For some time, commenters on Frank Report have debated the important topic of whether Kristin Kreuk, that marvelous taxpayer-funded Canadian actress, is a class A virtue-signaller.
Kreuk, the brilliant actress who currently plays a heroic attorney who fights litigious bullies and a pedophile father in her Canadian TV series, has taken to social media to condemn men who abuse women – and advocate for women taking the law in their own hands – including cutting off the penises of and murdering rapists without a trial.
Her condemnation of Harvey Weinstein, and her advocacy of Lorena Bobbit, and the India mass murderess, Phoolan Devi – who schemed the slaughter of 21 men, some of whom were possibly innocent – without a trial – on her word alone that they raped her – show that Kreuk has fixed social justice ideals and is prepared to Tweet them out to the world.
Some have thought it a tad bit hypocritical of actress Kreuk, who was a longtime member of the Nxivm sex-slaver cult [she was a coach, not just a student], to condemn Weinstein for abusing women but saying not a word about the man she endorsed for almost a decade – Keith Alan Raniere – who certainly rivals Weinstein in his abuse of women.
While Raniere raped women and girls, Kreuk never once brought her “take the law in your own hands” doctrine – the kill or dismember a rapist or abuser without a trial – advocacy against Raniere.
And while taxpayers toil at their drudgery, presumably most happily because they can go home from their work and be privileged to watch the brave-acting talented lady play a fearless lawyer who tackles bullies and sex perverts on TV, Kreuk has been criticized on Frank Report for Tweeting virtuous notions about others – yet when the call came to help her lost friends in the sex cult – and say something publicly to save them – she chose to be wholly uninvolved.
And then Tweeted more about other social justice issues.
Recently, however, a commenter, believed to be her most ardent supporter, Sultan of Six, raised a defense of Kreuk by attacking the attackers.
Sultan [or so he is believed to be, though he signed his name Sea Husky] says that not only is Kristin Kreuk right not to speak of her long role in Nxivm and to Tweet out her beliefs about others – but that anyone who calls her a virtue signaller is actually a virtue signaller himself!
Here is a recent exchange between Sea Husky [believed to be Sultan] and a commenter we call Kreuk Buster [KB]:
Sea Husky [S]: Kreuk wasn’t at Sarah Edmondson’s wedding as far as I know.
Kreuk Buster [KB]: Why would you know or not know? There was a video posted to Frank Report a while ago.
S: Not sure she would have even been invited at that point.
KB: She was a member of the cult at least as recently as 2016, so yes she would of been invited. And she was invited. And she attended.
S: Don’t think Mark Hildreth was there either. Mark Vicente was one of the groomsmen and I think Jim Del Negro went as well. Allison Mack was definitely there as she sang.
KB And how do you know about Vicente, Del Negro and Allison Mack but not Kristin Kreuk and Mark Hildreth?
S: You keep repeating the same thing about the Times Union story.
KB: Anyone who reads the Frank Report knows about the Times Union stories.
S: But you know very well that Kreuk was only mentioned in the February 11 article about NXIVM courting the rich and famous and that article contained nothing about the rape allegations or the suicides.
KB: The Times Union articles were a SERIES of FOUR articles.
• Part 3: Raniere’s multi-level marketing mind.
• Part 4: A history of Raniere’s sexual conquests.
Kreuk was named in that series, ergo, she was named in the same expose that spoke of rape, pedophilia and other crimes. Don’t piss in a wine glass and tell people its champagne.
S: That explosive, damning article about Raniere’s pedophilia came out one week later on February 18 and contained no mention of Kreuk.
KB: Kristin Kreuk was named in one part in a SERIES of FOUR articles that made up the expose. You cannot roll that turd in glitter, no matter how you try and re-frame it.
S: The February 11, 2012 article was basically just a summary of some of the ‘name’ people associated with the group over the years and included Roger Stone, Richard Branson and the Dalai Lama.
KB: And Kristin Kreuk and some of the others named in that section of the expose continued to support the cult, including Allison Mack and Mark Vicente.
S: Kreuk wasn’t even considered a big enough name to warrant a picture or even the headline of the “actress” section. The picture and bolded headline distinction went to one Linda Evans.
KB: Kreuk was the biggest name and draw in the Vancouver branch. Kreuk’s name was used to recruit at least one branded sex slave in 2013. The author of the Times Union articles would not of known much if anything about individuals and their roles in the NXIVM criminal cult. Here on Frank Report, we have learnt quite a bit.
S: You obviously have been obsessively following this actress for years.
KB: Okay Sultan. Don’t forget about Nancy Salzman, Sara and Clare Bronfman, Allison Mack, Nicki Clyne and the other ‘names’ in NXIVM too. People casually reading the Saratoga In Decline blog before Frank Report took over the anti-NXIVM coverage and learning about key figures in the NXIVM cult seems to upset you and touch an emotional nerve.
S: Otherwise how would you know what her fans were doing 8 years ago.
KB: Because the idiots (like you), were posting on the Saratoga In Decline blog in the comments like flies around shit and when internet searching Kreuk’s NXIVM affiliated group “Girls By Design”, among other NXIVM affiliated groups, you could see what the loser fans (like you) were saying and posting online.
S: Are you sure you aren’t Sultan?
KB: No Sultan. I am not you.
