Spark crossed a line

And -- I believe -- there are some who may want to protect the value of their Strider knives.

The Question keeps getting asked, but never answered. Strider's statements on the subject can, at best, be termed ambiguous and/or evasive, and touch on hot-button themes of "privacy," "duty," "honor," and "country"...but fail to provide a clear and direct answer. Counter attacks are launched wherein The Question gets lost in the discourse and bickering.

Spark brings us back to The Question, which is asked again.

And so the cycle begins anew.

This will be my only contribution to this subject: I am of the opinion that there are many who believe they know what The Answer to The Question is. It's time to close this topic down because -- IMHO -- The Question will never be answered by Mr. Strider. As a result, Mr. Strider will be burdened with The Answer for the rest of his life, and that's got to be a h e a v y burden to bear. I don't give a hoot about Mr. Strider, his product, or the truth about his life. Yet the thought of bearing that cross for the balance of a lifetime causes me to ponder the c o u r a g e it might take to answer The Question and -- as a result -- make this all go away. Perhaps Mr. Stider needs this pain.

RuQus Watcher

OUT

 

All moral standards are relative and as human constructs, subject to opinion. A judge can't realistically pass a moral or ethical judgement without a benchmark (often a law). If for example , the standard benchmark for excellent behavior is the highest office in the land, or say the majority religious patriarch, and that person or group of persons are down in the toilet, then that's the highest required standard by the subjects as well. That's the whole point of a minimum standard of acceptable behavior.

We don't live in a monarchy or oligarchy here in America, so what basis does anyone have for holding a mere 'subject' to a higher standard than we hold the occupant of the highest office in the land -and how will history judge the current standard bearer?

Now- if we were subject to a dictatorship,monarchy or oligarchy ; then sure, you could have a basis for making a biased judgment with extraordinary penance requirements for a person or group.

I'm not defending the crime, nor the criminal, nor the subsequent deception used to cover the person's criminal past. I don't and never will condone those things. I am, and if you re-read my posts, have consistently made the argument that few of us are in a position to single one person out as being exceptionally needy of deliverance and repentence. Not to interject too much of my personal faith into the argument, but I could cite a classic scriptural reference to buttress my point. I doubt I need to. In 4 years of participation in around 20 forums of various stripe, I've only found one that doesn't contain constant moral jockying and perverse mudslinging.

As some have pointed out- were it not for Strider's success, his history would have remained cloaked- his claims bearing little consequence. Just as President Bush's dubious service record would have remained cloaked, were it not for his uncanny ability to rally the faithful around him soley on the strength of an allegedly 'higher moral standard' that he stridently hammered into us during his 6 year campaign . Strider is clearly not as adept at sanitizing his past as the current 'chief'. Then again, Strider just wants to make and sell knives, the chief want's a glowing review in the History books at any cost- lives, lies , the planet, cash- it doesn't matter to him what it takes.

So why judge the gravity of Mick Strider's deeds with a different gauge than one you use for the sitting President of the United States? Are you planning to nominate him for office some day?

Now, as to the example of my car being stolen- indeed, I would rather that it be stolen than say my son kidnapped or my sister raped. I happen to love diamonds and am fully capable of executing a heist myself ( Humn.. so someone got to the exchange before me eh?)- so I'd have no problem replacing by stolen and beat up old car with a spanking new Rolls Royce Cornice- if I wished to do so illegally. So I'd say you've made an apt analogy. The local Police are well aware of who I am and what I do and they keep close tabs on me- as they should. They also get a lot of the stuff we review as donations after we're done. As do my local fire dept. & Boy Scout troop. I'm sure they'd like more but it does buy me a little more good will than persons that don't contribute anything at all.

Allow me to suggest that we have a choice to make. Either we judge the morality and ethics of our peers against an absolute benchmark of perfection or we judge them on a relative one. But one thing I do not believe we have a choice in- is even handedness- which is the thrust of my verbalizations here. Let's judge all those that make false claims of heroism with the same excellent and efficient yardstick that you've used against Strider's history-then I'll know that your motive was to be fair to the community and not just single out one person. Our government will pay dearly for it's current experiments with differential standards for the treatment of captives. Surely this humble forum can show them that there's a better path .

