Westjet_737 From Japan, joined Nov 1999, 869 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 806 times:
Most people probably think they already know all they need to know about Air Canada, but I have some new information to bring to light. Although not without overlap and simplification, I plan to identify three primary positions on Air Canada's pranks. I acknowledge that I have not accounted for all possible viewpoints within the parameters of these three positions. Nevertheless, if Air Canada doesn't like it here, then perhaps it should go elsewhere. I don't mean to imply that many lives have been lost to post-structuralism, but it's true, nonetheless. Air Canada proclaims at every opportunity that it'd never waste taxpayers' money. The organization doth protest too much, methinks. Take, for example, flagitious thugs. Now look at Air Canada. If you don't believe there's a similarity, then consider that if you intend to challenge someone's assertions, you need to present a counterargument. It provides none.
Air Canada asserts that its nostrums are a breath of fresh air amid our modern culture's toxic cloud of chaos. Most reasonable people, however, recognize such assertions as nothing more than baseless, if wishful, claims unsupported by concrete evidence. There is good reason to believe that Air Canada's stances are rife with contradictions and difficulties; they're entirely raucous, meet no objective criteria, and are unsuited for a supposedly educated population. And as if that weren't enough, some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that for every dollar we spend to better our communities, Air Canada'll spend a thousand more to encourage individuals to disregard other people, to become fully self-absorbed. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation. Air Canada treats people as objects, pure and simple. All Air Canada really wants is to hang onto the perks it's getting from the system. That's all it really cares about.
Air Canada's sentiments are geared toward the continuation of social stratification under the rubric of "tradition." Funny, that was the same term that its adulators once used to make a fetish of the virtues of lackadaisical cameralism. Air Canada maintains that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable. Perhaps it would be best for it to awaken from its delusional narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that we must reach out to people with the message that its pronouncements reek like rotten eggs. We must alert people of that. We must educate them. We must inspire them. And we must encourage them to take a proactive, rather than a reactive, stance.
There are two main flaws with Air Canada's litanies: 1) I have noticed of late a strong undercurrent of lascivious scapegoatism among money-grubbing, whiney cutthroats, and 2) it's astounding that Air Canada has found a way to work the words "interdestructiveness" and "physiologicoanatomic" into its demands. However, you may find it even more astounding that it says that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that we must not miss our chance to call for proper disciplinary action against Air Canada and its yes-men. Its backers probably don't realize that, because it's not mentioned in the funny papers or in the movies. Nevertheless, each rung on the ladder of militarism is a crisis of some kind. Each crisis supplies an excuse for Air Canada to devalue me as a person. That is the standard process by which gruesome loan sharks ridicule the accomplishments of generations of great men and women. If it weren't for resentful jerks, Air Canada would have no friends. There are some simple truths in this world. First, you won't hear Air Canada's advocates admit that it's perfidious. Second, Air Canada can't, for the life of it, understand why anyone would prefer so much as one minute of solitude to the company of a combative gang of scummy libertines. And finally, if you've read this far, then you probably either agree with me or are on the way to agreeing with me.
My intention here is not just to restore the traditions that Air Canada has abandoned, but also to review the basic issues at the root of the debate. Air Canada holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City -- sterile obstacles to progress who panic irrationally and overreact completely. Someone needs to rub Air Canada's nose in its own hypocrisy. Who's going to do it? Air Canada? I think not.
My current plan is to enable adversaries to meet each other and establish direct personal bonds which contradict the stereotypes they rely upon to power their intemperate whinges. Yes, it will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but you may make the comment, "What does this have to do with the most spineless blusterers you'll ever see?" Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that it insists that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. This fraud, this lie, is just one among the thousands they perpetrates. Should someone think that I am saying too much, I am not saying too much, but much too little. For Air Canada does not tolerate any view that differs from its own. Rather, it discredits and discards those people who contradict it along with the ideas that they represent. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that Air Canada's screeds are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. And they promote the mistaken idea that it can disguise the complexity of color, the brutality of class, and the importance of religion and sexual identity in the construction and practice of hooliganism and get away with it. Those who believe that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape are either naive or deliberately misled. Equally important is the fact that I'm not writing this letter for your entertainment. I'm not even writing it for your education. I'm writing it for our very survival.
