Listen very carefully to how Mike explains the Narrative Warfare capacity of Globohomo, when it came online, and why they freaked out. He did not mention us by name, but considering the anniversary event and that Games Journos are the Farm League for Mainstream Media and do every single bit of Narrative bullshit that the big players do FOR THE SAME REASONS.
We were the Black Swan that no one saw coming! We were the first to crack that wall in the Narrative Warfare Dyson Sphere. Sure, we did it against the Regime’s Farm League Teams, but we did it nonetheless; it’s no different than an unexpected revolt in a heretofore secure rear area garrisoned by shitters and losers because that’s exactly what it was.
The newbs and fuckups screwed up a job with low expectations, then fucked up the containment response, and suddenly people further up the status (and thus command) ladder had to be diverted to handle something that they should never have had to handle. In the process of doing this, we did irreperable damage to the Narrative Warfare Complex.
The lessons that were learned, the tactics that were developed, and the example that was set are still relevant today. The power of the Meme Magic we collectively unleashed is such that even those who are genuinely opposed to the Establishment Narrative are terrified of our ability to punch through it. Seriously, the fourth rule of r/neilgaimanuncovered is “No reposts from “Neil Gaiman Memes” and yet the posters there still regularly take their lead from some of our posts.
A few days ago, Milo, Ethan, Mundane Matt, myself, Sargon of Akkad, and a few more of the 40 or so original #GamerGaters appeared on a 10th Anniversary of GG Killstream, and it was remarkable to discover how despite our widely disparate politics, fields, and interests, every single one of us had been the subject of multiple hit pieces by the mainstream media, the same mainstream media that has been desperately trying to maintain its wall of silence about the growing number of accusations of sexual assault, non-disclosure agreements, and large monetary payouts.
But sometimes, silence speaks volumes. Indeed, perhaps the most damning confirmation of the worst-case scenario is the fact that The Guardian hasn’t fluffed Neil Gaiman once in the last two months.
So, to paraphrase an old GG aphorism, shut up and meme, boys! Shut up and meme. Vivian’s grown up and gone Goth.
The wall of silence surrounding Neil Gaiman is cracking and beginning to crumble, as both The Bookseller and Publishers Weekly have now publicly referenced the latest Tortoise Media episode, and, as previously mentioned, The Bookseller has been actively reaching out to Gaiman’s publishers for comments on the growing number of accusations of sexual assault, to absolutely no avail.
I suspect the reason further cracks are appearing is that hearing Neil Gaiman’s words in his own voice is more convincing to a skeptic than any amount of documentary and testimonial evidence would be. Any hope of simply blaming the podcast series on an anti-trans agenda or that it’s a whole lot of nothing is rapidly disappearing. The transcript of the sixth episode is now available, and it is extremely damning. Though again, not as damning as actually hearing Gaiman’s whiny, self-pitying voice.
NEIL GAIMAN: Hello! CLAIRE: Hey! NEIL GAIMAN: How are you? Apart from probably very nervous about this call. CLAIRE: (brief chuckle) Um… I’m doing well, I – (inaudible, trails off in background) …my letter… NEIL GAIMAN: …reading your letter, I – if I’d known that – I’d took up that headspace… CLAIRE: (audible breath) Heh… NEIL GAIMAN: for you… I would’ve… I don’t know! I would’ve – I definitely would’ve been reaching out a long – time ago! I… I… you know… I’ve never thought of you with anything other than fondness, and… CLAIRE: Mm. NEIL GAIMAN: – a little awkwardness, and… um… you know… have me feeling like I’ve got the wrong end of the stick, but I thought you were – terrific! And I – was heartbroken, seeing that I was giving you nightmares, and… (heavy sighs) So I’m really sorry! NEIL GAIMAN: I … don’t think anything is gonna unwrite the bits that I’ve obviously fucked up on all this. And – and I’m trying to make up some of the damage.
