I heard anecdotes about a man with a pro-life sign being assailed during the recent Boston demonstration/counterdemonstration, and then found that an Esquire writer tweeted a short video of the incident.    (Language alert.)

The guy was carrying a poster with photos of preborn human beings on the upper half of the poster, visible in the video. (I should add that these were not bloody-baby pictures. If there were any photos of aborted remains on the lower part of the poster, I didn’t see them due to the camera angle.) He was pursued – or as the Esquire writer put it, “made to part ways with his sign” – by masked assailants, who tore the photos off the poster one by one. Among the screaming voices was a woman’s, saying something that sounded like “I chose to have my baby but I’m glad I had a choice!”

At least that particular woman had the integrity to speak her mind without hiding behind a mask and without vandalizing anything.

In Pete’s coverage of the recent Boston demonstration/counterdemonstration,   he noted that the unifying factor among the disparate “counter” groups was anti-Trump sentiment to a greater or lesser degree. I don’t dispute that. I think that sentiment was accompanied by more than a dash of abortion advocacy, of a kind that was around long before Trump and will sadly be around long after he moves on.

I have no idea who the man with the poster supported for President; perhaps like me he’s at risk of being hashtagged #NeverTrump. Those masked hooligans who vandalized his sign didn’t care. The evidently harbored antipathy to the right to life and to anyone promoting it. Trump didn’t even need to be a factor for them.

That was one incident, involving relatively few people, in a place where tens of thousands of people had congregated for various purposes. Maybe the masked vandals who tore up photos of the preborn humans weren’t representative of the larger crowd. Then again, maybe they were.

Mayor and President alike tweeted approval of the day’s peaceful demonstrators speaking out against hate. It was a day for broad strokes, not fine details, so maybe incidents like the one I’ve described escaped the politicians’ notice.

But is it something other than hate when masked people carrying sticks menace a man holding a poster? Is it peaceful to rip up a sign someone’s holding, as long as no one sustains physical injury?  I’m pretty sure that if I, as a pro-lifer, were to tear up a sign held by someone, I’d be charged with simple assault under the laws of my state. (Rightly so, I might add.) Maybe the Boston police had to pick their battles, so to speak, and sign-ripping wasn’t a law enforcement priority the day of a mass rally. Understandable, from a tactical point of view. But I believe the Boston sign vandals got a pass that wouldn’t have been afforded to anyone tearing up a pro-abortion sign.

Readers, please take a moment to read Da Tech Guy’s pinned post, and then hit Da Tip Jar in support of independent journalism. Thank you!

Ellen Kolb is a writer and pro-life activist living in New Hampshire. Read more of her work at EllenKolb.com/blog.

Today are being greeted by a full quote press by the MSM not only suggesting that critiquing ANTIFA thugs for committing violence is “support” for modern Nazis but obscenely we’re actually seeing people who should know better equating World War 2 vets like my father who served in the Pacific, my Father-in-law who served in Europe, my uncle Joe who was badly wounded in Italy My uncle John who was wounded in France and my cousin died fighting the 3rd Reich with Antifa thugs.

We are also getting the completely expected sight of folks like Mitt Romney playing the same game ironically forgetting that the same leftists were calling him a Nazi just a few years ago (and thus justified if they choose to beat him or George W. Bush or any other member of the GOP who they have called Nazis).

Now I have no problem in coming down on Neo Nazis. Not only are Neo Nazis bad but they, after seeing the costs and the tyranny and the destruction that Nazism caused, still choose to embrace it. That makes them doubly wrong (and/or incredibly stupid) but this raises a rather obvious question.

All Americans, even ones who espouse foolish and destructive ideologies have the rights guaranteed by the first amendment. Therefore as long as people get the required permits for a public assembly, any Americans, even neo nazis, have an absolute right to make their case in the court of public opinion.

And that brings us to an obvious question: How hard is it to out argue a Nazi?