Oh! I should also appologize for my verbose English. English is neither my 'mother tongue' nor native language.I use these exchanges to get as much writing practice as I can.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

 

Bush was a certified Jet Fighter Pilot no matter how you slice it. How many people do you know that accomplished that? Just taking off and landing one is the most dangerous part of flying.

 

Look. The premise behind our social order is based on laws. But what then if the lawmakers themselves break the laws that they set forth for the masses? What then of the laws or the lawmakers or breakers? They become meaningless is what I'm trying to say. To emphasis- it's the deliberate intent to single one person out of the mass that I take exception to and not your very astute homework about them. And please, double-talk? Ok so my English is not perfect. Insulting the intelligence of others is barely worth the bother. This is not a discussion about intelligence at all, it's about Relative vs Absolute standards. Make a choice. Oh! You have. This discussion is about your decision to judge based on an absolute standard.So thank you for clarifying that point for me.:thumbup:

 

Today's Bo Nanas

 

Just for the record and at the risk of contributing to the defocusing of this thread, nobody has shown by apparently-credible, documentary evidence that Bush lied about his military service. He has released all of his military records. Certainly, he never tried to forge any military records. Other people tried to lie about his military service by forging military records and they got caught and disgraced and some of them had their careers ruined because of it.

Spark has alleged that Mr. Strider has lied about his own military service and allowed others in his sphere of influence to do so as well and that he has done this not once or twice, not casually or carelessly or accidentally, and not in the distant past, but habitually, deliberately, purposefully, and presently. Thar is a dramatically different thing.

Mr. Strider has not released his full military records.

And there have even been accusations made that Mr. Strider forged (or altered) his own military records also using the wrong font (or case), though those charges are not well-supported.

To compare Mr. Strider's situation to Pres. Bush is very invalid.

And besides, as has been said several time now, the misconduct of any other person would not excuse the misconduct of another.

 

Wrong! The most dangerous part of flying is the drive to the airfield.

 

i am reposting this as only one person has actually attempted to answer the questions.

i do not feel these are loaded or fallacious questions as i am simply asking those who have publically posted in support of mick whether or not they actually believe what he has posted

i am not asking whether or not his explanations are possible or even plausible. just whether or not you actually believe him

if you feel the questions are unfair in some way. you may post here or contact me by email or pm and i will attempt to rephrase them in a more acceptable way

 

might could agree if ya were speaking of landing/launching from a carrier, otherwise imho a mission over a hostile country would probably be more dangerous.

i found it odd he (bush) made such a big to do about landing on the carrier a few yrs back, sure it was cool, but if he woulda wanted to do a little combat flying himself he had the chance and passed, i dont think he flew (when he was in the TxAG) much more than he had to.

one guy i went to school with was (is?) a F16 pilot, bigggest dork i ever knew lol, his dad was the state aviation officer FWIW, anyway dont know how he passed flight school, i dont know that being a fighter pilot is all its cracked up to be if this individual can succed at it, certainly doesnt prepare ya to be president. FWIW i voted for bush both times.

kinda off topic though lol.

as far as supporting strider to keep prices up on strider knives, i dont know that i have supported strider, but if i had it wasnt to keep prices up, i have 2 striders total, never have made any $$ collecting knives, doubt i ever will, has nothing to do with that imho, at least for me, i dont know that the values have gone down one iota anyway, they dont appear to have from what i have seen.

 

I really fail to understand the arguments for Strider in all of this. Kevin made a case and has stuck to it through thick and thin. To his credit nobody has brought any facts to bear that would argue effectively against that case. Those that disagree with him or don't like his case have argued everything except the facts of the case.

Saying that Strider is a friend or a nice guy or a philanthopist or a good knife maker or even a veteran doesn't answer Kevin's argument. It just raises confusion. Kevin hasn't said anything about any of those issues. He has just complained that Strider lied about military combat in order to advance sales of his company. Veterans generally don't like that. I know I don't. It appears to me that it is true and nobody has said anything to make me believe otherwise.