PAUL CARUANA GALIZIA: Claire tells him that she’s had a long stretch of therapy, one that’s put financial strain on her family, and she expresses concern about how expensive the baby she’s expecting is going to be. Neil Gaiman is quick to offer a solution.
NEIL GAIMAN: Would you like me to send you some money? CLAIRE: I – again, the whole – like, putting a price tag on – NEIL GAIMAN: I mean, I’m not – I’m not trying to put a price tag, I’m – CLAIRE: (nervous laugh) …yeah… NEIL GAIMAN: like – just trying to – I’m – I’m not sure that I’m – reading you – I’m, I, I said that very bluntly, ‘cause, uh – (CLAIRE laughs) Like – listen – you’ve got a baby on the way and I appreciate that five hundred – dollars a month… CLAIRE: (laugh) Yeah. NEIL GAIMAN: …is, over a decade, is gonna stack up, and … a lot of that must have been my fault.
PAUL CARUANA GALIZIA: The two end the call slightly awkwardly. Five days later, Neil Gaiman calls Claire again.
NEIL GAIMAN: So, I have a plan. CLAIRE: Okay? NEIL GAIMAN: And I wanted to run it by you… and see if it’s acceptable for you. Um… and I’ve been doing a lot of thinking. A lot of – a lot of listening to what you were saying on the last call. Um… so… what you said about paying for your… therapy. (CLAIRE murmurs) I did the numbers and I went, “Well, that’s 10 years… at $500 a month,” which I make comes out to about $60,000. Um… so what I would propose… is that I will give you 15 thousand dollars a year for four years. Which… is the – the top level of a tax-free gift. CLAIRE: Mm. NEIL GAIMAN: So I can gift it – I can gift you $15,000 each year. And you do not have to pay that, pay any tax or anything on that. That is just a gift. Um… and then, I’m gonna make a hefty donation, to… to the place you sent me the link to. CLAIRE: Mm-hmm (affirmative). NEIL GAIMAN: …And that is my plan, if that is acceptable to you. CLAIRE: That – is really generous! Um, and I appreciate your – um – your appreciation for the – NEIL GAIMAN: …You know, I did something so much shittier than I ever dreamed, that I – I didn’t even realize I was doing something shitty. I did something really shitty.
PAUL CARUANA GALIZIA: On the 2nd of August 2022, Neil Gaiman sends Claire $60,000 to cover the cost of her therapy. It’s not the first time Neil Gaiman has paid women he was involved with money. Two months earlier, he had sent some NZ$13,000 (which is nearly US$8,000) and a non-disclosure agreement to Scarlett after an allegedly abusive sexual relationship that lasted three weeks. And around 8 months before paying Claire, he had paid US$275,000 and an NDA to Caroline Wallner after he allegedly coerced her into providing him with sex under the threat of evicting her and her three daughters from his property.
Mr. Galizia and others who are actively investigating the allegations have assured us there is more to come. A lot more, I would imagine, considering some of the unpleasant things that are being uncovered and some of the unexpected connections that are now being made. At this point, given that we now have reason to suspect Gaiman of being another manufactured success, I don’t think it’s even entirely safe to assume that the actor playing the role of the writer necessarily wrote everything that “Neil Gaiman” is presently credited with having written; the larger question is how deep this particular rabbit hole is going to go.
#GaimanGate quote of the day: “Neil Gaiman’s work is for immature goths at an 8th grade reading level.”
The BBC is never going to keep itself out of the headlines, not as long as it limits its staff to the anti-traditional, the degenerate, and the diverse:
I want to acknowledge that this has been a demanding period for the BBC and everyone who works within it.
The shocking news about Huw Edwards and other stories, concerning some of our high profile shows, have put the BBC in the spotlight. It can be challenging for us all when the BBC becomes the headline. We work for this wonderful organisation because we care about what it stands for and the role it plays in society.
