It is time for the gloves to come off. After making my stop at the Blue Collar Republican and getting an eye full of what went on over at Host Gator, I got stewed. The more I thought about it, the more pissed off I became and the pressure cooker started shaking. So here we are, and here is my 'virtual finger' to those miscreants over at CAIR.
If you unsure as to what I am speaking of, please go to BCR and here and here to read about it, then come back.
“Vilmar” may have let the matter drop, but myself and others will pick up the standard and wave it for all to see . I will not sit idly by, while these bastards seek to trample and subvert the right to say whatever the hell I want.
I suppose that since they found this objectionable, “Vilmar's” blog should be deleted as is only right, no? CAIR would never, then, say something such as this about Abdul-Jalil (who was put on administrative leave after making Anti-American and Anti-Jewish statements while holding public office) :
Wassim Nasr, Council on Islamic Relations: "There are other things that are the truth in his statements. For example, harsh treatment of Muslim prisoners at the Metropolitan Detention Center and the jails in New York, so I think we can't mix the two together. And even if it was his opinion, this is America and we are allowed to express our opinions publicly." (article here)
I took both the words in “Vilmar's” post and his linking to be satirical. But for a moment, let us just say they were not. Let's say the guy was truly twisted and supported the murder of children. A horrible, horrific, and malignant opinion that would be, but to use CAIR's own words, “And even if it was his opinion, this is America and we are allowed to express our opinions publicly.” CAIR would never, in clear and concise terms, support the killing of innocent men, women, and children. They would not support Sheikh Abdalla Ali (Mogadishu, Somalia sheikh) when he said:
"He who does not perform prayer will be considered as infidel and our sharia law orders that person to be killed,"
My eyes must be deceiving me, you hypocritical ass holes, when I read an editorial response, by Ahmad Al-Akhras (Vice chairman of national Council on American-Islamic Relations,Columbus ), concerning the events in Somalia to include:
“What has happened in Somalia, for the majority of Somalis inside and those who are abroad, is a positive change. I truly suggest that we should not prejudge this change, or any change for that matter, based on the religious affiliation of those in power.”
Do you call slaughtering someone who does not bend neck to an oppressive regime a “positive change”? I call that tyranny. I judge it evil.
Let's keep this train moving, shall we? So what happens when CAIR is in a public place, exercising the same rights they so abhor in the hands of others, speaking their views on Israel and America? What happens when someone asks a few questions that they don't feel are proper and in-line with their agenda? Surely a member of their group would not assault the questioner? Dr. Al-Akhras of CAIR would not physically put his hands on them and attempt to take their camera and push them away? No, you say?
These are all actions of a group that is in strict adherence to their mission statement, “to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding”
It is not like members of this organization (Randall ("Ismail") Royer [communications specialist and civil rights coordinator], Ghassan Elashi [founder of CAIR's Texas chapter], Bassem Khafagi [CAIR's onetime communications director], Rabih Haddad [CAIR fund raiser], Rabih Haddad [a CAIR advisory board member]) have been arrested, convicted, deported, or otherwise linked to terrorism-related charges and activities. Honest.
CAIR has a long and distinguished record. Take a trip here and here to see the hi-light reel.
My father always told me, “If it looks like shit, smells like shit, and tastes like shit, chances are...”
CAIR is no friend of mine, yours, or any other free thinking individual on this planet. I am not cowed, nor am I fooled. I know what they are, I know what they represent, and I will not be silent in letting everyone know it.
Try and pull the truth down from my little blog, you better pack a lunch. If this web host drops its pants for you, I will find another. Litigation you say? Disclosure is a bitch.
I can understand why those over at CAIR would wish to quell free speech:
"Without free speech no search for truth is possible, without free speech no discovery of truth is useful, without free speech progress is checked and the nations no longer march forward toward the nobler life which the future holds for man. Better a thousand-fold abuse of speech than a denial of free speech. The abuse dies in a day, but the denial slays the life of the people, and entombs the hope of the race."
Charles Bradlaugh
Now, on to Host Gator.