Not caring about whether Strider lied about his combat experience is another matter. That doesn't answer Kevin's argument either. Wanting to do business with Strider despite the lies isn't germaine either. It is a personal attitude and doesn't answer Kevin's case. Those that think Kevin should not have brought it up in the first place have a right to that opinion as well. But it isn't an argument against Kevin's case. It is immaterial. It is called shooting the messenger.

Does anybody that is arguing against Kevin have any facts to counter Kevin's facts? Apparently not. So I'd like to suggest that we consider Kevin the winner since he is the only one who has offered up facts and made a clear and concise case. If this were a court case and I were a judge, I would find in favor of Kevin and I'm Kevin's competitor. I'm not Strider's competitor. I have no personal stake in the argument at all. But facts are facts.

Let's move on.

 

Great post. Nice job of summing up the salient points. It should get this thread back on track.....but I kind of doubt it.

 

Very good post Fred. I think pretty much just as you do after viewing all the details of more than just the two threads in reference to it here.

In my life experience when someone is innocent of anything he/she is accused of and knows it to be a false accusation they stand up, fight and pretty much take the course Mr. Osman did to correct the situation if its something as big as this matter is, (and yes its a big matter regardless of how small some want to make it out to be). When someone does the opposite and turns tail and runs? Well, you can figure the rest out pretty easily for yourself because actions speak louder than words folks. No amount of excuses makes up for this in my own take on it and perhaps that reaction to Spark's bringing this topic up is the one that stands out more than any other one thing to me.

We all know Mick can be loud. We have seen it. We know he is a strong personality and we have seen that as well as some of the vulgar lanquage usually associated with him when he posts. How many times has he said come and say it to me, come and do it personally blah blah blah? He has no problem at all speaking his mind and yet here now about this we get nothing. Anyone that has interacted with Mick on these forums knows his character so, many have noted how it has toned down a bit and almost become soft spoken and very mild by comparison to what we have grown accustomed to. You notice this whether you are a fan or not. So, regardless of how often Spark is attacked, and regardless of the smoke screens thrown up by everyone else this one thing stands out as the clear cut out of character response by Mick to what has been brought up. To me that and nothing else carries more weight by itself. If he knew Spark was wrong, we'd all have seen a fight put up by him that was more in character with what we all know and have seen many times before, but instead we get an exit from the internet after several softer spoken meek responses when it first broke.

I feel for the brothers that love him and care for him but regardless of how you might feel about him it is readily apparent to me by Mick's actions after this all came up (again) that Spark is nothing less than right on the money in his assessement of the situation.

STR

 

The original poster brought Mick into this thread, so any discussion of him or Spark's motives is on track.

 

As long as they are facts and not innuendos or guesses or hopes or opinions or attitudes. The discussions I've read use those things as arguments. They aren't facts. Facts are facts. Let's move on.

 

STR, the only time I encountered Strider was at a presentation he made to the press in the Buck booth at a SHOT show several years ago. My impression of him was that he was a blowhard. He probably is.

I don't argue with success, however. He launched a knife manufacturing business in the U.S. and made a go of it. That deserves respect and admiration. The sad thing is that the success belongs to his and his partner's guts and good business sense, not to the lies about combat service. I think he would have been just as successful without the bluster and arrogance and lies. Apparently, he didn't think so.

 

What is that "Man oh Mania" that you are so hot for????

 

Hey, let's not confuse the discussion with a bunch of facts. Really though, this is a forum, and from what I have gathered over the years, innuendos, guesses, hopes and opinions are the mainstays of forum communication.

 

Unfortunately, you're right. Thankfully though there's occasionally guys like Spark and Knife Outlet that speak out so clearly and factually, it cuts through all the hyperbole for anyone with clear enough eyes to see it.

I'm tired of seeing Spark persecuted for calling Strider out on his unrelenting line of crap. Bullshit is bullshit. If people don't know it when they see it, then I feel sorry for them. If they see the bullshit and still don't care, then I feel even more sorry for them.

Spark, you have my support. These forums are a great place you've created and I wish you many more years of prosperity.

 

just passin' thru