Richard Roland

RTs do not signify agreement.

[Richard Roland @skyhookt]

They come against us in great pride and lawlessness to destroy us and our wives and our children, and to despoil us; but we fight for our lives and our laws.

1 Maccabees 3:20–21

[Wrath Of Gnon @wrathofgnon]

“When the medieval man rebels it is against the abuses indulged in by his lords. The modern revolutionary, on the other hand, does not rebel against abuses but against usage or custom.”
— Jose Ortega y Gasset, The Modern Theme

[Wrath Of Gnon @wrathofgnon]

We need to reinterpret our position in a radically old way.

[Frank McCormick @CBHeresy]

One thing I learned teaching in a Black school is that a shocking number of Blacks think self-defense means revenge. In their minds, the second someone puts their hands on you, all limits disappear and you’re justified in doing whatever you want in return.

[Richard Roland @skyhookt]

@alexbronzini Not at all. It is quite believable.

[Josh Blackman @JoshMBlackman]

Office of Legal Counsel Concludes That Disparate Impact Liability Under Title VII Is Unconstitutional. Two decades after Justice Scalia's Ricci concurrence, the "war between disparate impact and equal protection will be waged" very soon. https://t.co/YsOAQ2lthP

[Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog]

The people predicting rioting seem to be under the mistaken impression that riots are an organic event. They aren’t. The Left chooses when to pull that lever. I don’t think they’ll pull it here. We’ll see.

[Richard Roland @skyhookt]

@JerryFergu49130 @FoxNews Happy to see that I called it wrong.

[Richard Roland @skyhookt]

@JerryFergu49130 @FoxNews And so we know why the jury has chickened out.

[Laura Aboli Official @LauraAboli_X]

Signal is 100% right.

The greatest trick governments ever pulled was convincing people that freedom and privacy are obstacles to safety.

What we are witnessing is not child protection. It is the construction of a surveillance architecture that will eventually monitor, profile, categorize and control every aspect of our digital lives.

Today it is age verification and content scanning, tomorrow it is digital identity, then financial monitoring, then behavioural scoring, then access to services conditioned on compliance.

The destination is not difficult to see. It is a technocratic system where every interaction is tracked, every transaction recorded, every opinion assessed and every citizen reduced to a data profile managed by governments and corporations working hand in hand.

A form of digital neo feudalism where a small unelected class controls the platforms, the infrastructure, the money and ultimately the boundaries of acceptable behaviour.

The argument that only criminals should fear surveillance is as absurd as saying only criminals need freedom of speech. Privacy is not evidence of wrongdoing, it is the foundation of human dignity, individual sovereignty and genuine liberty.

The UK government is asking citizens to accept the presumption of guilt simply to communicate online. To prove who they are, verify their age and allow their devices to inspect their content before they can participate in modern society.

History teaches us that every power granted to the state eventually expands beyond its initial mandate. The technology introduced to detect one form of content today will be used to police entirely different forms of expression tomorrow.

The choice before us is not between privacy and child protection, it is between preserving a free society, or constructing the infrastructure of a digital prison that will further enslave us.

[Wesley @WesleyLowery]

FL police use A.I. to identify a vehicle theft suspect from surveillance video. Based on an "85% match" they arrest and charge Jalil Richardson. He spends 3 months in jail. He loses his job, his home, and custody of his kids.

Richardson lives in N.C.
He's never been to Florida. And his timesheet shows him at work at the time of the crime. No one checked before charging him. https://t.co/2AcQYwq30f

[Richard Roland @skyhookt]

@glukianoff You must have a odd definition of the word 'progressive'.

[Mark Judge @markgjudge]

The Anti-Communist Film Festival!!! 96%!! https://t.co/r8zBdMJadr @guy_next_to_me

[The New Criterion @newcriterion]

“Sam Alito, the most normal and measured man I know, will always be comfortably the same.”

Read “Alito: the jural genius of a normal man,” by Hadley Arkes. @BasicBooks

https://t.co/XiBX8J0iKU

[Ben Swann @BenSwann_]

The mosquitoes that Google plans to release are infected with a naturally occurring bacteria called Wolbachia. When they mate with wild mosquitoes the eggs don't hatch, causing the targeted population to decline over time.

That is at least the theory.

Supporters say it could help to reduce diseases like Zika virus without using pesticides. Sounds pretty good, right?

But the bigger question isn't whether or not the science works (and we're not even sure it does). It's who decided that one of the world's biggest tech companies should be in the business of altering ecosystems?

[Edward Feser @FeserEdward]

What those who are unhappy with the pope’s comments on war need to get into their heads is that his concern – and the concern of other churchmen and theologians who have argued for a more restrictive approach to war in modern times – is the protection of innocent lives. That’s it. It isn’t pacifism, or cowardice, or Neville Chamberlain style naiveté, or misplaced sympathy for evildoers, or any of the other straw men people keep attacking. It’s the enormous number of civilians who have done nothing deserving of harm and yet are killed, or have their homes destroyed, or whose society’s infrastructure is so devastated that anything like normal life becomes impossible for them. That some war aim is good in the abstract, or that some government has done evil, does not magically make it acceptable to inflict this sort of damage on huge populations of innocent people who simply get caught up in the middle of conflict between warring armies. That A has a legitimate reason to attack B does not somehow entail that he is at liberty to do things that inflict enormous harm on some third party C in the process. Everyone knows this in other contexts, but for some reason some people wrongly suppose that it doesn’t apply in war. And when they try to rationalize this attitude by appeal to the good consequences they claim war will bring about, their reasoning is no different from (and no less morally corrupt than) the similarly utilitarian arguments others use to justify abortion, euthanasia, and the like.

[MrHobbes @VintageMrHobbes]

The only reason people are angry is elon musk or something

[Mary Talley Bowden MD @MaryBowdenMD]

@joeroganhq For all the people claiming I’m lying….

[Le JDD @leJDD]

«Macron se croit tout permis» : le RN mobilisé contre le remplacement des vitraux de Notre-Dame https://t.co/gxE8q4m1at

[Kyle Seraphin @KyleSeraphin]

Does anyone else know where I can find a job where $40M in petty cash gold bars can be signed out, and no one even knows it is a problem until I lie on my time card?

Or is that only an intel service thing?

[Richard Roland @skyhookt]

@DrGeneCallahan @jeffreytucker Right. https://t.co/HhqZZFEinQ doesn't even claim to track inflation.