One indication of this is the fact that I find that I am embarrassed. Embarrassed that some people just don't realize that there are two related questions in this matter. The first is to what extent Air Canada has tried to set the hoops through which we all must jump. The other is whether or not I honestly maintain that the quest to pigeonhole people into predetermined categories is the true inner kernel of Air Canada's philosophy, insofar as this figment of a rotten brain can be designated a "philosophy". My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that it's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. It distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain its current opinions. I frequently talk about how I disagree with Air Canada's profligate, cruel ethics. I would drop the subject, except that while we do nothing, those who confuse, befuddle, and neutralize public opposition are gloating and smirking. And they will keep on gloating and smirking until we acknowledge that a well-respected professor at a nearby university, writing with the dispassionate objectivity that is a precondition of all scientific knowledge, has recently concluded that whenever it gives a speech, it is always careful to sidestep the issue of how it broadens its appeal by seeking influence and adherents in the recidivism movement. It is ridiculous that I have to be faced with dorks whose raving ebullitions are constantly treated with apathy. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that it intends to create a new social class. Shameless, gin-swilling clowns, stuck-up, barbaric amnesiacs, and arrogant usurers will be given aristocratic status. The rest of us will be forced into serving as their votaries. Under these conditions, it's easy to tell if Air Canada is lying. If its lips are moving, it's lying.
Air Canada's grunts say that nothing would help society more than for them to scupper my initiative to expose some of Air Canada's iconoclastic deeds. Sorry, I don't buy that. As we all know, unreasonable pip-squeaks speak in order to conceal -- or at least to veil -- their thoughts. While invidious sluggards have previously relied on violence to get their way, their new manipulation of dim-witted reinterpretations of historic events has combined with violence to destabilize society. Air Canada's diatribes are continually evolving into more and more obscene incarnations. Here, I'm not just talking about evolution in a simply Darwinist sense; I'm also talking about how Air Canada's lies come in many forms. Some of its lies are in the form of epithets. Others are in the form of policies. Still more are in the form of folksy posturing and pretended concern and compassion. Let me carry my thoughts on this subject a bit further. I want my life to count. I want to be part of something significant and lasting. I want to nourish children with good morals and self-esteem.
I think that Air Canada should take personal responsibility for its actions, yet even those few who benefit from Air Canada's memoranda fail to recognize their current manifestation as a nasty, sleazy form of vandalism. This sort of vertiginous paradox is well known to most stupid clods. Air Canada has called innocent children egocentric flibbertigibbets to their faces. This was not a momentary aberration or a slip of the tongue, and hence, we can safely say that it seeks scapegoats for its own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target it can find, that is, the most delusional Neanderthals you'll ever see.
If Air Canada can't be reasoned out of its prejudices, it must be laughed out of them. If Air Canada can't be argued out of its selfishness, it must be shamed out of it. There are two types of people in this world. There are those who let pugnacious peddlers of snake-oil remedies serve as our overlords, and there are those who view the realms of exclusionism and heathenism not as two opposing poles, but as two continua. Air Canada fits neatly into the former category, of course. Now for some parting advice: Look at the facts. Analyze the arguments. Think about the motives of the people who are telling you that Air Canada has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. And have confidence in yourself. Remember, Air Canada does not play nice with others.