The National Socialist regime was murderous, repressive and led to one of the most costly wars in the history of the 20th century. I submit and suggest that given those facts and that America fought a 42 month war to destroy it , making the case against National Socialism should be one of the easiest tasks there is.

Yet the so called “ANTIFA” folks are not only unable to do so but can only counter the arguments of Neo Nazi’s by violence.

This would seem rather odd, how is it possible that ANTIFA can’t make a case persuasive enough to counter a bunch of National Socialists?

Again the answer is pretty simple. Their ideology is not any better.

Rather than National Socialism, what they argue for is anti-capitalist Communist Socialism. The same communist socialism that between the Soviet Union and China managed to slaughter 100 million people in the 20th century. Not only has their ideology been tried even more times than Nazism but because it has been tried in multiple countries on multiple continents it had a chance to cause even more slaughter, suffering and starvation that the National Socialists managed to achieve.

In other words their ideology is just as failed, just as murderous bad and consequently just as easy to counter.

And that’s why ANTIFA is all about violence, like the Nazi they can’t make a credible argument for their beliefs, but unlike these Nazi’s who apparently haven’t quite figured out that they have an argument that won’t sell, they knowing people won’t buy what they’re selling have decided to bypass the whole public assembly first amendment bit and decided to silence any who oppose them by violence because they know their argument is so pathetic they can’t even out argue a bunch of Nazis.

Closing thought: What does it say about the arguments of the professional left and the media left that they seem desperate to whitewash ANTIFA violence and make any critique of them beyond the pale, could it be that they understand that their own argument are weak and want to use ANTIFA as muscle to keep people afraid of countering them?


If you want a source of reporting other than the MSM please consider hitting DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



Sgt. Angel: [Pausing from the fight] No listen wait wait wait wait wait Michael Listen. Is this what you really really want want?
Michael: [Pausing to Think] Yarp.
Sgt. Angel: Suit Yourself [Attacks]

Hot Fuzz 2007

The Battle at Berkeley where the feared thugs of Antifa, confronted for the very first time by a foe willing to punch back left the field humiliated, in full retreat subjected to not only beating including weggies is both a turning point and a time for decision for the group: Is violent confrontation what they really want?

Now it would be very easy to let Trump supporters assemble and have their rallies, it would be a simple thing to let speakers on the right speak and make their counter argument. There are certainly enough leftists in California to allow them to dwarf Trump events if they can get the folks to turn out, but their entire MO to this point has been violence and intimidation and if they can’t intimidate then they’re just another group of leftists whining about the election.

On the other hand it’s now been clearly established that:

  1. Trump Supporters can fight and win even facing bricks and Pepper Spray.
  2. The same police that didn’t engage to stop Antifa from beating people are just as willing to sit back and let them get beaten too.

So Antifa is going to continue to go the violence route they are either going to have to escalate with lethal weaponry or augment their numbers perhaps persuading the Black Panthers or some Latin Gangs to fight with them.

The problem with the former is they will almost certainly be outgunned by the Jacksonian Trump supporters who I suspect will not hesitate to return fire (which would likely create the Martyrs that the anti-Trump left is hoping for) and it it becomes the later then they will lose all control over the situation and could lead to bloodshed on a scale they neither want nor imagine.

So what will it be Antifa, will you choose to respect the free right of Americans to assemble and speak or will you choose violence and escalation and all the personal risks it will involve?

Is that what you really want, Yarp or Narp?

I was shocked and revolted as I watched the rioting unfold on the UC Berkeley campus back on February 1st.  Here is a link which consists of a collection of videos and tweets: Twitchy craziest protest.  The sole purpose of this senseless violence was to prevent one individual, Milo Yiannopoulos,  from speaking.   This should not happen anywhere in this country, let alone at Berkeley, which was the birthplace of the free speech movement.  It is true that only about 150 individuals, most likely outsiders, committed the violence and destruction, however a very large number of student protesters cheered on and gave the anarchists cover.  What did Milo do to deserve such an unfriendly welcome?  He is an outspoken, charismatic, and popular libertarian-conservative.  Yes, he is outrageous and provocative, but that is no reason to silence him.  There is no legitimate reason to silence anyone.  Most disturbing of all is the reaction of the university. They did nothing to stop the rioting, they did nothing to protect Milo’s right to speak freely, and they did nothing to protect the rights of those who wanted to listen to him.

