Burning-men 2017, Witch hunts and beyond


First they came for Kevin Myers, I/you didn’t notice/care.
Then they came for George Hook. I liked tweet x, posted a comment of y value on Facebook re: z or something something.
Then they came for …

Who is next?

You might not like or care about any of these personalities. You might agree with them entirely on any given day, half of what they say or none of it at all whenever. You might be happy to see them hung drawn and quartered in the court of public opinion held at the temple Circus Media Maximus. However whichever way you roll, it’s really not the point is it?

However it now appears to be entirely acceptable in growing media, social circles and top political office to call for the head of anybody of any notable *profile for whatever real or imagined transgression is claimed, all this being very quickly followed by full on character assassination administered by swarming packs of identiy-differantied cyber snipers patroling the social-cyber alleys and boulevards like vigilantes of social justice with threats also levelled at sponsors/employers. All the time those involved inhabiting a zealotry of immense beyond reproach moral conviction in the pursuit of seeing the flagged targets livelihood/career obliterated to dust in full public spectacle often minus an equivalent defense.

Yet is it merely satisfy the baying cyber-mobs call for social justice to be done over a perceived slight, transgressions or tyrannical oppression of the hyper-patriarchy or something more?

What and when is enough enough?
Who truly pays in the end?
When are apologies not enough?
What if there is a mistake?

There are many more question besides.

Theses implications do not settle for good once flesh and blood tribute has been extolled on the socio-sacrificial altar, again “Who is next?” are you watching over your shoulder and worried about your job because you have a constitutionally protected opinion?

Such is it that in this kangaroo court of public opinion it seems guilty until proven guiltyis the sole insta-verdict, punishable by virtual death.

It seem evidently clear that these are not civil actions in the legal sense and broader. This is not what might be understood to be civil discourse. They, are not civil.

Therfore such behaviour absent the hallmarks of civility can only be deemed as entirely violent, so violent a tactic to be akin to nothing but acts of all out war. It’s Kill, Kill, KILL!

Thejournal.ie covers the transcribed comments of George Hook and some of the reactions online - worth reading.

*I will add one caveat: I’m not entirely surely this phenomena ever affects to politicians all that much or they seem deftly able to negate these things by being better protected somehow, well in Ireland anyhow. There are of course exceptions to this too!


In a similar vein, this is the guy who was fired from Google recently for voicing an opinion that was actually based in scientific fact…facts that didn’t tally with the consensus viewpoints within the organisation



Fúck George Hook. An obnoxious creep.

Who is next? I have a wishlist as long as my arm.


Who is next for a kicking ? Anyone who sins or is seen to sin against the Po-faced Left.
There seems to be a shouty mostly male Antifa-wannabe element just waiting to jump in. I was reading Twitter hate against that FG councillor and saw that the hive has also attacked Laura Kennedys Twitter account for the below

Her sin was to question in passing the validity of identity politics


Oh cool, a support group for Antisocial Justice Warriors.

Are you allowed to hug each other or does that violate some nohomo rule?


Rape victims? Single mothers? Your choice.

Talk to women about it.

Rape shouldn’t be a political point scoring issue. George Hook isn’t being called out for being an obnoxious Blueshirt fucko, but for blaming victims for getting themselves raped.


  • George Hook.


he didn’t though did he, what he asked was should people not take responsibility for putting themselves in dangerous situations, which is at least a question worth debating. But instead we get a load of mock indignation and witch hunting. The accusation of victim blaming is the latest weapon of the baying mob, it is now beyond a joke. Unless you want to spend all your time on radio talking about housing those who cant or wont house themselves or increasing welfare payments it appears you are a target.

But modern day social activity means that she goes back with him. Then is surprised when somebody else comes into the room and rapes her. Should she be raped? Course she shouldn’t. Is she entitled to say no? Absolutely. Is the guy who came in a scumbag? Certainly. Should he go to jail? Of Course. All of those things,” he said.
But is there no blame now to the person who puts themselves in danger?” he said.


Chris Coleman will be next. I’m offended by how PC he is. :smiley:


Shane Coleman? Or did you mean Chris Donoghue, the most PC bore on Irish Radio?


Context is everything.

Considering risk/reward w.r.t drinking and sex, in the context of a discussion about, say, the abuse of alcohol in modern society, is maybe OK, although it needs to be done very carefully.

Starting that discussion in the context of a rape story is pure victim blaming, even when you state up front that you think rape is very wrong (duh).