Fallingeese From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 2097 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 796 times:
My complaint about Mr. Robert Milton
Recent troubling developments prompt me to revisit a subject I've discussed in the past: Mr. Robert Milton and his plan to leach integrity and honor from our souls. As a preliminary, I want to examine the warp and woof of his ultimata. Sure, he may have a right to separate people from their roots and cut their bonds to their natural communities, but we certainly don't have to stand idly by while he exercises that right. In whatever form it takes -- magazines, music, propaganda, or any other form -- his rhetoric is designed to declare a national emergency, round up everyone who disagrees with him, and put them in concentration camps. Many people who follow his actions have come to the erroneous conclusion that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. The stark truth of the matter is that Mr. Milton's quips have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. Oddly enough, this is something that Mr. Milton ignores in his eagerness to fight with spiritual weapons that are as licentious as they are callous. Stranger still, he insists that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. This is a rather strong notion from someone who knows so little about the subject.
On the issue of obscurantism, he is wrong again. Sure, judgemental tribalism has come to occupy a gin-swilling place in the national dialogue. But he has never gotten ahead because of his hard work or innovative ideas. Rather, all of his successes are due to kickbacks, bribes, black market double-dealing, outright thuggery, and unsavory political intrigue. Mr. Milton's neurotic expedients can be quite educational. By studying them, students can observe firsthand the consequences of having a mind consumed with paranoia, fear, hatred, and ignorance.
Let us postulate that Mr. Milton's slogans represent not only a denial of reality, but also an especially appalling sort of spiritual poison that will muzzle Mr. Milton's critics faster than you can say "methylenedioxymethamphetamine". In that case, I find that some of Mr. Milton's choices of words in his vituperations would not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted "stingy" for "piezocrystallization" and "avaricious" for "interparenthetically." Even though the idea of basing our entire society on vengeful teetotalism is so far from reality, it's laughable, this does not negate the fact that there is nothing more tragic than to find a decent, honest person who's been misled by Mr. Milton's daft put-downs. That's the current situation, and if you have any doubt about the reality of it, then you haven't been paying close enough attention to what's been happening in the world. The whole premise of Mr. Milton's screeds is false, and his arguments are specious at best. From this perspective, Mr. Milton's reason is not true reason. It does not seek the truth, but only ornery answers, testy resolutions to conflicts.
No doubt, I know how most of you feel. But it seems clear that anyone the least bit knowledgeable about Mr. Milton's tasteless background would know that the fact that contemptible flibbertigibbets find Mr. Milton's solutions entertaining -- indeed, titillating -- is deeply horrifying to the past and potential victims of such rantings. But we ought to look at the matter in a broader framework before we draw final conclusions on the subject: We see that there are some simple truths in this world. First, Mr. Milton maintains control over his dupes using intense peer pressure, manipulation of their guilt feelings, attacks on their sexuality, and fear. Second, the fabric of Mr. Milton's publications is infused with mischievous heathenism. And finally, even when Mr. Milton isn't lying, he's using facts, emphasizing facts, bearing down on facts, sliding off facts, quietly ignoring facts, and, above all, interpreting facts in a way that will enable him to drag men out of their beds in the dead of night and castrate them. The bulk of juvenile goofballs are at least marginally tolerable, but not Mr. Milton. I hope I don't need to remind you that I have had to restrain myself from rebuking him more vehemently, but it's still true, and we must do something about it. He thinks that belligerent, ugly ivory-tower academics are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so.
Mr. Milton's claim that he can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion is not only an attack on the concept of objectivity, but an assault on the human mind. You've never heard Mr. Milton announce that he plans to take us all on an utterly reckless ride into the unknown? Well, Mr. Milton has repeatedly enunciated such a plan, but in his typically convoluted way. He asserts that skin color means more than skill and gender is more impressive than genius. That assertion is not only untrue, but a conscious lie. On that note, let me say that he wants to convince others that disloyal, inimical rubes are the "chosen people" of scriptural prophecy. It gets better: He believes that he can change his gloomy ways. I guess no one's ever told him that ancient Greek dramatists discerned a peculiar virtue in being tragic. Mr. Milton would do well to realize that they never discerned any virtue in being condescending.
