Background:
Several years ago, I discovered Flopping Aces. After participating here for a long period of time I was honored to be asked to be one of the Authors here.
They say that politics makes strange bedfellows. Through my time of being aware, involved, and interested in politics, I’ve certainly found that saying to be true.
That realization has become even more clear over the span of the last few days.
People that you have a great deal in common with can sometimes shock and astound you with the ideas they have and positions they take on certain issues.
Purpose:
One my co-authors here, Mike’s America, decided that he would create a series of posts regarding the Cordoba House project, the Islamic community center which is currently under construction near the site of the WTC.
The most recent of the series, and the reason for this separate, independent offshoot post, is here.
Mike is of the strong opinion that the construction of the facility should not be allowed and, that’s cool with me, as long as he can create a solid, logical argument for his position.
I, and two other co-authors here, Mata Harley and Wordsmith, are of the opinion that because there is no legal or Constitutional basis by which the project can be blocked, it should be allowed to go forward no matter how distasteful we find it.
Through the ensuing discussion on the issue in earlier threads Mata decided that she had had enough of the negativity and the fighting so she is now on hiatus, taking a much needed, and well-deserved, walkabout.
I purposely joined in on the conversation late precisely because I was not liking the tone myself.
Needless to say that the conversation started out bumpy then accelerated down the slope, jumping ugly at the end.
Basically the thread comments descended into a back and forth conversation between Mike and I in which I posed a series of questions, and he ignored them.
The purpose of this post is to pick up where Mike chose to cut our conversation off by repeatedly using the delete key on me, a fellow co-author on this site then subsequently closing the thread to all comments.
Mike deleted multiple other comments from the thread toward the end as well, especially any that expressed support for me or my position.
As unfortunate as the events over the last couple of days have been however, this whole experience, this entire discussion, has been one of remarkable value to you Dear Reader which is why, really, I continued to participate, standing my ground, arguing my points, and never wavering because, quite simply, the facts and logic are on my side.
Dear Reader, what you have been able to learn is that there are many disparate voices here at Flopping Aces and that we, like the American population in general do not, and will not, always agree with one another and that we will vehemently disagree at times as well.
Scope:
With the exception of vulgarities* or major profanity* or threats of harm* there will be no censorship on this thread.
I have the courage to allow you, the audience, to post your opinions freely without fear of the delete key.
(*Unfortunately, Curt or I, or one of the authors here at FA must decide what violates standards of acceptability when it comes to said vulgarity or profanity. Threats of harm in any form are not acceptable. Kindly conduct yourselves as mature adults and don’t put us in position of editing.)
If you have new things that you wish to say on the Cordoba House issue, or if you simply wish to continue the discussion from that thread, here’s a place for you to do it unmolested.
If you posted a comment there (Ron) that got deleted, feel free to re-post it here.
If you posted something directed toward me and it appears that I didn’t respond, I may have either missed it, or Mike trashed it. Feel free to re-post it here.
*******************************************
That said, Mike’s America, you are more than welcome to participate on this thread. In fact, I look forward to having you drop by with one unwavering caveat: NO DELETE OR EDIT KEY FOR YOU.
Let’s see if you can debate, and argue, and support your position without the escape valve.
Let’s see if you can strut your cred and walk the talk without the safety net.
I did my best to get you to understand that I was the wrong one for you to try to bully and intimidate but you chose not to heed what I had to say.
******************************************
Ill get things started off by posting here my last comment on Mike’s thread. He deleted this one, of course, which is exactly what I expected he would do.
@Mike’s America:
No one is “keeping score at home.”
Actually, they are Mike. All of those regular readers. All of those lurkers. All of those casual observers. All of those people who might make it through these parts at some point during their Interwebz browsing today or at some point in the future.
They’re all out there. Watching. Reading. Observing.
And, yes, keeping score too.
All of those who have their e-mail alerts turned on have been able to read each and every post…including those you chose to delete.
And what they’ve seen here on this thread, as well as the other three or four or five by you on the same topic is a very sad display.
A very sad display indeed.
I, and others here, have made well rounded, fact based, rule of law based arguments without the need for emotion, feeling, hysteria, hyperbole, or insult.
Others, not so much.
From my very first post I’ve been able to defend each and every position I’ve taken without finding it necessary to hide behind the cowardice of the delete key.
Considering that fact alone, which of us has been clearly demonstrated to be the adult here?
Furthermore, you and I both know that you’ve never laid a glove on Mata, Word, or myself regarding this issue.
While you’ve spun and spun and spun and whirled and twirled and gyrated yourself into a shrieking frenzy of emotion and feeling your arguments have never even stirred the breeze close where we’ve been standing.
This isn’t about your ego or that of your buddy Rich Whiner.