S: So while you may have known Joe O’Hara threw her name in his list of people who MAY have possibly known or done something, since she, along with those 50-60 other people were never served, you have no idea what she was aware of.
KB: NXIVM knew who Joe O’Hara and John Tighe (of the Saratoga In Decline blog) were. NXIVM went after them. On the SID blog, John Tighe posted an article about O’Hara’s lawsuit with a picture of Kristin Kreuk mentioning she had been named. Of course, Kreuk knew about the blog, there were private pictures of her posted on that site and her fans (like you) posted about them.
S: And by omitting people like Nicki Clyne and Sarah Edmondson from his list of names, all O’Hara demonstrated was that he didn’t really know anything about the people.
KB: Joe O’Hara omitting certain names he didn’t know of does not mean he didn’t know anything about anyone and does not render those he did name as clean. Unknown terrorists not put on a Most Wanted list does not mean those that are on said list don’t deserve to be. Just being named on a list like that, especially when in the public eye, should be a red flag. Also, Sarah Edmondson’s husband Anthony Ames was named, along with his nickname “Nippy”.
S: And with every batch of photos that Frank publishes from Necker Island, all he does is show that you didn’t have to be that involved or high up in the group to garner an invite to that gathering, i.e., MIA, Ben Bronfman, Georgiana Bronfman, and all of those people no one can identify.
KB: Actually, you did. Ben Bronfman and Georgiana Bronfman were invited as they were cousin and mother to the Bronfman brats. MIA was engaged to Ben Bronfman and as for the others you cannot identify, you have no idea who they were, how high up they were or anything else for that matter.
S: If Sara B wanted to party and impress, she obviously was going to invite some beautiful actresses over the likes of Kathy Russell.
KB: And yet she invited Emiliano Salinas, Nancy Salzman, Mark Hildreth and Alejandro Betancourt… Kristin Kreuk is a prolific virtue-signaller and a hypocrite. Virtue signaling and hypocrisy are not necessarily the same thing but they often go hand in hand.
Example, Kristin Kreuk being asked by her fellow NXIVM cultists to help fight her cult (after they were personally affected), which was branding sex slaves. A cult led by a pedophile rapist. Kreuk refused as her “career” is much more important to her. Instead, she took a huge chunk of taxpayer dollars to pretend to fight a pedophile, rapist, “racist” on TV and on social media, she spoke all big about women’s issues, Harvey Weinstein, Phoolan Devi (a criminal murderer), etc.
That is mega virtue signaling and hypocrisy. She is still virtue signaling all these leftist “issues”. Nothing you say can erase these facts. It’s on public record now.
S: Your psycho-babble just proves you don’t know what you are talking about. You are claiming calling out virtue signaling is the other half of virtue signaling like two halves of the same coin. You are saying it’s just a “point of view”, like being anti or pro ISIS, as if it’s the same thing, two sides of the same coin.
KB: Calling out virtue signaling is not about the accuser. It’s not to make the accuser look good. It’s putting the spotlight on the one being accused. It does not matter if the virtue signaller believes 0.1% of the subject or 100%, they want to first and foremost to look good while they are doing it.
S: Someone might be unhappy by an Islamic terrorist attack. However, going on social media to declare your “solidarity” with the attacked city and why Muslims are peaceful, with the intention of looking good to others is hollow empty bullshit virtue signaling.
KB: Saying “fuck these jihadi cunts”, meaning it and not giving a shit about being praised or criticized is NOT virtue signaling. It’s the intention behind it. If you point out a virtue signaling moron like Kristin Kreuk or one of these other leftist celebrities who are desperate to be liked and adored by being pretentious (whether they believe any of their shit or not) and you are not doing so to appear virtuous yourself, then it is NOT virtue signaling. Claiming otherwise is pure projection and makes the virtue-signaller more in need of a mighty slap…
Virtue signaling is ‘hinting’ through empty words that you are morally more righteous than others without saying so, wanting to appear virtuous to others, but not actually doing anything or wanting to do anything to demonstrate it. Empty words. Bullshit behaviors. Like these celebrities at awards shows. All talk. It’s the intention to look virtuous to others as your main motivation.
If your motivation is to point out “what a fake dickhead” she/he is, without being remotely motivated by looking virtuous, then it is NOT virtue signaling. It’s the intention and motivation that differentiates.
When I see a liberal celebrity talking shit about “walls are racist” from behind their guarded mansion walls, it pisses me off. It does not make me feel virtuous and pointing out their bullshit is not an attempt to make myself look good to others, or make myself feel virtuous. I’m stating what an asshole the celebrity is, not how virtuous I am.
It matters not whether the virtual signaller is an actor or not. Virtue signaling is virtue signaling. Calling out virtue signaling is not virtue signaling. The one calling it out is not trying to appear virtuous. Kreuk is.
For 10 years, the taxpayer-funded, adorable actress recruited and was used to recruit women into the sex slaver cult. She claims she knew nothing about any illegal activities in Nxivm in her single Tweet on the subject, following Raniere’s arrest, when it was safe to make a comment.
But her sole comment was misleading. She claimed she was a mere student who took a class or two. She forgot to mention she was a coach and recruited others.
Meantime follow her on Twitter, she has a lot to say about what’s wrong with the world.