Freedom of speech is one of our most important God given natural rights.  This right must include speech that others might find offensive.   We are all unique individuals.  What offends one person, others might enjoy.  Some of the most fundamental truths may offend a very large portion of the population.  Being offended is a purely emotional response.  We are all supposed to be rational and intelligent beings, ruled by intellect rather than emotion.  Only the most emotionally fragile of us need to shelter ourselves from everything that might possibly be offensive.  Free exercise of speech and free expression are far more important than the emotional well being of fragile individuals.  Unfortunately, political correctness has completely reversed this.  Far too many people believe that their right to never be offended far outweighs everyone else’s right to freely express themselves as they wish.  The right to not be offended does not exist.  It interferes far too much with everyone else’s right of free speech, therefore it is not a valid right.  If we have to refrain from possibly offending anyone we would never be able to speak.

Political correctness has always been a weapon used by the political left to try and silence those on the political right.  Far too often, conservative principles and ideas are labeled offensive or hate speech, and then these labels are used as a justification, by colleges, to ban individuals from speaking .  The latest buzzwords used as justification are white nationalist and alt-right.  Before this last election, I never heard of the alt-right yet, according to the left. it is everywhere.  I believe the white nationalist alt-right exists but it a very small fringe group.  Mainstream conservative publications, such as the Breitbart family of websites, have been unjustly labeled white nationalist alt-right, along with Steve Bannon and Milo.  These accusations, which have been loudly trumpeted by the media, were used as justification by the rioters at UC Berkeley.  Milo discussed the complicity of the media in this interview: Media Legitimizes Violence on Conservatives.  One of the organizers of the Berkeley riots spoke to Tucker Carlson.  Here is a link to the interview.   She used these accusations as justification for the riots.

Thanks to political correctness , conservative speech has become unwelcome on college campuses.  Immediately when a conservative or a libertarian speaker is announced, the cries to ban them begin at once, and then the protests start.  There absolutely nothing wrong with individuals peacefully protesting because they do not approve of the speaker.  People have a right to peacefully protest for any reason.  Blocking entrances, rushing stages, shouting down, and drowning out a speaker with your voice are not valid forms of protest.  These tactics interfere with the rights of the speaker and those in the audience who want to listen to the speaker.  Far too often speakers on the right are uninvited by the college the moment the protests start.  This is a gross violation of free speech.  Liberal speakers far outnumber conservative speakers.   College campuses have become “safe spaces” where conservative ideals are not welcome and often labeled bias incidents.  According to this article, seventy colleges now call authorities for bias incidents.

Thanks to decades of political correctness, more than half of all high school students believe the First Amendment goes too far when protecting free speech.  This is not just a disgrace, it is a national tragedy.   Here is a link to a survey on this subject.

Political correctness is predominantly a phenomenon on the political left, however those of us on the right have, at times, demonstrated our own bad habits when it comes to free speech.  At times we try to force others to be “patriotically correct.”  Everyone has a right to do and say things that are unpatriotic.  No one should ever be punished for being unpatriotic in speech or behavior.  We can criticize individuals for what they say if we do not agree with them because free speech is a two way street.   No one has a right to silence anyone.

 

strawberries_moldy
Yummy

by baldilocks

The main reason that this country is in deep trouble is that facts which used to be routinely instilled into public school students are no longer. I’m not even talking about how to use facts during the process of connecting dots with events and coming to cogent conclusions. I’m referring to the facts themselves–simple events and straight-forward declarative statements. For those under a certain age, the facts either do no exist, or worse–they have become mutilated into something unrecognizable, mutilated by scattered “thinking.”