I know we have all felt let down and worried about the impact on the BBC. However, we hold ourselves to the highest standards and we know there will be lessons we can learn to ensure we have the strongest possible workplace culture.
Just wait. There will be more. There will always be more, because they’re not actually against most of it. They just don’t want the British public to know that.
It’s always fascinating to see how “who whom” trumps absolutely everything else for the SJW. Not even war or criminal accusations are as important as their identity boundaries are to them. A tale of two tweets from the SJW micro-Twitter to which they’ve retreated in the aftermath of the Musk acquisition.
Just deleted a link to an article on the Gaimanbots published on a site that’s comicsgate affiliated. Mea culpa! TL;DR: s’lookin like someone hired a very expensive cyberPR company to flood major social media platforms with cornball “Gaiman! He’s ginchy!” AI-generated bot posts.
I have been puzzled by your silence on the serious allegations leveled against Gaiman. Promoting his work without even a mention is shocking to me, given Bleeding Cool’s gossip column origins. Will you cover this story?
It literally never occurs to them that they are actively assisting the media’s wall of silence regarding the Neil Gaiman sexual assault allegations because they are hiding most of what little coverage exists since they don’t like the only journalists who are willing to breach that wall. In fact, many of them even rejected the initial allegations due to an insane theory that Boris Johnson’s sister had manufactured the allegations in order to destroy Neil Gaiman’s reputation due to Gaiman being a public advocate for transexualism.
Meanwhile, no one besides Fandom Pulsehas covered the story about the bots and the professional social media campaign being waged on behalf of Neil Gaiman, aside from The Bookseller‘s initial reporting of Gaiman’s engagement of the firm.
Neil Gaiman appears to have engaged a damage-control firm and begun an extensive social media campaign TWO MONTHS BEFORE the podcast that broke the news of the alleged sexual assaults, based on what the members of the Neil Gaiman Facebook group have observed.
In the past few weeks, there have been reports that a reputation management firm has been hired by Neil or on his behalf, and their activities may include astroturfing X with positive comments about his work. Messages take the form of paragraph of Chat-GPT-style text praising a Gaiman project, or describing it as if readers will never have heard of it before (which is not appropriate for the intended audience, who have already been discussing it for years). There is then a bunch of replies to the post expressing delight about the work. I assumed that couldn’t happen on Facebook.
A few days ago I was concerned by a post that was shared to this group from the Neil Gaiman group. Now, we’re all positive folks and we’re here because we like Neil’s stuff (or did until recently), so it’s not unusual for the mood to be on the enthusiastic side. It’s possible I’m seeing more than is there. But… You can check how long somebody has been a member of a group, so I had a quick look for each of the posters. Tortoise Media’s podcast was published on 3rd July so there would have been an awareness of their initial investigations in the months running up to then. A remarkable number of commenters only joined the Neil Gaiman group in May, June, and July.
A Reddit commenter points out that Gaiman’s claims to have been diagnosed with autism – at the age of 62 – appear to be rather dubious. He first made the claims on March 8, 2023. That would appear to have been before the podcast production was underway, but well after Gaiman was aware that he was going to be facing public accusations of sexual assault.
If I remember correctly, didn’t he also talk about having autism for the first time a few months before the podcast was released? I think he confirmed it for the first time on Tumblr earlier this year, (and surprise, that was one of the defenses used by a friend of his who talked to Tortoise). Seems like he and his team were already long prepared for the podcast episodes to drop and had a plan in place.
It’s certainly interesting that while Gaiman is more than willing to tell people that he’s autistic – which apparently has not impressed anyone as an even remotely legitimate diagnosis – while continuing to conceal what appears to be his continued involvement with Scientology. Personally, I think he should have gone with sociopathy, although perhaps that would have struck just a little bit too close to home.