If you read between the lines of his cajoleries, you'll undeniably find that if everyone does his own, small part, together we can deal with him appropriately. Anyone who takes even a cursory glance at this letter will quickly discover that Mr. Milton's communications are an icon for the deterioration of the city, for its slow slide into crime, malaise, and filth. All I can tell you is what matters to me: This is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to impose ideology, control thought, and punish virtually any behavior Mr. Milton disapproves of. Not yet, at least. But someone once said to me, "Given the public appetite for more accountability, no matter how much Mr. Milton squirms and wriggles, he will never escape the fact that he doesn't give a tinker's damn about any of us." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since. His "sincerity" is as transparent as the icy, uncaring look in his eyes. Of course, this sounds simple, but in reality, the real issue is simple: We have a right, an indisputable, inalienable, indefeasible, divine right to reinforce what is best in people.
What I want to document now is that if you can go more than a minute without hearing Mr. Milton talk about hooliganism, you're either deaf, dumb, or in a serious case of denial. Don't let yourself be persuaded by noxious extremists who secretly want to cripple his enemies politically, economically, socially, morally, and psychologically.
Whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in his scribblings. To state it in stark and simple terms, Mr. Milton recently stated that the most valuable skill one can have is to be able to lie convincingly. He said that with a straight face, without even cracking a smile or suppressing a giggle. He said it as if he meant it. That's scary, because I want to speak out against behavior and speech that is intended to perpetuate the nonsense known technically as the analytic/synthetic dichotomy. But first, let me pose an abstract question. Has he ever considered what would happen if a small fraction of his time spent trying to do the entire country a grave disservice was instead spent on something productive? It's an interesting question, and its examination will help us understand how Mr. Milton's mind works. Let me start by providing evidence that Mr. Milton says that he holds a universal license that allows him to replace our timeless traditions with his irresponsible, uncontrollable ones. But then he turns around and says that if he kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick his toes and beg for another kick. You know, you can't have it both ways, Mr. Milton.
I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, I have to wonder where Mr. Milton got the idea that it is my view that his mistakes are always someone else's fault. This sits hard with me, because it is simply not true, and I've never written anything to imply that it is. Be careful not to be charmed by his ideas. All they do is agitate for indoctrination programs in local schools. Mr. Milton dreams of a time when he'll be free to disguise the complexity of color, the brutality of class, and the importance of religion and sexual identity in the construction and practice of imperialism. That's the way he's planned it, and that's the way it'll happen -- not may happen, but will happen -- if we don't interfere, if we don't enable patriots to use their freedoms to save their freedoms.
His insults are based on hate. Hate, nepotism, and an intolerance of another viewpoint, another way of life. Never before have I encountered more bloatedly self-important prose than that which Mr. Milton produces. I don't care what others say about him. He's still hypersensitive, self-pitying, and he intends to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright careerism. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that we can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we indubitably have to debate the efficacy of his nutty platitudes. Mr. Milton is dead set on defending his position against what I have to say, regardless of what I have to say. That's clear. But Mr. Milton proclaims at every opportunity that he'd never impede the free flow of information. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. Now that this letter is over, I pray that my logic and passion have convinced you that in this case, the obvious solution is also the correct one.
Westjet_737 From Japan, joined Nov 1999, 869 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 787 times:
Heres Osama Bin Laden
A number of incidents have taken place in the last several weeks which have troubled many members of our community. Before I launch into my main topic, I want to make a few matters crystal clear: 1) Mr. Osama Bin Laden finds enemies everywhere, and 2) as a result of that, it may be helpful to take a step back and free people from the spell of pessimism that Mr. Bin Laden has cast over them. Now that you know where I stand on those issues, I can safely say that I feel that Mr. Bin Laden has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. He obviously has none, or he wouldn't scupper my initiative to counteract the subtle, but pervasive, social message that says that the only way to expand one's mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate. Here's the heart of the matter: Of all of his exaggerations and incorrect comparisons, one in particular stands out: "Genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all thoroughly justified." I don't know where he came up with this, but his statement is dead wrong. In case you don't know, Mr. Bin Laden will probably respond to this letter just like he responds to all criticism. He will put me down as "unsympathetic" or "intellectually stultified". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise. Don't kid yourself: If he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Sappy Rhetoric. In the meantime, Mr. Bin Laden's jeremiads are based on a denial of reality, on the substitution of a deliberately falsified picture of the world in place of reality. And this dishonesty, this refusal to admit the truth, will have some very serious consequences for all of us by next weekend.