Example: a certain American profession athlete decides that he will not only openly forego paying traditional respect to the American flag during the ceremonies which routinely herald the beginning of sporting events in the USA, but will openly disrespect that flag. The athlete explains his stance via Social and Mainstream Media outlets, which, of course produces an avalanche of reactions from countless sources.

Many who defend the athlete’s stance have cited the First Amendment and that is where, in my opinion, the real trouble shows itself.

The First Amendment reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

It’s a straight-forward statement about what congress—the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives combined—may not do, with respect to its reason for existence: making laws.

So, it would seem simple to conclude that the First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the controversial statements and actions of the athlete in question, right? Hahaha!

All too many of our fellow citizens cannot (will not?) wrap their minds around this simple bit of logic: if congress isn’t making laws about speech, religion, press, etc. then the mention of the 1A is a non sequitur where any statement is concerned or with any expressed criticism of said statement is concerned, including all of the latter regarding this athlete.

(Wait. Should I explain what a non sequitur is? Eh, look it up yourself.)

I’ve had people argue with me about this and get angry when I try to show it to them. Not only do many citizens not know this, but they don’t want to know it.

We can take this seemingly small controversy and apply it to objective knowledge itself. Call it the fruit of post-modernism. It tastes rotten and it’s probably poisonous.

I’m praying that more of us will swear off of it and I think it will happen. But it won’t be without pain.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>>baldilocks

 

 

 

The_Death_of_Socrates
The Death of Socrates (1797) by Jacques-Louis David. Socrates was “invited” to kill himself.

by baldilocks

At American Thinker, First Amendment activists Matt Patterson and Lindsey DePasse point to known history, show how to analyze it and how to draw conclusions from it.

The Greek city-state of Athens had no constitutional protections for people who advocated notions radically at odds with prevailing wisdom.

The result: Socrates was put to death for “corrupting” the youth.

Four hundred years later, the Roman province of Judea contained no constitutional protections for wild-eyed preachers who advocated radical alternatives to established political and religious orthodoxies.

The result: Jesus was crucified for claiming to be “King of the Jews.”

Sixteen hundred years later in Italy, there were no constitutional protections for thinkers who discerned profound restructuring of metaphysical realities.

The result: Galileo Galilei was tried and sentenced to house arrest by the Catholic Inquisition for advocating views contrary to Church doctrine.

Four hundred years later, the United States of America did provide constitutional protections of speech and assembly, allowing Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. to lead a movement that changed laws and expanded liberty for millions.

Socrates, Jesus and Galileo lacked governmental protection to say crazy things. As a result, they were put to death or imprisoned by the government for saying crazy things.

True, Dr. King also met with an untimely end, slain by a fellow citizen who denied him his constitutionally protected freedoms. But the others were killed or imprisoned by the government because they had no constitutionally protected freedoms.

That is all the difference in the world. And it is a difference that Dr. King died for.

Of course, no ancient history is taught in most public schools, much less the simple compare/contrast analysis displayed above. As a result,

A 2015 Pew Research survey found, “Four-in-ten Millennials say the government should be able to prevent people publicly making statements that are offensive to minority groups.”

Let that sink in for a moment: 40 percent of Millennials favor explicit, unconstitutional censorship of “offensive” speech. The same Pew survey found that 35 percent of all Democrats and 33 percent of all women “say the government should be able to curtail speech that is offensive to minorities.”

When the government comes after the First Amendment, look for it to come for the rest. Some argue convincingly that it’s too late. We’ll see.

Related: Condition: Unknown, Unknowns

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game (click on left sidebar image), was published in 2012. Her second novel will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>>baldilocks

What else can one conclude when you see this

Twitter confirmed it has permanently banned Breitbart Tech editor and alt-right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos for allegedly violating its “hateful conduct policy”.

The contretemps has been brewing all week, as Milo engaged in a barbed to and fro with embattled Ghostbusters star Leslie Jones over her Twitter feud with trolls who hated her new movie. At one point the CEO of Twitter Jack Dorsey intervened himself, asking Jones to direct message him. Milo himself said nothing racist, though he joked that Jones’ grammatically challenged quips at him were “barely literate”, said America needs better schools and referred to Jones facetiously as “a black dude”.