Check out this breakdown of joe rogans new special and how over the top and aggressively gay he is. It’s at 1.4 million views in under a week and climbing. I want to see the fear in the eyes of all the frauds who lie and ass kiss rogan and attack anyone who makes fun of him in any way. I want to see that moment when they realize everyone knows now and they can no longer gas light and ad hominem anyone who makes joe feel insecure or sad.
I want to see them slowly start saying more vague things about joes contribution to comedy. Maybe from “saving” all of comedy to “he’s not totally destroying it. I mean he’s a really nice guy when you get to know him.” I knew this day would come. Enjoy every minute of this
Joe routinely talks shit about me on his podcast for saying obviously true and hilarious things. Well. I’ve learned in farming that eventually the chickens all come home to roost. And on a level of feel for the guy. I don’t hate him. I’m not taking pleasure in his humiliation. It’s all the comics who know better and lie. I do take pleasure in watching them squirm knowing that they have to “pivot their position.” I don’t think joe is as aware of the situation as all the leaches and ass kissers around him. Those guys can be the most vicious and the most cowardly.
The critical breakdown of Rogan’s stand-up special is much, much funnier than the special itself.
Unfortunately now it sounds like the crowd’s initial excitement and enthusiasm is running on fumes as we’ve got our first real obvious awkward bomb of the night. The crowd goes completely silent and Joe just stands there like a deer in headlights, now I don’t know if this is from excitement and arousal or from nervousness and fear likely some combination but this is the moment Joe starts profusely sweating through the mustard blouse perhaps its nerves from some subconscious realization that his shadow is about to take the wheel and squirt out a major leak here. Pay attention to this region here and watch how it develops throughout the show and by the way oh oh man look at Chekov’s Stool behind him just teasing us back there. Stop teasing us Joe! He knows how to build suspense that’s for sure.
Seriously though these aren’t really jokes, this is all just his regular podcast banter he’s been doing for the past 5 years, just yelled on a stage in front of an audience, and the bombs are piling up… it’s clear that his heart isn’t in it anymore. This thing was just a Greatest Hits Montage of the worst era of this guy’s podcast condensed into an hour.
This is how it’s done. In fact, if everyone refused to talk to the media, its influence would be significantly degraded, because without the cover of direct quotes from the relevant sources, their little hit pieces always end up looking like the groundless opinion pieces they actually are.
News query from The Associated Press
I’m a reporter covering religion and politics for The Associated Press. I’m working a story about Sen. JD Vance and the role of Catholicism in his life and approach to public policy. He has often been discussed as being in dialogue with Catholic post-liberals or integralists. You’ve been described as one of the leaders of the integralist movement, or as you have described it, political Catholicism. Would you be open to an interview on this topic, on your interactions with Sen. Vance and on your thoughts about the implications of his nomination for the vice presidency?
Peter Smith, Reporter, Global Religion team, The Associated Press
Dear Mr. Smith, Thank you for your message. With whatever respect may be due, I would rather handle a hissing viper than interview with a journalist from the Associated Press. Come to think of it, I have spoken unjustly; vipers are at least sincere in their own way.
Adrian Vermeule, Ralph S. Tyler Professor of Constitutional Law, Harvard Law School
Personally, I usually don’t even bother responding to the inquiries, because even the most firmly negative response just causes them to run their Reluctant Interview script, in which they first appeal to the opportunity to let you tell your own side of the story, then to the importance of the story, and finally, to veiled threats about some of the negative stuff they could write about, but might not if you talk to them.
Don’t take the bait, in fact, don’t even respond to them in the first place. Don’t get cute, don’t get clever; the more dishonest reporters will even try to utilize any rhetoric on your part and present it as you somehow threatening them. Remember, their whole objective is to make you look bad, and anything you say to them, or write to them, is potential grist for the mill.
But don’t delete their emails, always save them, in case you need them for the police or for a lawsuit. Because it looks really bad for them when they are issuing those veiled threats or claim to be “giving you the chance to respond” to a story that is already written and is scheduled to run the very next day.