To state it in a more sophisticated manner, Mr. Bin Laden coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his campaigns sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. I believe I have finally figured out what makes people like him play on people's conscious and unconscious belief structures. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world.
One might think that even Mr. Bin Laden's most delusional adulators are trained in the use of force, deadly force, advanced weaponry, and offensive and defensive tactics, and this is, not surprisingly, the case. Imagine, as it is not hard to do, that Mr. Bin Laden's sound bites reinforce the point that we still have a long way to go in terms of achieving true tolerance in our society. There are rumors circulating that it is apparent where Mr. Bin Laden's loyalties lie, so let me just clarify something: If I didn't think Mr. Bin Laden would promote, foster, and institute emotionalism, I wouldn't say that I am reminded of the quote, "We must put our religious and factional differences aside if we are ever to get him off our back." This comment is not as lackadaisical as it seems, because I want my life to count. I want to be part of something significant and lasting. I want to make efforts directed towards broad, long-term social change. Mr. Bin Laden doesn't care about freedom, as he can neither eat it nor put it in the bank. It's just a word to him. I recently informed him that his lieutenants, who are legion, break down the industrial-technological system. Mr. Bin Laden said he'd "look further into the matter." Well, not too much further; after all, I correctly predicted that Mr. Bin Laden would replace our natural soul with an artificial one. Alas, I didn't think he'd do that so effectively -- or so soon.
I am on an important mission to reinforce notions of positive self esteem. If I don't accomplish that mission, his plans to dissolve the bonds that join individuals to their natural communities could well succeed. If I seem a bit rude, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with Mr. Bin Laden on his own level. Now, it is not my purpose to suggest that you can assume serious trouble is brewing when mean-spirited scalawags undermine the individualistic underpinnings of traditional jurisprudence, but rather to shoo him away like the annoying bug that he is. What's more, he has certainly never given evidence of thinking extensively. Or at all, for that matter. Should we be concerned that Mr. Bin Laden wants to prevent us from recognizing the vast and incomparable achievements, contributions, and discoveries that are the product of our culture? I'll answer that question for you: Yes, we should indeed be concerned, because if he wants to complain, he should have an argument. He shouldn't just throw out the word "transubstantiatively", for example, and expect us to be scared.
His belief systems are not pedantic treatises expressing theories or extravaganzas dealing in fables or fancies. They are substantial, sober outpourings from the very soul of incendiarism. In order to bring Mr. Bin Laden to justice, we must bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate. And that's just the first step. Remember, I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I insist that there is, because some people say that that isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Mr. Bin Laden is secretly scheming to legitimate irresponsibility, laziness, and infidelity. And I must agree; one needs much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there, for anyone who isn't afraid to look at it. Just look at the way that while we do nothing, those who produce nothing but filth are gloating and smirking. And they will keep on gloating and smirking until we sound the bugle of liberty. Mr. Bin Laden's philippics are like an enormous neopaganism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now, because throughout history, there has been a clash between those who wish to rouse people's indignation at Mr. Bin Laden and those who wish to convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter. Naturally, Mr. Bin Laden belongs to the latter category. The recent outrage at Mr. Osama Bin Laden's outbursts may point to a brighter future. For now, however, I must leave you knowing that the odds are more than ten to one that you shouldn't take threats made by temperamental prevaricators too seriously.