Breitbart has more

Breitbart Tech editor Milo Yiannopoulos has been suspended from Twitter once more just 20 minutes before his “Gays for Trump” event takes place at the Republican National Convention.

The justification for the suspension is currently unknown, although it could be as a result of Milo’s run-in with Ghostbusters actress Leslie Jones on the site. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey publicly reached out to Jones late on Monday evening after she complained about “abuse” on the platform. Milo was suspended despite the fact that he sent no abusive tweets to the actress.

BuzzFeed gleefully reported that the suspension is permanent, citing a statement from Twitter promising a clampdown on “targeted abuse.” Milo has also received a message from Twitter confirming that that his ban is permanent

Let me clue you in a sec.

Actual strong women are, well strong. They can take critique, they can handle being quoted and are able to take care of themselves.

Weak women fall apart when critiqued and run for others to defend them if anyone says a word that gives them the vapors.

Apparently Twitter believes women need to protected from any word or phrases that does not fit their worldview.

Apparently Twitter believes women need to be protected from public debate as it might disturb them.

Apparently Twitter believes that women are so weak that they are incapable of defending their positions and statements for themselves.

To put it simply Twitter want to put feminists back into an 1880’s box and their feminist allies rather than objecting are calling it being empowered.

What a bunch of losers. I’ll give Milo the last word:

“No, of course, I don’t have any regrets,” Milo told Heat Street. “But feminists on the other hand should have regrets that they have taught strong women that they are victims and attacked people for having different opinions to them on Twitter.”

FYI Feminism not withstanding don’t think for one second this isn’t about silencing a high profile Gay Trump supporter who a huge megaphone at a time when Hillary is tanking at the polls.

Update: Analysis True


I’d like to think we do good work here If you’d like to help us keep up the pace please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. If less than 1/3 of 1% of our readers subscribed at $10 a month we’d have the 114.5 subscribers needed to our annual goal all year without solicitation.

Plus of course all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



A few days ago after he was banned from Twitter but before his @sextroubleaccount I talked to RS McCain about what his going on with him.
We talked about the possibility that this was part of an election year strategy:  

“Now you’ve seen how this shadow banning where search results are being suppressed. It looks very much like they’re trying to tilt the playing field in an election year when Hillary Clinton is the presumed nominee and feminists have the thumb on one of the most powerful social media platforms in the world”

He compared it to other loss leaders for the left:

It’s like salon.com it’s been losing over a mil a year for 20 years and yet the “investors” are willing to do it because it promotes a “progressive” message

He told me that he didn’t find out about his initial banning until he saw a tweet talking about it (I only noticed when my @rsmccain feed wouldn’t load in tweetdeck)

He challenged twitter to show a screen cap of his threatening or abusing anyone while noting that his @sextroubebook account has picked up over 2000 followers in just under 24 hours.

Of course 24 hours later that account was banned too.

I also asked him about how this would be received.  As it was a primary weekend he noted all the political reporters are covering politics but wondered about their lack of interest

people know my number and know people who will get it and you’d think people would call

And perhaps Twitter figured that after a few days everyone would forget the #freestacy business.

But when I talked to him less than an hour ago (I’m typing this as 9:55 AM Thursday) there were two developments the most significant being Denial of Service attacks against his site which were launched today:

when I work up this morning this was going on and it’s intermittent.

He noted the irony in terms of “who is being harassed here”

It’s Ironic that I’m accused of targeted abuse while people responsible for shutting me down are not content with having my twitter account wiped off the face of the earth are attacking my site

he referred to the tactics used against him as DARVO which stands for: Deny, Attack reverse victim , Offender and noted how familiar this all seems:

Dealing with these people is like dealing with Kimberlin, he’s a known sociopath and when you get into a conflict with a sociopath they begin to manipulate the story they become the victim and you become the villain for trying to tell the story about them. You keep telling the truth. Who is being targeted for abuse?

