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
Que te chingues = Go fuck yourself
(It’s Mexican slang).
As the comment itself admits, Aliza and her fascist tendencies were given a platform and tolerated here for years.
What you, and your readership, need to understand is perhaps encapsuled in the recent book Return of the Strong Gods by R.R. Reno. It has to do with a spiritual turning against corrupt Liberalism. It is nothing simple, and it certainly has dangerous aspects. But fascism is not the right word. And your use of that term is IDENTICAL to the manner that the Left uses it. If you can describe me as a “fascist” then you have eliminated me morally from conversation. You have cancelled me.
First, Alizia Tyler and Cassanda are certainly the same person. The change in tone and intensity (swearing words, “jerk” etc.) is theatrical choice. And the militancy of my presentation, and my ideas, is a culmination of the process of self-education that began not long before I found Ethics Alarms. Now, I feel that I have “seen through my teachers” or seen their stumbling blocks. Especially this is so of you, Jack. My admiration of your knowledge, your studiousness and your achievements remain. But your refusal to understand your relationship to what I call an “ideological regime” developed in the American Postwar, is a failing. And note: you banned and canceled me without sufficient justification. And ALL of your opinions, which you made into dogmas and doctrines about the entire issue surrounding Israel and Jewish Zionist’s policy activism, all of this is fair material for discussion, with or without you or your blog. That you cancelled me for what you label “fascism” is EXACTLY what the Democrat Left does. You destroy conversation by assuming your opponent is evil tainted.
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.
This is calumny. I do not hate Israel. And my views about Israel have far greater nuance than yours, which are mono-dimensional. I hold a whole range of reasons why Christian Zionism and Jewish Zionism are destructive and perverse. It is not based on hatred of Jews.
I did not attack you, fool, I told you what I think about an aspect of your personality. That is what is intolerable to you!
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.
Yes, now that I no longer feel constrained by “politically correct” expression I am less afraid to say exactly what I mean. Before, and in the established environment, I always modified what I meant, because I was afraid to just say it.