No, it’s not about my ego at all. Fact is, it’s about yours.
This whole thread and the three or four or so before it (as well as your complete posting history here and at your “home planet”) have been all about your record of crowing and pontificating and preening yourself on how you represent and espouse supposed Conservative principles and values and your “service to the cause,” and how you believe in the Constitution, blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda, etc. etc. ad nauseum.
Yet, when asked simple, but pointed, questions you cannot even bring yourself to answer directly even with all that Conservative street cred you supposedly have.
No my friend, the ego runs large, thick, and heady on your side. Do I really need to go through your posts and comments to pull blockquotes and links together for you and our reading audience?
Nah, I won’t do that. At least not at the moment. Interested parties can can click to read your posts and the accompanying comments. They can search the archives.
You lost the argument a long time ago and yet you cannot help but insult those who see it otherwise.
Actually, I find that tremendously amusing. I’ve lost the argument? Really?
Who is cowering behind the delete key?
Not moi.
Instead, I’m standing firmly on the facts, the law, and the US Constitution.
Again, post it all if you want on YOUR OWN POST.
The post is coming. Oh, YES!…
(By the way, this comment addressed directly to you sir will be included as part of that post…so delete away my friend, it’s still gonna be right out there in the blogosphere for everyone to see.)But I am not going to enable you to launch a civil war against our readers.
Um….there has been no civil war against the readers here. Have I intelligently debated the issues with them? Yes, of course. Has there been disagreement? Yes, of course.
Such is the nature of a blog which allows comments.
Of course there are some who cannot bring themselves to discuss and debate things intelligently, instead choosing the cowards’ way out by simply clicking delete and acting as if the comments were never posted when the tide of the conversation turns.
You’re done here.
And that is final!
He says, as he stomps his foot and sashays away from the discussion.
Well, Mike, whether I am “done” here remains an open issue. That decision ultimately lies with Curt, the barkeep who also owns the saloon.
I had a little conversation with Curt on this matter yesterday when you chose to delete the first in the series of comments. We will see what he has to say about today’s events.
You know, in the grand scheme of things I think it’s OK that you and I came to this head to head, toe to toe standoff…actually it’s great in many ways.
This whole thread…every single comment we’ve made back and forth to one another, and to others…clearly demonstrates what both of us are made of.
One of us, when challenged, stands his ground, firmly and convincingly stating his position. Then arguing it.
The other, when challenged, dashes for the comfort and safety of the delete key.
Of of us, when challenged, embraces the voice of opposition, debating, arguing, and discussing counterpoint by counterpoint.
The other, when challenged, dashes for the comfort and safety of the delete key thereby silencing the opposition.
Ironically, actually more like hypocritically, this is the same person who was, earlier in the thread, busy complaining about the voice of the opposition (his side) being silenced.
This discussion series demonstrates to anyone who wants to see that we Conservatives, we true Constitutional conservatives, always believe in the US Constitution and will always, always unwaveringly stand with the Constitution and the rule of law even when it’s unpopular.
Even when it’s uncomfortable.
Even when it runs contrary to public opinion.
Those who choose to make the Constitution into some malleable, flexible thing that applies when convenient, and is to be ignored when uncomfortable…well, are they really and truly Conservatives?
Or are they some other squishy thing?
Mike, the clarity of the difference between the two of us really couldn’t possibly be more clear.
Thank you so much for giving me such a stellar opportunity to demonstrate it.
I’ve got to tell you, I am truly sorry to see dirty laundry and bad feelings between various authors aired on this site in this way. To my mind, no matter what your opinion re the Cordoba House Mosque, this thread is really out of place. I would strongly suggest that somebody hit the delete key and send this entire post where it best belongs. . . .
A little too much context. Not too surprised Mike started deleting stuff, he’s always been more interested in the political message than the philosophy per se. Anyway I agree that there is no legal basis stopping the construction of the mosque. Unfortunately there is also little doubt that some extremists will see this as a sign of Western weakness, not seeing that it is a reflection of our respect for the law (which makes me think of John 1:5 – ‘and the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not’…).
As an aside I think it’s pretty positive to see that you all are willing to hash your differences out in public rather than try to present an absolutely monolithic conservatism. Obviously there is still a constrained range of views but it’s not censored to make it look like everyone always agrees on everything.
Well Granny, I can totally understand where you are coming from.
Really I can.
This Cordoba House issue (all three or four or five threads of it…just how much is enough…especially from one closely controlled, edited, censored viewpoint?) has already cost us the participation of some of our regular comment contributers.
This issue has also cost us the participation and contributions of what I consider to be the finest, most well-read, most well-researched, and most well-spoken authors on the site.
At some point you just have to lay the issue bare. Let some sunshine and fresh air get in, and let the healing process start.