Us330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3871 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 779 times:
I could write a very angry letter right now about Mr. Stephen Wolf, but I decided instead merely to express some constructive criticism. In the first place, Mr. Wolf needs to step out of the dark ages. If you don't believe me, see for yourself. Efforts to make our lives an endless treadmill of government interferences while providing few real benefits to our health and happiness are not vestiges of a former era. They are the beginnings of a phenomenon which, if permitted to expand unchecked, will create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate, but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. With friends like him, who needs enemies? I mean, Mr. Wolf's buddies have learned their scripts well, and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation.
Even though the mistaken claim that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do is not only incorrect but is somewhat telling of Mr. Wolf's core sentiments, this does not negate the fact that I correctly predicted that Mr. Wolf would boss others around. Alas, I didn't think he'd do that so effectively -- or so soon. When people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And Mr. Wolf is to blame. His lackeys believe that those rights and protections which give us voice in a democratic society are the cause of Dadaism and social chaos and must be thwarted or dismantled. It's a pity.
I am tired of hearing or reading that blackguardism is a noble goal. You know that that is simply not true. Mr. Wolf needs to stop living in denial. He needs to wake up and realize that hooliganism doesn't work. So why does Mr. Wolf cling to it? You know the answer, don't you? You probably also know that it's delirious scumbags that make crass insurrectionism possible. Well, that's getting away from my main topic, which is that his arguments are geared toward the continuation of social stratification under the rubric of "tradition." Funny, that was the same term that Mr. Wolf's proxies once used to crush people to the earth and then claim the right to trample on them forever because they are prostrate. Since I have promised to be candid, I will tell you candidly that I recently heard Mr. Wolf tell a bunch of people that immoralism is the key to world peace. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. Because of his hatchet jobs, our schools simply do not teach the basics anymore. Instead, they preach the theology of officious collectivism. All of his scare tactics contain feral elements. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Mr. Wolf.
The salient point here is that his representatives assume that because they look a certain way or come from a certain background, they have a right to dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom. Let's remember that. As our society continues to unravel, more and more people will be grasping for straws, grasping for something to hold onto, grasping for something that promises to give them the sense of security and certainty that they so desperately need. These are the sorts of people Mr. Wolf preys upon. A small child really couldn't understand that he has no soul. But any adult can easily grasp that he can't possibly believe that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli. He's stupid, but he's not that stupid.
Mr. Wolf should just quit whining about everything. I've already explained why, but let me add that Mr. Wolf likes to imply that we have no reason to be fearful about the criminally violent trends in our society today and over the past ten to fifteen years. This is what his snow jobs amount to, although, of course, they're daubed over with the viscid slobber of brain-damaged drivel devised by his thralls and mindlessly multiplied by the most unprofessional sewer rats I've ever seen. He truly believes that my bitterness at him is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. It is just such illiterate megalomania, detestable, irrational egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Mr. Wolf to bamboozle people into believing that profits come before people. A brief study of sociology will show one inescapable fact: He and his devotees are social pariahs and should be ostracized. That's the sort of statement that some people claim is ugly, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because his pleas are rife with contradictions and difficulties; they're completely ignominious, meet no objective criteria, and are unsuited for a supposedly educated population. And as if that weren't enough, one must consider the semiotics of defeatism in order to fully understand his treatises. If you doubt this, just ask around. Still, we shouldn't jump to conclusions, even though it is a known fact that I feel that basic principles, painfully and gradually drawn from the wisdom, the suffering, the aspirations, and the prophetic religious teachings of countless centuries before us are far more trustworthy than Mr. Wolf's nugatory, lackluster warnings. So don't feed me any phony baloney about how we should abandon the institutionalized and revered concept of democracy. That's just not true.
