Neither can Billy.
Neither can Billy.
If we’re going to make a stand, then first we must redefine the parameters of debate. The conversation around Islam has been shaped entirely by the left, and the borders they’ve drawn are so narrow as to make effective discourse impossible. So let’s reject their pointless regulations. They can no longer be permitted to police the debate.
There were voices from the left in the aftermath of the Manchester attack who were more outraged by things being said on Twitter than by the massacre of children in a British city centre. These people are deeply confused, so let’s clear things up for them: getting angry because a brainwashed psychopath has committed mass murder is normal. Talking about the ideology that drove him is normal. Searching for solutions is normal. To have been galvanised, frustrated, and furious all at the same time was normal.
The rest of Sam’s essay is just as good. See it all here.
But the terror situation is getting worse, the attacks more frequent, and the methods more barbaric and stomach churning. After a pop concert for teenagers, what might be the next target? Do you think it likely that someone in the UK is planning an attack on a primary school, right now? How far along in their preparations might they be? Is whoever made the nail bomb in Manchester gathering materials for his next hideous device now, and how many children could it kill and maim?
Above is a signature from a court document filed in the Walker v Kimberlin and Kimberlin suit. I wrote about it in January of 2016. At the time, there was debate about why the signature of Mrs. Kimberlin differed from document to document. I found a signature which I believe was written by Mrs Kimberlin:
This signature box appeared on Hogewash!, and was filed more recently in the Hoge v Kimberlin et al.
I’m very sure that there’s a simple explanation.
At some point, people at Hogewash!, BillySez and Thinking Man’s Zombie might start to wonder if Bill Preston-Schmalfeldt is intentionally living his life in an attempt to convince a judge that he cannot be held responsible for his own actions.
It’s one thing to find a “Kick Me” sign on your back. It’s another thing entirely if you notice that it is in your own handwriting.
Mark Steyn writes about those occasions when Donald Trump goes off script, and declares them to be excellent:
The trouble is Trump is left to his own devices less and less. The Republican base voted for Trumpism: an end to illegal immigration, an end to one-sided trade deals, an end to the spiraling cost of and dwindling access to health care, an end to decade-and-a-half unwon wars, an end to the hyper-regulation of every aspect of American life, an end to freeloader “alliances” like Nato, an end to the toxic bargain of “globalism” wherein all the jobs in your town migrate to the Third World and all the Third World migrates to your town.
And this, when Angela Merkel dared to call terror “Islamist.”
“What about Mohammed? Was he an Islamist?”
I think we all know the answer to that. President Erdoğan certainly does. Having previously declared that the concept “moderate Islam” is ugly and offensive because “Islam is Islam”, he recently rebuked Angela Merkel, mutasarrıf of his German sanjak, for using the term “Islamist terrorism”. “Such an expression is not correct because Islam and terror cannot be associated. The meaning of Islam is peace.” Or else.
Yes, or else exactly.
LONDON — Police on Tuesday identified the man who blew himself up the previous night at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England, as 22-year-old Salman Abedi. CBS News confirmed Abedi was known to British authorities prior to the attack.
In a generic statement posted online, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) claimed responsibility for Abedi’s , including children, at one of the entrances to the Manchester Arena.
In a generic statement posted online, blogger Dave Alexander said anyone who supports a group which deliberately targets children can go to hell.
My time traveling colleague Kyle delivered a dossier from our future. The document here is undated, but seems to have been written sometime in the near future, or perhaps this year.
To: Top Levels
Re: The Necessary Elimination of so-called Free Speech in America
No one will willingly offer up their own right to free expression. But take someone aside and suggest that “we need to figure out how to stop these other guys…” and the job is much easier.
These hateful people saying hateful things. They must be stopped, by any means. Fighting in the streets, campus free speech zones/codes and limits to social media.
Whatever can silence these haters.
Anytime you can convince a vegan who drives a Prius to punch a so-called Nazi, you’ve converted someone to the cause. Globalism is destroying the planet, so let’s trash a Starbucks. The Free Speech rally in Berkeley is tied to the Trumpers, who are aligned with big money to destroy the rights of LGBTQ individuals, and corrupt the political process with fake news and hate speech. So bring masks and mace to the anti-protest.
Incorporate that idea into a simple phrase, like “Stop Hate,” or F— Haters.”
The total control of free expression cannot be accomplished in a single year, or a single decade. Begin by telling all that some words are banned. “You can’t say that…” is step one. Stop people from offending others. Later you can ban just the ideas, because as you know, some writers will be more nuanced than others.
Some will refuse to use the banned words, but will promote the bad ideas. They, too need to be stopped. Demonize, use your broad brushes, and push the narrative that the bad ideas are just a cover for racism, sexism, or any ‘isms’ which are out of favor.
Rewrite history to reflect half-truths. Bull Connor and Abe Lincoln had no political affiliation, and MLK was not Republican. The winners and the wiser historical characters are always those from our side.
Frame all historical discussions to match current approved mores. Let the concept of forefathers expire through disuse, or be silenced out of charges of sexism. Historical examples of individualism, gun culture or self-reliance are to be written out of history. There must be strict adherence to these new historical interpretations, and swift punishment for those who veer from the approved thoughts.
Step by step, the Lower Levels will accept the new limitations on other people’s speech, and resulting penalties. Over time, even those who once advocated reduced “free speech” only for others will accept if for themselves. After a year or more of voicing “You can’t say that…” all but the most self-aware will internalize the notion that “I can’t say that…”
As the process continues, there will be hardly any need to remind the Lowers of their responsibility. Observe Europe as a template. The strategy has been very effective.