Dealing with the situation between Mike and I, while unfortunate and unpleasant, is necessary.
Every attempt was made for a reasoned debate. All of those attempts were rebuffed with insult, censorship, deletion, and challenges to start my own post.
So, I have done precisely what I was asked to do.
Mike, like the politicians he’s accustomed to working with, likes to manage the message. He likes to dominate the conversation. He has the unfortunate habit of hitting delete anytime he loses control of the message because, on this issue in particular, he is arguing a tenuous and losing position.
In my opinion, threatening, bullying, intimidating and then deleting and censoring the voice of his co-authors, of all people, is simply unacceptable.
This issue needs some sunshine and, unfortunately, I was compelled to be the one to drag it into the light.
I didn’t want things to be this way but that was the hand I was dealt.
Just wanted to weigh in to correct something Aye mentioned about me, and then clarify something that has gotten lost in all the g’azillion comments over four previous threads and the heat on this.
As my siblings would be the first to let anyone know, I’m not one to back away from a battle. My retirement from blogging did not have to do with this subject, and had everything to do with the time it takes for me to research and compose my posts. Nor am I apt to be around for comments much in the future. It is unbelievable how much time you can spend, living life thru a computer monitor on blogs and forums, plus the related news articles.
But this subject struck me as unfinished business… at least so I told myself. I allowed myself to be sucked back in on this for one day only – the thread which Aye mentions above that, like the prior threads where it was just Wordsmith and myself commenting, deteriorated into massive ugly. I lost more than a quarter of my work day on that, accomplished nothing, and consider that a lesson well learned.
Granny, just to let you know, we’ve always done our own little battles behind the scene. But when one author doesn’t allow another author the courtesy of the comment appearing, and challenges them to start their own if they want their voice heard, it’s the only way the conversation can be finished, and Aye’s comments could be viewed. It’s a self defense thing for Aye, and he simply did exactly what Mike told him to do. At least Aye has that power as an author. Those who’s comments supporting Aye, and who were expunged, do not have that same power to retrieve their voice.
I, however, doubt many will have the appetite to continue this.
But Granny, just so you understand, this group of authors were never lockstep, and always diverse in our opinions. It was part of our “charm”. You should consider it an honest expression and a compliment when it’s brought to the forefront, instead of hidden behind private emails. As bbart notes above, it’s good when we hash out our differences and debate style in public… assuming, of course, the “post moderator” allows that to happen.
If anyone plans on continuing this discussion, perhaps you should consider the different degrees of reasoning and attitudes. I know that my own have been mischaracterized, and I’ve been the subject of everything from frat humor and ridicule to outright insults. That’s okay… my hide has always been tough, and as I said in the now defunct thread… the only person I ever agree with 100% of the time is the one staring back at me in the mirror.
Here’s where people fall on the Cordoba House:
1: Those who outright support it, with no caveats.
2: Those who don’t like the development, but have accepted that the legal process has been determined by local authorities and community. Therefore we begrudgingly believe that it should be built as planned because our rule of law and freedom of religion should be applied equally. To not do so is simply reprehensible.
In fact, most of us wish this whole thing never happened, but since it has… we respond with the principles of this country we were taught. That sometimes we may not like our freedoms being extended to those we detest. But that’s exactly what the Framers and Founders had in mind… protecting just those people. And most expecially when it comes to choice of religion. This is my own personal category.
Many have described this as being right down the middle. Not happy about it, but the legal process was hurdled. Move on.
3a: Those who have decided that Rauf is a radical, and Cordoba House should be stopped at any cost… including altering laws to reverse the current legal decision.
3b: Then there are those who are also on record that it should be stopped even if Rauf is a “moderate”… whatever that guideline is. The above group sometimes say they are just fine if the mosque is “built elsewhere”… but they are also silent when the more extreme movements are shutting down mosque developement, located no where near Ground Zero, all over the country.
The question to the “build it elsewhere” group is… where would that be? How many blocks away is good for you? And are we now allowing the nation of opinion to decide for a local community if a particular religion can build within x blocks of anything they deem important?
4: Those who believe that Muslims and Islam have no place in the US, that there are “enough” mosques in NYC or other places, and should be returned to “their nation of origin”. Yup… we’ve had quite a few of those here too. Among the more prominent public voices in that category are Pam Geller with her Stop the Islamification of America. They were successful in thwarting another mosque in NY that was no where near ground zero. The location matters not to some. Just the fact that the Muslim presence is growing.
Sorry… the last category is the ‘phobes, with many in the 3A/3B categories dancing closely with the ‘phobes, never condeming their remarks and aligning themselves with them instead. As Martin Niemoller told us, if you do not speak out now, there will be no one there when you need a voice.