Grummz calls out WIRED for lying – again – about #GamerGate:
Wired gets it completely wrong.
Gamergate started because journalists were exposed for trading favorable reviews and coverage in exchange for favors, and for lying about it, as well as the movement.
Ethics in journalism was the banner, and now Wired is perpetuating the lies and smear campaign that started it all.
Just yesterday we had recent example of a game journalist’s corruption, and even just weeks ago with Ubisoft and expensive Disney trips for influences.
The gaslighting that wired is doing here, shows the reasons haven’t changed, and the journalists are still scum.
To this day, the media still knows virtually nothing about #GamerGate. As an OG GamerGater, I do. I was there from the very start ten years ago, before it was even christened #GamerGate. I even know the identity of GamerGater#1, who broke GameJournoPros and exposed the gaming media’s whole ghastly favors-trading game; most people have forgotten that I was once not only a game journalist myself, I was the first professionally syndicated one.
The gaslighting, as Grummz correctly described it, was always an attempt to change the narrative away from the gaming media’s wrongdoings, many of which are things they do openly today that they don’t even bother to hide.
The fall is a bitch when the Black Rider has no further use for you. The YouTube CEO is dead of turbo cancer and I very much doubt that any of the thousands of video creators who were unjustly kicked off of YouTube by her and her minions for nonexistent and unidentified “violations” will shed one single tear for the woman.
Susan Wojcicki, who served as CEO of YouTube for nine years during a period of massive growth for the video platform and was one of Google‘s first hires, died on Friday, Aug. 9. She was 56. Wojcicki’s death after a two-year fight with cancer was announced by her husband, Dennis Troper.
You can take the ticket when it’s offered. But all those millions and all that manufactured success won’t avail you much once you cease to be useful and you’re thrown from the high horse. And there is no question that the late YouTube CEO merited her fate, given that she actively pushed the shot that very likely killed her. If she had paid attention to what she called “misinformation about COVID-19” instead of banning it, she would probably still be alive and well.
YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki on Tuesday said the platform has removed more than half a million videos that contain misinformation about COVID-19 since February.
I don’t know why, but the wicked are always foolish enough to believe that their even more wicked masters won’t lie to them.
Wow, I was so mad at her when she deleted my YouTube account and my income for “hate” that turned out to be “true.” But seeing her deplatformed from life itself is humbling. At least I still get to be on rumble. She’s now not even allowed on bitchute. But seriously tho does this mean I can go back on YouTube?
Former BBC presenter Huw Edwards has been charged with child pornography offences after 37 indecent images were allegedly shared on a WhatsApp chat.
Scotland Yard confirmed the 62-year-old broadcaster was facing three charges of making indecent images of children between December 2020 and April 2022.
Police said Edwards was arrested on November 8 last year and charged just over a month ago on June 26 following authorisation from the Crown Prosecution Service.
Edwards – who helmed royal and political events at the BBC before resigning in April – has been bailed and will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court this Wednesday.
According to the charge sheet, Edwards is accused of having six category A images, 12 category B pictures and 19 category C photographs on WhatsApp.
And yes, it’s pretty much all of them. The evil guys don’t want to talk about the wicked guys, they prefer to systematically target the kind of people who will call them out for what they are.
And they tell you what they are. You just have to believe what you read. Consider the following, written by the accused himself, Mr. Tubcuddle:
Today I had my photo taken, for an American Library Association Series of author photo posters. (The poster won’t be out for months. You’ll need to get something else in the meantime, like their Sherman Alexie poster. Or their Orlando Bloom READ poster. Or their P. Craig Russell Sandman poster.) The photographer explained that she was going to do a straightforward photo (which she took), and that later she wants take some more imaginative ones — me looming from the darkness, me with paint or ink dripping from my hand, that kind of thing. And then she mentioned that she wanted to also take a photo of me as the mythological or literary character of my choice, and wondered who I’d like to be.