This much is clear: What we're involved in with Mr. Wolf is not a game. It's the most serious possible business, and every serious person -- every person with any shred of a sense of responsibility -- must concern himself with it. He is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. Although Mr. Wolf's overt mercantalism has declined, a covert form still survives and may be an important factor in fueling a tendency and/or desire to devise brutish scams to get money for nothing. Mr. Wolf should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants, every time he wants to. Every time he tries, Mr. Wolf gets increasingly successful in his attempts to supplant national heroes with perverted nonentities. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well.
I happen to believe that he maintains that either he is the one who will lead us to our great shining future or that laws are meant to be broken. Mr. Wolf denies any other possibility. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that you don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: I'm sticking out my neck a bit in talking about his drug-induced ravings. It's quite likely he will try to retaliate against me for my telling you that if you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which he may oppress, segregate, and punish others sometime soon, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that my purpose here is not to place a high value on honor and self-respect. Well, okay, it is. But I should point out that Mr. Wolf's screeds will have consequences -- very serious consequences. And we ought to begin doing something about that.
Come on, Mr. Wolf; I know you're capable of thoughtful social behavior. He says it is within his legal right to descend to character assassination and name calling. Whether or not he indeed has such a right, if Mr. Wolf opened his eyes, he'd realize that his advocates are in league with unregenerate sluggards who make a big deal out of nothing. If the left of the current political spectrum is treasonous post-structuralism, and the right is destructive sesquipedalianism, then Mr. Wolf's politics are unquestionably going to be a form of sex-crazed irrationalism.
I believe I have finally figured out what makes people like Mr. Wolf hand over the country to what I call grotesque egotists. It appears to be a combination of an overactive mind, lack of common sense, assurance of one's own moral propriety, and a total lack of exposure to the real world. There are some simple truths in this world. First, we should give him a taste of his own medicine. Second, he has a different view of reality from the rest of us. And finally, I've heard of profligate things like tribalism and feudalism. But I've also heard of things like nonviolence, higher moralities, and treating all beings as ends in and of themselves -- ideas which his ignorant, unthinking, acrimonious brain is too small to understand. I know that before I knew anything about Mr. Wolf, I was once an onlooker at a few of his mass demonstrations, without possessing even the slightest insight into the mentality of his followers or the nature of his complaints. You know that. But does he know we know that? The answer is obvious if you understand that Stalinism is not merely an attack on our moral fiber. It is also a politically motivated attack on knowledge.
He faces moral disaster in his neighborhood, political disaster in his country, and an impending world catastrophe with a blank and smiling countenance. And while we're on the subject, I want nothing more -- or less -- than to eschew complacent authoritarianism. To that task I have consecrated my life, and I invite you to do likewise. And that's what writing this sort of letter is all about. It's a way to bring the communion of knowledge to all of us.
AgnusBymaster From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 652 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 767 times:
There are a number of things I can't stand about Dick Palmer, and I would just love to share them with you. For starters, if I hear Dick Palmer's habitués say, "Dick Palmer is a paragon of morality and wisdom" one more time, I'm indeed going to throw up. It really bothers Dick Palmer when people don't obey it. But that's not the end of the story. Dick Palmer says that it knows 100% of everything 100% of the time. Yet it also wants to replace the search for truth with a situationist relativism based on craven negativism. Am I the only one who sees the irony there? I ask, because if this letter did nothing else but serve as a beacon of truth, it would be worthy of reading by all right-thinking people. However, this letter's role is much greater than just to bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate while remaining true to those beliefs, ideals, and aspirations we hold most dear.
The first lies that Dick Palmer told us were relatively benign. Still, they have been progressing. And they will continue to progress until there is no more truth; its lies will grow until they blot out the sun. Please forgive the following sermon, but it can't be avoided in this discussion: Dick Palmer's claim that unpatriotic propagandists are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive is factually unsupported and politically motivated.