There is no other way to describe that attitude but as a war on Islam and Muslims in general. Something that, BTW, makes George W. Bush a liar. He spent quite a bit of time trying to explain to the world at large that this war is against the global jihad movement, a small fraction of Islam.
Apparently, there are many who did not hear that message, and OBL and Zawahiri are correct. Some in the west are, indeed, waging a war against Islam, and their voices are getting louder and louder. It’s very inconvenient rhetoric for the “conservatives” to ramp up, right before an important midterm election when fiscal issues should be on the forefront.
For those that wish to alter laws in order to achieve their goal to reverse NYC’s planning council decision, the creativity has no end. Demands they investigate property owners’ finances. Just if they are Muslim? Or any commercial developer? Or is public opinion the measuring stick that infringes on privacy laws, and demands that all financing is made public? If there is probable cause for financial investigation, I’m all for it. If not, that’s another ugly precedent to set.
Fact is, the Imam Rauf has been a NYC resident, and leader of a mosque for decades there. Never has this mosque been on the radar of Homeland Security, or they would have been the first to make sure terrorist funds are frozen, and had an eyeball raised. This is no low profile property deal.
The other way some wish to alter our principles … most specifically the freedom of religion… is the new self-proclaimed infidel experts’ talking points that Islam is “not a religion”. Well, that will come as some news to centuries of Muslims. But, in the bizarre thought processes that has become all too prevalent in this nation of late, we’ve come to believe that if you “rename” something, you can “redefine” something in order to make it fit into your agenda. We’re all aware of the “renaming” going on… only this time, it’s coming from a conservative movement.
I’ve already said my piece on this. I’ve been maligned, ridiculed, and attempts make slap me down as the bad guy when I responded with the exact same tone in which I was addressed. No biggie. I’m not here to be liked, disliked, revered, respected or disdained. And I’m quite sure that after this issue has been brought up, there are people who may have liked me before, but now can’t abide me. But as I said, I’ve never been one to slink away and back down from a fight that was worthy of waging. I was here to add another viewpoint, and hopefully help some see something they may not have thought about before.
Now it’s going to be up to you all because I am, again, going to reclaim my life outside of the computer monitor. One would hope that – if you can identify yourselves in any of the above categories of opinion – you all would at least reign in the extremists that persist in making Bush a liar, and waging a very loud war on Islam for the world to see. If you don’t do it because such bigoted attitudes are offensive to you, then do it so that you don’t hand AQ a propaganda victory, and the lib/progs an extremely easy to prove talking point this midterm election.
AYE CHIHUAHUA: HI, It was mentionned quite a few times how the DEMOCRAT majority,
WOULD not have any one to stand out couragously to express concern about
the leader’s decisions,on many instances:and over expences
NO ONE can say the same for THE CONSERVATIVES who willingly express their view
as individual but when the time come to unite for the AMERICA’s cause, you will see the
unifided patriotism right here. thank you
Where I fall on this issue is fairly simple- the Constitution does not permit the government to say where or what form a church, synagogue, or mosque may place itself- that pesky little “freedom of religion” thing, so while I might think that the Mosque has purposely “poked its finger” in America’s eye, simply because it could, there is not much we can do except be offended.
Remember, you not only have the right to free speech, religion and a free press, you also have the right to not like it when some of these things do not turn out as you might wish, or believe to be right.
But that does not meanthat you can impose your own arbitrary rules on anyone else- you just have to suck it up and grow some stones as an adult and realize its not about you, it is about the future of this country, and that means sometimes we do not like the free speech we encounter- but it does not mean we should muzzle it.
If the other side cannot do this, neither can we- life isn’t fair, or we could build a church or synagogue next to the Mosque in Mecca- we can’t, but the next best thing is to show the rest of the world we are better than the other side when it comes to tolerance.
http://article.nationalreview.com/438616/raufs-dawa-from-the-world-trade-center-rubble/andrew-c-mccarthy
http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/30/imam-faisal-ground-zero-mosque-money-opinions-columnists-claudia-rosett_2.html
Aye,
I’m a NYer, and this city is as diverse religiously as any place in America. In my daily walk, I pass by a Lutheran church, a Catholic church, a Synagogue, a Mosque, and sometimes a Buddist temple. I’m aware of some Wiccans in my neighborhood, too. They all co-exist in this city quite well.
New Yorkers, and I hope most Americans, understand the difference between terrorists who may use their religion to justify the horrible things they do, and Muslims who worship within the same religion peacefully.
Even for those who don’t get the difference, surely we know that the United States Constitution allows EVERYONE the right to worship as they choose, and therefore building a Mosque on this or any other site cannot be legally blocked, nor should it.
I’m with you on this one 100%. I’d venture to guess that Mike has just simply gotten caught up in all of the understandable emotion regarding this, that he’s lost his reason. I hope that in time, you guys will help him find it again, and that you’ll once again find harmony amongst yourselves.