It’s all a question of media bias and unlike folks like me who have their background in stuff like tech (Hence DaTechGuy) media is something Stacy knows as this is his 30th year in the business.

This is the 30th anniversary of my first job as a $4.50 staff right Austell Georgia in cobb county Austell News-Chronicle owned by a local businessman named Lamar.

Ironically Stacy told me Mr. Lamar started his newspaper because he was sick of what he was seeing from the local weekly, so in a sense Stacy McCain cut his teeth on alternate media and media bias:

It’s like media bias everybody has their own opinion on it but nobody asks me even though I’m in the business.

However the 2nd development is the story starting to get out there. In addition to calls from me he’s been contacted by Buzzfeed: “their piece is predictable left” and Debra Saunders who got some minor facts wrong:

“I didn’t out a transgender. It wasn’t a secret that “Sarah” was transgender, Her attacks on 4chan caused people to ask ‘Who is Sarah Butts?’ which caused them to find out who he was…If it hadn’t been for Nyberg’s attempt to silence others nobody would have cared but when somebody has a commercial enterprise online and you try to drive them out of business…

Which is what those going after Stacy McCain are doing, trying to silence him. Ironically he tends to do exactly the opposite:

This is them, trying to silence their critics, I don’t do this to other people, I quote them, that’s what they hate, feminists hate to be quoted.

And now the story is starting to penetrate the MSM (more on that later today) much in the same way that the Anthony Weiner story did, slowly like water on a rock.

Drip Drip Drip.

Fyi you can help by retweeting items in the #freestacy hashtag, writing your local paper, spreading the word on facebook and calling your local talk radio show. Let’s give the Twitter Safety crowd the attention they deserve.

Drip Drip Drip

*******************************************************************************

It’s 10:15 as I type this and we are $36 dollars shy of our daily goal of $61 and $1309 behind our daily goal for the year (just
over 21 days) that can keep the mortgage and the writers paid.

To those who have kicked in (particularly new subscribers of which we need 114.5 @ $10 a month to make our goal every day), thanks ever so much.

If however you have not & are both able and inclined I’d really appreciate it if you’d help us close that gap by hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. 114.5 more subscribers at $10 a month will get the job done and will get you my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



Either way thanks for reading and don’t be shy about letting us know what you think. One can’t improve without critique.

I’ve written a lot about Twitter and the BS we’ve seen toward Robert Stacy McCain the last few days and it has generated a lot of hits but I’d like to go off on a slight tangent.

For whatever reason HBO had one of their semi-annual “Free on Demand” moments and being newly laid off from the lowest paying job I’ve had since I left college in 1985 (Despite the spectacular Obama economy that everyone in the media is telling us we’re in’s talking about) I’ve been taking advantage of the situation to watch my two favorite series: John Adams: about the blunt spoken founding Father who Ted Cruz so reminds me of (more on that later this week) and Band of Brothers the true story of Easy Company in Europe during World War 2.

I bring this up because yesterday I was watching episodes six and seven which take place in Bastogne at the Battle of the Bulge where the 101st airborne are dealing with being surrounded in the dead of winter with little food, limited ammo, no winter clothing while under siege by a German Army five times their size with armor and artillery pounding them to pieces.

Their plight illustrates the difference between the fantasy that Robert Stacy McCain’s contrary opinions are causing oppression to the wealthy feminists now in charge at the Twitter “Safety” crew and feminist students at top line colleges whose annual tuition is double what I was making in my now non-existent job are suffering beyond measure by having their own public statements, expressed publicly on the net, quoted back at them, vs people actually suffering and risking something for a cause.

Furthermore one doesn’t have to go to drama to illustrate the costs of real suffering or risk, one can simply look at stories like this

The career criminal whose drawn gun sparked a wild shootout in which two Brooklyn police officers were wounded in Bedford-Stuyvesant early Saturday is a cop-hating, self-radicalized Muslim who is associated with other suspected extremists, police sources told The Post.