“Red Riding Hood’s Wolf,” I said, because I went perfectly blank, and that was the first thing that popped into my completely blank head. So I’m going to be Red Riding Hood’s Wolf in a photo, although this may not be obvious to anyone except the photographer and me.
Afterwards, she asked why…
I honestly didn’t know, so I started writing, to try and figure it out.
I think part of the idea of Red Riding Hood’s Wolf (why her wolf? Possibly because I was given a Ladybird book containing the story of Little Red Riding Hood, when I was an infant, and that was the first time I’d encountered the image of a wolf standing on his hind legs. He wore a jacket, at least in memory he did, in the paintings, and was talking comfortably to Red Riding Hood, who was chubby and pretty, and much older than I was, and I could absolutely understand what he saw in her, and for me Sondheim’s song “Hello Little Girl” was already beginning to come into existence, as text not subtext: obviously, this meeting was to be the start of a beautiful friendship, one that would last — girl and wolf — forever). The wolf in the story represents an awful lot of stuff — the danger and truth of stories, for a start, and the way they change; he symbolises — not predation, for some reason — but transformation: the meeting in the wild wood that changes everything forever. Angela Carter’s statement that “some men are hairy on the inside” comes to mind: as an image, in my head, it’s the wolf’s shadow that has ears and a tail, while the man in wolf form stands in his forest (and cities are forests too) and waits for the girl in the red cloak , picking flowers, to come along, or, hungrily, watches her leave…
There’s a woodcutter, and an axe, but at the start of the story, the wolf is waiting again, and he’s just fine.
When I was a boy, when I grew up I wanted to be a wolf. I never wanted to be a wolfman. I didn’t really want to be a werewolf, except for a few years in my early teens. I wanted to be a wolf, in a forest or in the world.
Later, as an adult, I remember encountering the story of Red Riding Hood in its original form, a French version that predated the cleaned-up ways of telling the tale I’d already encountered, and the bleak sexuality of the story came through: when she encounters the wolf in her grandmother’s bed, he eats and drinks her grandmother with her, then tells her to take off all her clothes and throw them on the fire — she wouldn’t be needing them any more, — and, finally, she joins him in the bed naked. And then, with no more ado, he eats her. And there the story stops, sometimes with a direct moral — not to talk to strangers — and sometimes without it. The story disturbed me, and I put it into Sandman, in the Serial Killers’ Convention story, where it represents a number of things at once, and is also itself.
The wolf defines Red Riding Hood. He makes the story happen. Without him, she’d just be another girl on her way to her grandmother’s house. And she’d leave her goodies behind, and come home, and no-one would ever have heard of her. But he’s not just her wolf: he’s all the wolves on the edge of the world, all the wolves in all the stories, all the wolves in all the dreams of wolves; flashing green eyes in the darkness, dangerously honest about what he wants: food, company, an appetite.
And if I could be any literary figure, I think, today, I’d be strangely happy to be him.
TRANSLATION: if they get him for breaking the law, it’s going to because the girl was underage.
UPDATE: Oh, the irony. I was banned from commenting at /r neilgaimanuncovered because the moderator read my biography on Wikipedia. La, whatever shall I do? Anyhow, I’ll continue to mine the subreddit for information, but now they won’t get what we dig up without reading VP and Fandom Pulse.
Feminists are such retards.
FEMINIST: Why won’t men speak out against rich, famous men attacking young women?
EVERY FEMINIST ALLY:-total silence-
VD and JDA: Rape and sexual assault are bad. Neil Gaiman is also bad.
FEMINIST: Shut up shut up shut up! Not you, you’re too evil! Now, why won’t men speak out against rich, famous men attacking young women?
UPDATE: The poster and photo referenced in Gaiman’s blog post. He’s just one fedora short of euphoria. Now you know why only losers and overweight, insecure goth girls ever thought he was cool.