@MataHarley:
I’ve respect you even when we disagree, but your comment here is epic and on the money.
CARY: I think you’r wrong to say that because mike and many others used the FREEDOM of speech to disapprove an obvious wrong building to be built; does’nt mean
he and others lost their reason at all. this happen to be a diffrent view on the truth; they never talk of changing THE LAWS OF THE LAND THEY KNOW MORE THAN YOU, but expressing their views in order to influence change of views of the MUSLIMS. bye
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Ignoring the rights that the Constitution gives all Americans, and limiting them only to those one approve of, is indeed unreasonable… at best. You’re entitled to think I’m wrong, but I stand 100 percent by my statement, as well as by the positions of Aye, Mata, and Word on this particular matter.
CARY: I also stand on AYE CHIHUAHUA AND MATA whom I trust BOTH on their knowledge
of the CONSTITUTION: AND I trusth MIKE also and others for their used of their couragous stand
on their oppositions to that building: IT became A clash between 2 legitimates important VIEWS
because thoses 2 views where so IMPORTANT,IT turned on each other. even as they where diffrent.
The constitution does make a statement about what should be done when a person or group attempts to overthrough the government. If you cannot see that Sharia and hence Islam does exactly that. I don’t think that the founders intended the Constitution to be a haven for those that wish to destroy the country, subjugate groups of non-believers and replace a Federalist government with a Religious one. But then I am a proud Phobe and will also state that I don’t think Nazi’ism, Stalin’ism, or any other group that would plan to subdue the country should be allowed to continue here. But Rob, that is not what the Constitution says, how can you profess to say that you support the Constitution and say that we should kick the commies and islamists out? Well, the Bible also teaches to turn the other cheek, but it never says to allow your neck to be placed in a noose. I think the founders figured that we would be smart enough to know that, they were apparently wrong!
The Constitution trumps all feelings. NO MATTER WHAT THOSE FEELINGS ARE!
MIKE! I’M LOOKING AT YOU!
So use that same Constutution, and buy the property next door to the new Mosque…Then fill it with a museum showing the 1400 years of strife and hate eminating from the cult of Mohammed, and how it culminated in the buliding of the Mosque next door.
What a thin-skinned hypocrite you are, Mike!
You say:
Then right under your comment you let stand Rumscrook because you like his “off-topic” comment; yet for Cary under him, you have:
Don’t be surprised if Aye’s thread gets bumped.
To all here- I think that our Constitution, IF FOLLOWED, is strong enough for us to allow them to build the Mosque- yet let them know that we do not approve, in any way, extremist views they may have.
People, you have to have confidence in our laws- until they are subverted- but the core values of our Constitution are the same ones that have enabled us to withstand the forces that have torn apart EVERY OTHER GOVERNMENT in this world, bar none.
We are the oldest continuously run Republic in this world, and unless someone comes along who tears up the Constitution, and inserts himself as emperor, all we need is to be true to the tenets of the Constitution, and it will guide us well.
This includes, of course, the freedom to worship as you will- even if that concept is too complicated for some to grasp.
It is until a tipping point, as many of the other country that have said, “what is a few Muslims…”
If we were talking Nazi’s at what point do you think “enough” would be? They have both stated the goal to take over the world. I don’t think that we should allow any group that outright endorses the oppression of another group be it Jews or Infidels. I guess one could also ask, “How much shit would you like with your steak?” At what point do you say, “Your beliefs that you hold as the word of Allah are not acceptable to a free society.” And the thought that the more you allow in the better they will behave has been proven false in every western country that has allowed them in. Why do some insist on repeating the mistakes of Europe again here? Learn from them, don’t emulate them.
As I said, if we hold to the tenets of our Constitution- but that goes for Christians as well as Muslims or Hindus-
were you aware (not many are) that there are 4 stanzas to the Star-Spangled Banner, not just 2? Apparently, because the last two reference God, or a Creator, they were quietly expunged from public knowlege. This happened in FDR and Truman’s terms.
Just gotta loathe them Progressives.
Part of the problem we have is in not being religious- or rather, not standing up for your religion- apparently it is “classless” to talk either religion or politics anywhere, lest you offend someone, but abrogating your responsibility to have a “social backbone”, and be willing to debate either, is not doing society any good- it is our duty to argue and debate, and even draw a line in the sand and say, “Enough is enough!”- Our social fabric demands it, especially since our youth have NOT been taught the history of the United States, or debated the true meanings of our Constitution.
For damn sure no “journalist” knows what they are doing- they believe that by inserting “flashwords” into a pure news story, they can influence the way the public sees that story, but they are too ignorant to realize they are poisoning the well of trust the public has had in them- like the boy who cried “wolf”, pretty soon noone listens.