Anyway, that quote Coles has pasted is evidence of Hook’s borderline rapey behaviour.


George Hook has clearly stated that she shouldn’t have been surprised that someone else came into the room and raped her. That’s just normal behaviour is it?

She didn’t put herself in danger. The rapist did. The responsibility for rape lies entirely with the rapist. If you think there is a grey area about that point then you need to have a good hard look at yourself.



Chris Donoghue appears to be using this as a way of keeping himself in the news.

Unfortunately for him without ivan yates to prop him up he was quickly exposed as a lightweight and uninteresting broadcaster.


Sorry Chris Donoghue.

Chris Coleman is the Wales Manager. World Cup qualifiers still on the mind.


I dont think anyone is arguing otherwise, the point he made, rather clumsily ill admit, is that people need to take responsibility for their own safety as well.

At it worst its clumsily done, and probably a debate framed in a different context. However the reaction was as if he had been found guilty of rape himself.


I get where youre coming from Coles but this isnt really about George Hook.

First off, he made unscripted comments on a radio programme.

Secondly, the actual comments he made did not blame the victime for being raped. He stated that the rapist was a scumbag who should be jailed. Stated that it was reprehensible. Stated that he was a father and wondered aloud about the intersection of risk and modern social mores. There was defintely an implication that more risk attached to certain behaviours than it did to others but he categorically did not blame her for being raped.

Regardless, all of the above is not the issue here. The man is at risk of losing his job because he expressed a view.

This type of outcome is a product of a culture that exists within a minority circle within our society who feel it is their God given right to police discourse and set every policy agenda across the board. It betrays a mindset that lies at the heart of what describes itself as being ‘progressive’ but is also the very place from where numerous 20th century leftist regimes began their journey to firstly Totalitarianism, and latterly to mass murder of those who dared to dissent.

We in the west tend to rightly view verses such as the following as warnings against the evils of the type of fascist totalitarianism that murdered millions in western Europe.

However, the same reasoning applied elsewhere to those on the left who murdered many more across the globe, justified through their own version of totalitarian politics.

IMO this incessant politically correct hounding of dissenters via social media (especially when it threatens someones livelihood) is a first step along the same road…we’d do well to face it down…


So if i leave my car unlocked in a shopping centre car park with the keys sitting in it and its stolen i have no responsibilty for leaving it like that to be easily stolen? I think that’s what Hook was trying to say, very poorly.


As I referred to, women get witch hunted too now (the irony !)

Anyway my support group’s meetings will be funny.
We have Chris Rock (probably a Trump voting marcher with a Torch, I know !)
We have Oliver Callan (probably a high Testerone p***y grabber, I know !)
google.ie/amp/s/www.irishti … 3fmode=amp

Your support group has a load of po-faced, hair triggered, male Antifa wannabes. And Una Mullally. The craic will be immense. Sorry I meant immense/ femmense/transmense. Didn’t mean to trigger anyone.


well said


Yes, vaginas are just like cars.


The guy is a bit of a dinosaur but at least he has some interesting and controversial things to say. If everyone was only exposed to PC media and used that as a barometer for what to expect in the real world then they would be in for a guaranteed shock.

It was indeed clumsily made and is a very difficult point to argue. As was said, context is everything.

Those that stayed in the path of an approaching hurricane have to bare some responsibility for putting themselves in harms way. Or a tourist nabbed by a crocodile. Can you blame a force of nature?

Where the culprit is human however the blame shifts entirely to the perpetrator in this case.
If you walk through the wrong neighbourhood in Baltimore and get mugged. Were you stupid, reckless, unlucky? Maybe all but you are blameless.
Innocent people killed by bombing campaigns in Northern Ireland. How much caution should they have exercised themselves or should they have been forced to moved to a perceptively safer location? Blameless victims nonetheless.
Family car struck by a drink driver. We all take a risk every time we get in a car. Is that reckless?

The victims of rape are completely blameless. Some may have flown closer to the wind than others but they didn’t decide they were going to get raped or want it so it cannot be their fault.

Maybe I’m wrong but I didn’t take it that GH believes any rape victims are to blame. Their blame score is 0 %.
Their risk score however varies on the circumstances they place themselves in or perhaps find themselves in. Is there any responsibility for taking a risk or who much risk? That’s the question that should be up for debate. The blame debate is a bit of a red herring.