Jamal Funes, whose rap sheet stretches 17 years across three states, is “associated with people the Joint Terrorism Task Force are looking at,” one source said.

via Pam Geller who says:

The NYPD is a favorite target for devout Muslims engaging in jihad. As big as this story is, don’t expect the enemedia to report it. One resident said, “We felt like we were in Baghdad.” Uh, you are.

“When officers show up, they’re in the middle of a combat situation.”

Of course to the people who are silencing Stacy it’s the police who are the oppressors and the gunman the victim, just as the Muslim refugees who were assaulting women in cologne are the victims and the women assaulted in stories like this:

“Teenage Afghan migrant, 16, ‘rapes worker at Belgian asylum centre two weeks after attending a course on how to treat Western women,

Somehow don’t raise the ire of their feminist sisters that the words of Robert Stacy McCain Do.

That’s the real difference between those trying to silence Stacy McCain and Stacy himself.

Stacy surrounded by his children and grandchildren and well versed in the sacrifices both he and his ancestors have gone through to give said children and grandchildren their life in America, knows that even if Twitter never lets him back in, he’s a lucky man with a good life, better that most of the human race before him has endured and he is grateful to God for this bounty.

Meanwhile his critics who are trying to put him down, being ignorant of history and brought up in a culture that’s told them how special they are all their lives, continue to see themselves as oppressed victims of a terrible system even as they draw a healthy pay and enjoy one of the most comfortable lifestyles in the history of mankind.

What an unhappy life that must be. Even with all the financial issues I’ve had for the last year and the physical illness I’ve gone through for the last month, I wouldn’t trade places any of those people in the Twitter Safety crowd or those feminists crying in their cornflakes even if it came with the extra years of their comparative youth.

And I suspect neither would Robert Stacy McCain.

Update: I know I use this Screwtape quote a lot but it so fits here

The characteristic of Pains and Pleasures is that they are unmistakably real, and therefore, as far as they go, give the man who feels them a touchstone of reality. Thus if you had been trying to damn your man by the Romantic method…you would try to protect him at all costs from any real pain; because, of course, five minutes’ genuine toothache would reveal the romantic sorrows for the nonsense they were and unmask your whole stratagem.

I suspect Screwtape and his friends have a field day with modern feminists.

Oh and expect to see more of this:

“The intolerant student Left has even turned on me – a lifelong civil rights campaigner,”

First they came for RS McCain….

****************************************************************************

It’s been a good couple of days for the blog both in terms of the hits and the tip jar but despite that we’re still $1511 shy of the $61 a day pace that can keep the mortgage and the writers paid.

To those who have kicked in (particularly new subscribers only 118 @ $10 a month to go to save the day), thanks ever so much.

If however you have not & are both able and inclined I’d really appreciate it if you’d help us close that gap by hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

Consider Subscribing 118 more at $10 a month will get the job done and will get you my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else and make you eligible for the weekly call DaTechGuy hour returning in March.


Choose a Subscription level



Take a look at this commentary

and as you do remember two things:

1. Jesus Christ was executed by the Romans by the request of the Jewish authorities for what they considered blasphemy against their faith.

2. Bill O’Reilly wrote a best-selling book titled Killing Jesus

This is about as far off the Irony scale as you get. This is Chris Cuomo territory

BTW In honor of Mr. O’Reilly’s Biblical ignorance I offer $50 tip jar hitters the option of declining the standard Book premium for themselves & having me buy Bill O’Reilly a copy of the New testament which I’ll ship to the Fox News studio he broadcasts out of as a gift in your name.

*****************************************************

My goal is Twenty grand a year

Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid.  If I can get to Forty Thousand I can afford to travel outside of New England and/or hire me a blogger to help me get it done.

Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done.

 

Our May Premium for a tip jar hitters of $50 or more is Tim Imholt’s book: The Forest of Assassins

Subscribe at $50 or more in and receive each monthly premium shipped the date of your payment.

All Tip Jar hits in May of $10 or more will get a copy of Jeff Trapani’s excellent E-Book Victor the Monster Frankenstein.