We have been “snookered” by the people who say that talking politics or religion is a tasteless thing to do- when all is said and done the only thing left is a vacuum- and NOTHING can survive THAT.
To Aye:
I just wanted to say that you, Mata and Wordsmith are all on the right side of this issue. Aye, I hated to see your posts deleted on Mike’s thread as I felt that you made a sound argument based on the rule of law and the Constitution. I know you and I have gotten into a few back and forths in the past, but believe it or not I always enjoy reading your comments as well as any threads because you make well reasoned arguments based in logic and not emotion (unlike some other authors). I think what Mike did to you was cowardly to say the least but I’m glad you created this thread in order to finish what you were trying to say.
Keep it up Aye!
Ron H.
A.C. I’d echo Ron H’ s thoughts re your statesman like approach to the issues.Mike has deleted most of my posts which to me seems very childish.As a lifelong Dem.going back to a young teen watching how JFK inspired a nation to “ask not what your country—“.I joined the Marines inspired by that speech. I believe in Dem principles of a free press, civil rights.human rights,freedom of speech and religion and a strong respect for the environment.
JFK said “A free society that cannot care for the many who are poor cannot protect the few who are rich”
Mata and you have really opened my eyes to the principles of Conservatism.Thanks for that.
RW
This post is so wrong, Aye.
@Skye:
Well, obviously we disagree on that.
Unfortunately, the decision was made to shut down debate entirely by deleting comments which were not even directed at the post author that’s when the necessity for this post arose.
How thin skinned, Aye. You created a hit post because of few deleted comments? I’m embarrassed for you. Our readership deserves better on this blog than your petty grievances.
Well, Mike repeatedly asked me to create my own post. I simply complied with his request.
Strangely, I haven’t seen you express embarrassment by proxy or direct criticism for the guy who cannot carry on a debate without deleting the voice of the opposition, including mine, simply for the horrible offense of having an opposing position.
You’re right. Our readers do indeed deserve better.
@Aye I read your posting and agree with about 90% of it. Mike did step over the bounds and
your rebuttal was good.
We are either a Nation of Laws or We are not deserving of our Rights and Freedoms. I will Stand and Fight Sharia Law with any means required bar none but sincerely hope that it never gets to that. Constitutional Law at State and Federal Level must be Defended against All Comers, Foreign or Domestic. The Authority of the States must be preserved as well as the Will of the Voters on All Matters. The Feds need a trip to the woodshed in November. I hope they get it ‘good and hard’. The Soviergnty of ALL Individual States and limits to Authority of the Federal Government must be respected as is the Will of the Majority of the Voters on ANY matter, Foreign or Domestic, whether it be Immigration, Marriage, 2nd Amendment issues or
especially fiscal responsibility.
That having been said from the Montana high ground, can We Please put this FA pissing contest to rest? We are a diverse group of Family here but can civilly agree to disagree on some matters.
@Old Trooper – You will agree that Aye needs to apologize to the readership for this petty posting.
@Aye – Yes, creating a post to air grievances is really taking the higher ground in this debate. You simply could have created posts with your POV on the Mosque – one I completely disagree with – but that is your right. Instead, you decided to tarnish the hard earned reputation of this blog with this whining post. I will continue to be embarrassed as a contributor by this childish post.
Skye, I hold All of the FA Authors with great respect for doing some homework on their very informative and provocative postings here. I particularly enjoy you contributions as well on happenings around Philadelphia that I would rather visit than DC.
There is an old saying that goes “Be careful what You ask for…” The gauntlet was thrown and Aye responded. I feel that all of the subsequent discussion falls under the First Amendment venue and that opinions and emotions run pretty turbulent on the NYFC Mosque, it’s supporters and detractors have strong feelings on the placement of that structure and the proximity to Ground Zero.
The 9.11.01 attack forced me to postphone my Retirement from Active Federal Service and I did respond to the attack out of both Patriotism and my own personal need for vengeance. I did tear up my Retirement Papers and participate in the initial assault by airborne insertion with the 75th Ranger Regiment and kicked in the doors to Kandahar with great enthusiasm and vigor. I took great pleasure in destroying the Taliban sanctuary there and did not spare a one of them
in my effective range.
I Retired again and was subsequently recalled to Active Duty due to the lack of progress in repelling the insurgency. My anger at the treatment of Afghan Citizens, Women and children at the hands of insurgents and Taliban extremists was immeasurable. DOD recalled several Old War Dogs and we were getting results and then Politics reared it’s ugly head and logic failed the Current Regime.
