short, I find it interesting that people are now kicking off about womens/childrens rights campaigners using this brandnewtube, after they massreport anything the same groups post on YT with the hope of getting them removed (and sucessful a lot sadly also). So, if you will not let them be posted mainstream, and kick off about them being posted elsewhere, whats to be done here to satisfy? When you suceed in getting such views banned on YT, people involved just give in and walk away? Unlikely, and a bit hopeful I think for those who wish for certain viewpoints on womens rights and safeguarding to be banned completely.

This is the image which featured at the beginning of Sonia Poulton's video which TT appeared on. This is Albert Bishai's page on the site: brandnewtube.com/@ALBERT He is an open antisemite. You are correct that thankfully his videos dont have many views as yet. Presumably the intention of advertising him at the beginning of Sonia's video was an attempt to change that.