Post Exclusive or Not Exclusive2

 

Worshipful Brother Sir,

 

If there’s anybody more disappointed to responses to a personal opinion, it would not be you.  My piece was posted in MY own personal website where I store most of MY humble writings as a precaution in case my PC’s hard drive malfunctioned.  Your subtle innuendo that I stole an idea from a published material and used it as my own can be better served to described Albert Pike’s Moral and Dogma.

 

To received this kind of communication from a Past Master implying his superior ability to drop lower than a less talented “intellectually dishonest” person is a fine example of the result of my original article---Not 4 Everybody.  Despite of beautiful lesson such Masonic Ornaments, people who should be teachers especially those who were elected to sit in the Eastern Chair could not even remember nor understand the Fellow Craft Charge.  Instead of focusing on the issue, the tactic of personal attack is an old trick perfected by career politicians.  Most appalling is calling someone a “brother” and instead of whispering good counsel to an erring ear went ahead insinuate his mightiness.  If there is a bigot here, look into your mirror and if you listened hard enough, the image might tell you that your “sensitivity to your local experience” is not a license to get even to those who have nothing to do with your issue.  How regrettable that you call me a “Brother” as I am oblige to return that favor---- you might be one but worthy let alone “worshipful” might be hard to accept.

 

 

Rudy Olano

Rocky Hill, CT

30Jan06

 

PS,

Would you agree that it is bit presumptuous as your friend xxxxx like to say, to expect that my knees would start shaking just because you made something “crystal clear.”  How about this.  YOU AND ANYONE LIKE YOU ARE NOT WELCOME TO MY WEBSITE.  It is my hope that is clear enough.

 

BTW, xxxxx, If you care about fairness, why don’t you post my reply so that everybody in your group could at least read my rebuttal?  or maybe I need to post that too, on my website.

 

 

Brother Rudy,

Just read your response to my remarks on your "Not 4 Everybody" piece.

For what it's worth, I'm a bit disappointed. Not at the response itself-- everyone is entitled to their opinion, and everyone knows that old saying about opinions. I'm disappointed that you would post my response outside of the (closed) forum in which it was presented without asking my permission. And I'm further disappointed that you quoted me completely out of context. That's a breach of internet etiquette at best, and intellectually dishonest at worst.

To be honest, it reminds me of what anti-Masons continually do with the works of Albert Pike -- picking lines here and there to further their own agenda, without placing them in the original context that more fully illustrates the writers point of view, and which would weaken their own arguments. If I wanted to engage in the same tactics, there's more than enough material in your response that I could pull some lines and fragments from here and there, and make you out to be bigoted, anti-Catholic and an elitist. But, that would be intellectually dishonest, and non-masonic as well.

Good luck with "better serving the Craft through the medium of study and research..."



PS In case it is not self-evi
dent, I have responded to you via email, one-on-one. So, to be crystal clear, I'm not expecting to find any part of this posted on your Sequoia site.

--
Wethersfield, CT