I do personally feel that the Cordoba Mosque Project is both insensitive and intolerant of the memory of the 9.11.01 Victims and the emotions of the 9.11.01 Victims Family Members. It is insulting to those folks. However the Rule of Law must prevail and regardless of the strong emotions felt, the same Rights, Freedoms and Liberties that I personally cherish and have Defended with my Life must be respected in the case of that Mosque. It speaks poorly for the Builders of that structure but as it has been approved by the Planning Commission and violates no Laws, the SOBs can build it.
As I stated, I will not allow Sharia to replace the Bill of Rights or the US Constitution in any fashion and would reject it and resist it with any means necessary. Bar none, and that would include acts of violence if need be on a grand scale.
Freedom of Religion is guaranteed by Law and was written in Freedom Hall in Philadelphia by the Founding Fathers. Signed by all in attendance. That and my respect for Women and the Cocktail Hour seperate US from the Taliban and Islamic Extermists. My Oath to Protect and Defend the US Constitution has NO Expiration date. My Love of Country is a given without any
bounds or Limits. My Respect for the Bill of Rights fits in there as well.
I respect both Mike and Aye Chi and Yourself. Here at FA spirited discussion is what We do and why most of US come here. We are All Patriots with differing points of view and opinions. I cast my lot with the Bill of Rights a long time ago and the Rule of Law must prevail. My Daughter is a USAFA Cadet and will eventually be wearing Air Force Blue, take the Oath as an Officer to Protect and Defend the US Constitution the same as I did and hopes to fly Fighter Aircraft. Sharia Law would have her as someones wife popping out babies and uneducated. There are limits to what I will accept. Sharia Law is the Limit for me. Allowing followers of Mohammed to worship falls under Freedom of Religion under the Bill of Rights. Permitting Jihad to be nurtured or sponsored there is a horse of an entirely different color. Here You are innocent until Due Process to prove you guilty. A real conundrum for a few of Us but it is the Rule of Law.
Take Care Lady and God Bless the USA.
I don’t Love NYFC but would defend it with my Life if necessary.
I prefer Missoula, MT to NYFC or DC as I’m just a guy that loves fresh air and the high country.
Free and open discussion of issues, IMO, the primary value of this entire blog, and maintaining that value is not something I personally regard as petty.
I spoke to soon at that other thread. This thread is the best in FA history.
It is with sadness that I view these developments; however, if you think this was a hot debate, think back to the debates in Philadelphia during that hot summer with the shutters all closed for secrecy and tempers getting much hotter than the ambient temperatures and stifling humidity. With some of the greatest minds that may have ever lived arguing the concepts that forged this great country over the anvil of tyranny with the hammer of freedom. Those arguments built this great and unique country that stands alone in its concepts of freedom and liberty.
Yes, it hurts to have your pride slapped, but you will not win every argument, despite how truly convinced you are of your righteousness. We who write articles and commentary here, do so with a purpose that transcends individual pride; we have a mission and if we lose our direction, we fail in our mission. Freedom is a very precious gift that we have all inherited, protecting and cherishing that freedom is our self-appointed goal. Some have had the distinction of wearing the uniform and putting their life on the wall, most of us merely peck at keyboards and are less than casual about sighting in; however, our mission is just as important, we exercise our freedom to express ourselves and argue; hopefully, we come away with a greater understanding of the word ‘patriotism’ and that freedom also includes listening and analyzing the thoughts and opinions of others.
This argument should be considered a celebration of freedom and provide a greater understanding of what it would be like if we allow tyranny to rob us of this special gift.
I didn’t see the posts Mike deleted, but certain people were being rather abusive and dishonest with the Islamaphobia label. IF that was what he deleted, then I have no problem with it.
While some did earn the title, many did not and I sure felt that I was being accused of being one simply because I disagreed with the building of the mosque (and still do). So, if this thread was to whine about Mike not tolerating mistreatment, bad on Aye.
Now if it was truly a case of deleting opposing viewpoint posts, I agree it should not have been done and Aye is right to call him out on it.
One deleted comment is one thing, creating this type of mean spirited, vindictive post is quite another.
Aye overstepped his bounds in this instance, and hurt FA in the process, more so than a single deleted comment could ever accomplish. So, I am calling Aye out on this travesty of a post.
Hard right: I failed to see thoses you call “some”
It makes me wonder if I was view as one of the “some”.
thoses posts where all “fire” and it was expected to go far on soul searching
FROM everyone, but I cannot label our smarts commenters as “islamophobe” from what I read. bye
how’s the farm going?. bye
SKYE: hi, I admire your standing on what is right, as CHIHUAHUA’s standing and readyness to go all the way to protect what he saw as breaching the laws of the CONSTITUTION,as a BRAVE WARRIOR he showed himself to be, A TRUE PROTECTOR of the REPUBLIC,
AND all of the readers could admire his stance.
