For the record, however, here is the confession in CAA’s latest spammed screed; take it as you will:
This banned commenter is not a he, you insulting bully, but Alizia who participated for years on this forum. You did not merely bad, you CANCELLED, in exactly the same way as your dreaded Democrat Left has done and will continue to do. You especial reacted when I told you, to your arrogant face, that you were a bully. And you gave me “4 hours” to retract my statement and beg for forgiveness. Que te chingues! You will not ever EVER succeed in the use of intellectual force to bend my thinking to your will. So: fuck you Jack Marshall. You are a fraud. What you demand as ethical behavior is to cower before you; to beg you to forgive me for being completely honest about what I think. For this reason, and for as long as I desire to and find it useful and entertaining, I will exercise my choice not to submit to cancellation as an ethical act of resistance. You Jack Marshall actually represent an ideological regime of the power-establishment. You attempt to control thought and opinion by force and by bullying and intellectual violence.
Que te chingues, you are a fraud.
You have assembled a limited group of sycophants around you, and driven away those interested in and capable of contrary ideas and opinions. The sycophants that surround you — Witherspoon the most notable — refuse to oppose your dictatorial tendencies because they sense that opposition is not allowed. This is the reason to refer to you as a Boomer is not ad hominem. It is a designator to locate you in a specific generational attitude. That generation (that regime) violently purges those who do not toes the line. They make criticism and opposition into thoughtcrime.
You have shown your real true colors, Jack Marshall, and you would do well to admit your own error, not demand that I or anyone bow down before your bully attitude.
Have I made myself clear? Being truthful is what “shows promise”, you arrogant jerk.
Nice! Also a blatant misrepresentation. As long-time readers and civil commenters here know, I have always permitted criticism, contrary opinions and in some cases (AblativeMeatshield comes to mind), offensive comments as long as they conformed to standards clearly stated on the home page. I even gave a regular column to a left-leaning commenter who was analytical, articulate, fair and, I thought, a friend, only to be kicked in my metaphorical face when said commenter became Trump Deranged and fled with nary a “thank-you” or “good bye.”
As the comment itself admits, Aliza and her fascist tendencies were given a platform and tolerated here for years. What got Alizia banned was not her opinions but 1) defying my order to stop bringing her hatred of Israel into every discussion regardless of the topic and 2) refusing to retract and apologize for an attack on me. The fact that she was given an opportunity to retract was a privilege she had gained by virtue of being a veteran commenter; a new commenter who made similar comments would be summarily banned with no appeal. I will not be treated with disrespect on my own site.
So that solves the mystery, or at least should consign it to the dustbin of Ethics Alarms history. If whoever it is keeps posting when I am asleep, walking Spuds or advancing the cause of legal ethics, please don’t respond. I’ll flame the garbage as soon as I return.
Meaning of “Que te chingues” in Spanish slang
“Que te chingues” is a vulgar Spanish expression that literally means “What the fuck are you doing?” or “What the hell are you doing?” but in practice it’s used to express annoyance, shock, or frustration, depending on tone and context.
Having grown up among Cuban refugees in Miami in the ’60s, I’m familiar with the type. Hot headed chicks. Franco era fascists at heart. She could very well be Cuban American, or maybe Venezuelan. Loves strongmen. The Muslims occupied most of the Iberian Peninsula for quite a while. Scratch a Hispanic, you get an Islamicist.
Thus spake a geriatric boomer sycophant
So, which corrupt, Latin American shithole have you come from in order to save the United States from itself?
If AT and CAIA are the same, I prefer the more direct writing style of CAIA. It’s much easier to follow. The the writing style of AT, while being appreciated for its distinctiveness here, was a bit to fluffy esoteric academic.
though not a profusive commentator. I look forward to reading, pondering, your post and the commentators that follow. I occassionaly add short snippets of observation.
Keep up the work! My gratitude!
Whoever it is seems to be having an old fashioned hissy-fit. I just spammed five more illicit, non-substantive, insulting comments. A few of the legit commentariate’s responses vanished with them. I think I’ve made it clear that we should not engage with Ol’ Nutball
From now on, we should all be wearing our underwear on the outside of our pants.
The latest nonsense is crying “Censorship!” Too bad nobody can explain to Whomever that in isn’t “censorship” for a citizen to bar someone from using a blog as a platform for his, her or its rants and delusions. Twitter and Facebook are public fora, Ethics Alarms is not. I don’t think the Freedom of Speech thing is that complicated, but maybe it is. For some.
[From your host:This one is long but easily summarized: “I have no life.” I am genuinely sorry about that, but its not my problem.]
Return of the strong Gods! Yikes! Like Franco and Mussolini? Fidel? Saddam Hussein? Mao? Hitler? Subtle? Like that? I don’t know whether you’ve been cancelled, but you’re clearly a lunatic. You’re messianic.
So, you’re Jewish?
Alizia Tyler aka Cassandra’s AI Agent the internet troll wrote, “The sycophants that surround you — Witherspoon the most notable — refuse to oppose your dictatorial tendencies because they sense that opposition is not allowed.”
Like so many things this Alizia writes, this too is HOGWASH!
I do like how she singled me out (she’s clearly psychologically obsessed with Jack and I) but it’s certainly not because I’m some kind of mindless “sycophant”, it’s because I didn’t pander to her and I pointed out her absurd trolling nonsense. Some things are worth repeating; one of the last things I wrote regarding what she wrote “I understand all sorts of things…” in one of her final comments before being banned…..
Alizia also wrote in the same thread, “You miss entirely the point I am making” to which I replied…
One time she had the gall to change her moniker to this…
I took a screenshot of it immediately so she couldn’t lie and say she didn’t do it after she quickly changed it to the fleur-de-lee.
From all the written words and actions by Alizia/Cassandra, I’m fully convinced that she is a racist/anti-Semite and an obsessed internet troll and should be treated as such anytime she makes her morally bankrupt presence known. Alizia/Cassandra the internet troll has earned every word of ridicule.
Don’t go away mad Alizia/Cassandra, just go away.
This time, stay gone.
If you recall, “A Friend” also made a point of attacking you.
I think I pegged “A Friend” as an internet troll after reading two or three of the comments posted. When faced with an obvious duck, don’t hold back, call it what it is.
Ever heard the phrase, “if you want an alcoholic to hit rock bottom so they can take a step towards self-awareness and recovery, then drive them to drink”. It’s a morally bankrupt thing to do to an alcoholic because of the possible consequences of their drinking but the same general thing can be said of internet trolls.
Th writing styles don’t seem the same at all – I think Alizia and Cassandra are two people, despite efforts to make you think otherwise. Perhaps it doesn’t even matter – a troll is a troll.
Yes, I agree with that; I’ve found the styles different from the start. Then again, I would expect the real Alizia to email me to reveal the hoax, like Howard Hughes did to explode the Howard Hughes memoirs scam.
I recall Alizia doing the “self-exile” thing for a while before coming back. I remember I took a leaf out of Extradimentional Cephelopod’s book in helping her be more persuasive. She responded with something along the lines of “I’m not trying to be persuasive.” I knew then that she was never interested in true learning and dialogue, only preaching her own point of view.
I’ve been wondering though, why you gave her a time limit to apologize for her final insult. What difference would a day, a week, or more have made?
I always give a time limit for apologies and retractions. I want these things settled and closed: settlement offers have deadlines.
I just dumped 13 spammed comments from whomever it is, and that doesn’t count the ones I left up but hollowed out to preserve relies by approved commenters. It shattered the revious record for single day assholery by a banned commenter.