KjK "insane rant" thread 2

[AdamRyan]

First thread filled up just as it was getting interesting

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5036512-kjks-insane-rant

So let's keep it going. My characterisation if the two basic positions are:

1)KJK is a stone cold legend, haters gonna hate but many women will give her cash to bathe in champagne

2. KJK is taking right wing positions for clicks and cash, most recently criticising a doctors conference to stay relevant.

Happy to discuss further. There are some particular posts I want to respond to which I will c&p below

33 minutes for a full reverse ferret. Is that a record? It's definitely got a hole in it.

And then watching the paint dry...

See, this is why I love these threads. You learn things.

Did any of you watch the video. She's talking about "what we know is happening in the United kingdom this second" and links Charlene's murder with grooming gangs and a "cover up" which can only be because "people in power are raping children".

It's straight out of Q Anon.

I'm not finding what is coming out her own mouth very endearing at all.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-54065470.amp

https://www.hull.ac.uk/work-with-us/more/media-centre/news/2023/qanon-is-spreading-outside-the-us-a-conspiracy-theory-expert-explains-what-that-could-mean

"QAnon’s core theories centre on its belief that there is a global cabal of Satan-worshipping, child sex trafficking elites who control governments, financial institutions, and the media."

OK, so we’re switching from “KJK is a far right Islamophobe” to “KJK has been brainwashed by QAnon” today, are we?

It’s enough to make me want to buy one of her t shirts.

No. Take me literally. What she says in that clip is consistent with what Q Anon supporters say.

I have no idea if she truly believes it or if she's saying it for clicks.

Is there an 'I See Lizard People' one?

…

Can you imagine being a victim of the Catholic church, Saville, or the Rotherham gangs, and being at the mercy of someone who is utterly uninterested in the case before them, determined to not investigate it, and who apparently can only relate to allegations by trying to fit them into some sort of trope framework, and look for examples of that trope in the media?

That did actually happen, and we've got a live one here.

You are being utterly disgusting. I am not defending child abusers. Just stop.

It’s the unintentional consequence tho, innit?

You are so determined to discredit KJK that you casually throw doubt on actual, real cases of horrendous child abuse.

Where did I do that please? Or are you just determined to smear to stop me drawing attention to what she says and how it parallels what others say.

I'll repeat what I said on the last thread:

If one doesn't want people to think one is far right, don't say far right things, don't take money off right wing groups, don't tolerate right wing activities in one's name and unequivocally condemn far right activity when asked.

Otherwise one runs the risk of being misunderstood and the resulting blog posts and accusations.

I am still curious as to why CPAC wanted to fund her tour. Usually people want to fund things that have value to them. What value does an English woman's speaking tour in Australia have to a multi-national conservative movement?

FWS were accused of taking 'right wing funding' by Lorna Slater.

Turned out to be absolute nonsense -

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scottish-government-cannot-back-up-26961353

I can't say what the situation is with KJK and funding.

However the whole 'right wing funding' thing is a very useful smear.

*And to forestall any 'Daily Express!!!' comments, I've included that link because it's the easiest to access. It was reported in multiple sources.

In the posts above.

It’s not smearing you to point out that your posts have the opposite effect to that which you profess to want to achieve.

I wish someone would send me some FundieBux.

What's wrong with agreeing with some things that are right wing?

It's all very sixth form politics to have such a polarised view of good/bad.

You said yesterday that, having Googled “KJK funding” that they provided security for the Australia visit.

Now they’ve funded the entire tour? So which is it?

Jesus. You're brave, asking for clarification on something!

<awaits word salad of denial and confusion>

CPAC sponsored and covered the insurance for the whole Australian trip.

CPAC also paid for the flights.

What effect do I "profess to want to achieve" in your opinion?

What is your precise issue with CPAC? Which of their aims and objectives concerns you and why?