MIKE’S AMERICA, was on the other side, trying to make the point with the groups
WHO agreed on same view,and between the two opposing and pushing their beleifs, wich had 2 diffrents sides not realy related on the post, because one was the law providing no answer to fix the will of the oposit view,which was the right to challenge the wrong.
AND we could expect , the 2 negatives to clash into attacks and counter attacks that needed
a closing which came to late for not wounding the oponents.
the favored two great AUTHORS have hurt each other and must repaired the dammage together out of our scrutiny: I am confident that they will do it together,and agree to disagree,
AS we love them as so intelligent and need them to give us such great post which reflex the real life, not anything fake like the GOVERNMENT majority is imposing to defeat the real AMERICA. bye
@Skye:
There were more than one. How will this blog continue to benefit if commentors (and authors) don’t feel safe that they will be heard? Echo chambers are easy to find on the internet. Turning this into just another one of those is a true disservice to your readership, as then you’ve lost what makes it unique and special. Please don’t let that happen.
@Cary:
Skye doesn’t have all the facts, yet she wants to claim I acted stupidly.
We’ve all heard that one before, eh?
@ Aye – I’ve had all the facts presented to me over the past two days and you still come out acting stupidly.
Hello, are you the only one in creation to have a comment or two deleted?? Get over yourself, Aye.
Please don’t devolve this blog into a bitching match between contributors – THAT will go along way to promote what is really good about this blog.
@skye:
With all due respect, you seem to be doing exactly what you’re condemning. Perhaps you’d like to consider emailing Aye privately, if you’ve more to say. This way you can have a private conversation, in private, free of public eyes and opinion.
@skye:
Really?
That’s strange. I never received a single e-mail inquiry from you. Nor did you ask me questions regarding the facts in your comments on this thread. Just a quick jump to conclusions.
That glaring omission, within itself, represents what is going on here.
You’re arguing what the full picture looks like when your puzzle is missing most of its’ pieces.
Yes, you’re right.
Which is why, of course, you e-mailed me directly so that we could have this conversation in the background rather than out in public.
Oh, wait…..
And with that Skye, I’m done with the tit for tat with you here.
If you’d like to e-mail me, you’ve got the address.
So…
How about them Giants this year?
To Skye:
What you should be embarrassed by is the fact that you Mike regularly practices censorship on this site and refuses to answer questions if he doesn’t like them. I followed the entire back and forth between Mike and Aye and I can tell you Mike’s behavior was cowardly and childish.
So do me a favor Skye and put a sock in it because the people reading this thread aren’t interested in what you think.
Ron H.
@Patvann: while I’m a Yankee fan, I’d love to see a Licecum/Price duel!
PATVANN: hi, we must help thoses GIANTS, recover, because too much kicking,
hurt them, they are licking their wounds until the healing has come to make them forget.
bye
RON H: hi, THE people are much interested to what all of the AUTHORS of this beautifull blog,
HAVE to say, thoses have proven their intelligence many times on their post, and that is because of them all, that YOU and I are here with the others. bye
Patvann Great year for the Giants.Barry Zito is the ultimate gamer.Godspeed to your Marine.As you know he is always welcome at my home in San Clemente.Look up Marine Corps Prayer on internet.
RW
Barry Z is also a great supporter of our troops. I have a hand-written personal letter from him he wrote in response to a comment I had left via e-mail to the Giants organization, after he sponsored a day for our injured warriors. He actually went through the effort to contact me (and my son) through my work, where I had written the e-mail from. It was stunning.
Thank you for the offer, and the prayer. We will be down that way at the end of November, and if the schedule allows, we just might take you up on that offer.
The idea is to have an author level debate with no delete key, no editing, and no censorship. Since the author level balance of opinion is tipped away from Mike’s side I would propose that he be able to invite one other person of his choice to even out the numbers.
Aye
If I were to email you privately, I would ask you why you drastically changed the focus of this blog post from what you proposed. However, since this is a public debate, I’m asking you in public, sport.
Ahem, hey pot..kettle is calling you. Again you chose to make this a public discussion. not I.
I’m simply following your lead. It was your choice to use this post to castigate a fellow, now former, contributor, not mine. You crossed the line champ, I’m trying to help you see the error of your ways.
You should have took you own advice and moved on instead of embarrassing yourself.
Unfortunately, you would not move on, Aye. You started this in the public forum, its up to you to end it. Oh BTW – Cary, Ron and I have never really been on ‘friends’ so..what’s your point?
Hypocrisy, indeed, Aye. The ball is in your court, champ. You can do the right thing and publicly apologize to me or continue to talk behind my back. What ever makes you feel better, Aye.
No Beez, you weren’t one of the some. 😆
I’m not surprised some of the lefty bomb throwers are all for this thread. Mike didn’t let them play their non-debate games which made them cry.
@Skye:
A million an episode… sure, rub it in…