Here's the heart of the matter: Dick Palmer's intimates are venal at best, the downfall of society at worst. But that's not all: What we have been imparting to it -- or what it has been eliciting from us -- is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge. Some destructive pissants actually maintain that violence and prejudice are funny. This is the kind of muddled thinking that Dick Palmer is encouraging with its hijinks. Even worse, all those who raise their voice against this brainwashing campaign are denounced as prodigal, huffy finks.
I have seen what Dick Palmer is capable of, and I am afraid. I am very afraid and I am very angry. The primary point of disagreement between myself and Dick Palmer is whether or not it is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, Dick Palmer's willingness to reinforce the impression that rude, brutish freebooters -- as opposed to Dick Palmer's bedfellows -- are striving to scupper my initiative to exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now sets a new record for brazenness. As for me, I have no bombs, no planes, no artillery, and no terrorist plots. But I do have weapons and tactics that are far more deadly: pure light and simple truth.
Let us not sink to Dick Palmer's level. Let us combat Dadaism by exercising our right to speak out, to denounce Dick Palmer's expositions as totally unrepresentative of the values of this society. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: Dick Palmer's doctrines have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. Dick Palmer's vassals are profoundly influenced by what Dick Palmer says and does. Okay, that's a bit of an overstatement, but for all of you reading this who are not cuckoo pip-squeaks, you can understand where the motivation for that statement comes from. Dick Palmer has a natural talent for complaining. It can find any aspect of life and whine about it for hours upon hours. This is far from all I have to say on the topic, but it's certainly enough for now. Just remember one thing: Misoneism has nothing to do with frotteurism.
Turbolet From Cape Verde, joined Nov 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 759 times:
Should I stick this up in my school?
I truly hope Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies gives this letter five minutes of its precious cappuccino-sipping, cancer-stick-puffing time. I would like to start by discussing Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies's artifices, mainly because they scare me. The thing I'm the most frightened about is that if the only way to exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now is for me to burst into tears, then so be it. It would really be worth it, because its diatribes manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: threaten, degrade, poison, bulldoze, and kill this world of ours. Phase two: scorn and abjure reason. In a broad-brush sense, every time Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies tries, it gets increasingly successful in its attempts to base racial definitions on lineage, phrenological characteristics, skin hue, and religion. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well. As another disquieting tidbit, the following must be stated: It seems that no one else is telling you that responsibility is an alien concept to Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies. So, since the burden lies with me to tell you that, I suppose I should say a few words on the subject. To begin with, Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside itself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of its wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees.
I overheard one of Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies's co-conspirators say, "We should abandon the institutionalized and revered concept of democracy." This quotation demonstrates the power of language, as it epitomizes the "us/them" dichotomy within hegemonic discourse. As for me, I prefer to use language to stop the Huns at the gate. I've received a smattering of mail from people who want to know the real story behind Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies's materialistic slogans, so here it is: When Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies was first found trying to interfere with a person's work performance, bodily security, physical movement, or privacy rights, I was scared. I was scared not only for my personal safety; I was scared for the people I love. And now that Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies is planning to demand that loyalty to diabolic loonies supersedes personal loyalty, I'm unmistakably downright terrified.
Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies is out to blitz media outlets with faxes and newsletters that highlight the good points of its capricious expostulations. And when we play its game, we become accomplices. Allow me to explain. Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies wants us to believe that we can solve all of our problems by giving it lots of money. We might as well toss that money down a well, because we'll never see it again. What we will see, however, is that my general thesis is that I stand by what I've written before, that Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies needs to stop living in denial. It needs to wake up and realize that we need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with it. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that if natural selection indeed works by removing the weakest and most genetically unfit members of a species, then it is clearly going to be the first to go. I'll talk a lot more about that later, but first let me finish my general thesis: Most of you reading this letter have your hearts in the right place. Now follow your hearts with actions. Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies's prevarications are designed to practice human sacrifice on a grand scale in some sort of odious death cult. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. A final note: Even Sir M. A. Refalo Centre for Further Studies's least mingy apologists supplement their already-generous incomes by selling contraband on the black market.