Yes, they have a right to their intellectual property. They have a right to allow or disallow any content they wish on their servers. But, we have a right to let them know what we think about it in both word and deed. That they would so easily fold to demands that pimp out free speech, from a group whose record speaks for itself, tells me I want nothing to do with them and I will give them free advertisement stating the same. Host Gator and its affiliates will get nothing from me but more free press; I will ask everyone I know to do the same. They are free to act in their business dealings however they wish; we are free to react.
Here is their contact information so you, reader, may do the same if you so desire. I implore you to not leave this up to someone else. It is our duty to protect our way of life. Money doesn't talk, it screams.
sales@hostgator.com
billing@hostgator.com
support@hostgator.com
reboots@hostgator.com
My letter to Host Gator:
To whom it may concern:
Your selective censorship of rightwinghowler.com, has left me both dismayed and indignant. Considering that you host other sites that contain equally offensive material to different cross-sections of our country, I see what you have done for what it is - blatant cow-towing to an anti-American pressure group (CAIR). I understand that it is within your rights to control the media that is displayed on your servers. But, I also have the right to disagree with your actions and in so doing, not enter into any dealings with you or your affiliates. I hope that when and if you find yourself in this situation again, your response will be different. Either that, or apply censorship equally, and shut down every site that is brought to your attention as offensive.
Sincerely,
Alan Deal
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This post was left for me over at My Green Hell, from a fine gentleman who did not wish to post here because of the 'sign up' requirements in place by my blog.
I have since removed the sign up restriction and have taken the liberty to put his comments here. My apolgies for making it difficult to post here earlier, Major Patt.
__________________________
Dear Bean,
I did surf over to your compatriot's site where I attempted to post the following:
-------------------------
That in the name of "free speech" you and Bean would defend this composer of "hate speech" suggests to me that ye twain have lived too completely in the realms of the academic, the theoretical, and the abstract.
Meaning that it suggests to me that for you the idea of killing babies is perhaps physically beyond your comprehension... because it is completely beyond your experience.
Thus, where I hold the author of hate speech in contempt, you and Bean IMO are simply being niaeve, inspiring me to this improvisation on two lines stolen from Yeats:
"The best lack all intensity, while the worst/Are full of passionate convicition."
-------------------------
Unfortunately I could not post my remarks as I didn't want to sign up for a Google account in order to do so.
Perhaps you would assist me here? When you are next in contact with your friend, Alan, please pass on my words for his consideration?
All the best...
Douglas C. Patt
Major, USA [Ret.]
Dear Major Patt,
I think, in my admittedly poor use of the English language, I have led you, and possibly others, away from the point I intended to make. My meaning is this – the right to voice one's opinion is not a selective favor that applies when all parties agree with the subject matter and/or opinions expressed.
When I read the “offensive” endorsement from Vilmar, along with its accompanied text, the entire thing screamed Johnathan Swift's, “A Modest Proposal” to me. Perhaps I was incorrect in that assumption. But the substance of his remarks, or anyone's for that matter, is not the point I was driving at. I do not condone the murder of children in any manner what-so-ever. But because I disagree with an individual or group, does not mean I can morally or ethically pull out a gag and force it into their mouths. Were our culture to follow that line of reasoning, to its conclusion, where would it end?
I suppose Voltaire can eloquently say, in one sentence, what I have so mangled in many:
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” - François Marie Arouet (Voltaire)
Respectfully,
Alan Deal
Gentlemen,
You cannot defend a Noble Principle by championing a Bad Cause. Attempting to do so IMO will only offend Common Sense.
Respectfully,
Slugg
Dear Mr. Slugg,
I fear we will go in circles on this one. Is it not the Principle that stands on its own,defending not a cause or stance, but the freedom to express it?
Would we not, as a culture, be building houses of straw if we only allowed expression that had the approval of the masses?
Or am I missing your point entirely? I was dropped, a few times, on my head, so it is possible that this is the case. ;-)
Respectfully,
Alan
Post a Comment