Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
While no statement I'm about to make should be construed as suggesting or recommending that any person commit an illegal act of any kind, you should realize that JohnDoe is trying very hard to plug the hole in its dike of lies so that no more truth leaks out. Let me cut to the chase: One does not have to attack my character in order to provide an atmosphere of mutual respect, free from materialism, sesquipedalianism, and all other forms of prejudice and intolerance. It is an unconscionable person who believes otherwise. Yes, I realize that JohnDoe is secretly saying that I should just crawl under a rock and die, but for the sake of brevity I've had to express myself in simplified terms. An armed revolt against JohnDoe is morally justified. However, I contend that it is not yet strategically justified. JohnDoe's convictions are pockmarked with slovenly radicalism and other assorted ills. Not that I've come to expect any better from JohnDoe. In the past, organizations like JohnDoe would have been tarred and feathered for trying to sully a profession that's already held in low esteem. Just like dirty clothes on the floor and cluttered closets, JohnDoe's mess won't go away if we simply look the other way. I never cease to be amazed at the way that JohnDoe's epigrams are not an abstract problem. They have very concrete, immediate, and unpleasant consequences. For instance, in order to complain about the worst kinds of self-absorbed quacks there are, we must take advantage of a rare opportunity to tell it how wrong it is. And that's just the first step. Remember, when you tell JohnDoe's serfs that giving JohnDoe the means to destroy all tradition, all morality, and the entire democratic system is like supplying the gun to your own robber, they begin to get fidgety, and their eyes begin to wander. They really don't care. They have no interest in hearing that it has announced its intentions to operate in the gray area between legitimate activity and overbearing, catty negativism. While doing so may earn JohnDoe a gold star from the mush-for-brains nepotism crowd, we must understand that it would be grossly premature for it to claim final victory. And we must formulate that understanding into as clear and cogent a message as possible. JohnDoe is driving me nuts. I can't take it anymore! Still, we shouldn't jump to conclusions, even though it is a known fact that JohnDoe is like a magician who produces a dove in one hand, while the other hand is busy trying to transmogrify society's petty gripes and irrational fears into "issues" to be catered to. I try never to argue with JohnDoe, because it's clear it's not susceptible to reason. To state it in a more sophisticated manner, what I just wrote is not based on merely a single experience or anecdote. Rather, it is based upon the wisdom of accumulated years, spanning two continents, and proven by the fact that JohnDoe's prevarications do not represent progress. They represent insanity masquerading as progress. You may not be aware of this, but I've never bothered JohnDoe. Yet JohnDoe wants to corrupt our youth. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? Which brings me to my point. There are two reasons which induce me to submit JohnDoe's wheelings and dealings to a special examination: 1) JohnDoe's blatant indifference towards the feelings of others is due to intense misunderstanding, suspicion, and fear, and 2) JohnDoe is the lineal descendant of the lowbrows who nailed Jesus to the cross. I must admit that the second point, in particular, sometimes fills me with anxious concern. Now, more than ever, we must see through the haze of jingoism. JohnDoe occasionally writes letters accusing me and my friends of being the worst classes of daft jabberers I've ever seen. These letters are typically couched in gutter language (which is doubtless the language in which JohnDoe habitually thinks) and serve no purpose other than to convince me that even if one is opposed to unprofessional, ridiculous terrorism (and I am), then surely, it says it is within its legal right to poke someone's eyes out. Whether or not it indeed has such a right, JohnDoe just keeps on saying, "We don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. We just want to pit the haves against the have-nots." Who else but JohnDoe would have the brass to make a big deal out of nothing? No one. And where does that brass come from? It comes from a sure knowledge that it can retreat into its "victim" status if anyone calls it to account. After I clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in JohnDoe's viewpoints, I know that everyone will come to the dismayed conclusion that I stated at the beginning of this discussion: If you're the type who dares to think for yourself, then you've probably already determined that JohnDoe is not interested in what is true and what is false or in what is good and what is evil. In fact, those distinctions have no meaning to it whatsoever. The only thing that has any meaning to JohnDoe is fogyism. Why? I've never gotten a clear and honest answer to that question from JohnDoe. But what is clear is that its indifference only adds to the problem. So don't feed me any phony baloney about how we have no reason to be fearful about the criminally violent trends in our society today and over the past ten to fifteen years. That's just not true. The picture I am presenting need not be confined to JohnDoe's cock-and-bull stories. It applies to everything it says and does. It's no secret that egotism is the driving force behind JohnDoe's publications. Why do I tell you this? Because these days, no one else has the guts to. JohnDoe's theories are characterized by a preachy arrogance unbefitting to something that knows so little. But don't take my word for it; ask any humorless worrywarts you happen to meet. It is high time for someone to expose injustice and puncture prejudice. Will that someone be you? Recent troubling developments prompt me to revisit a subject I've discussed in the past: the plan to promote the foolish manuscripts of antihumanist tin-pot tyrants. So, without further ado, I present you with this all-important piece of information: When I say that there is no compelling moral or economic reason why he should open new avenues for the expression of hate, this does not, I repeat, does not mean that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. This is a common fallacy held by passive-aggressive pickpockets. He has warned us that one day, the worst types of uncivilized recidivists there are will teach splenetic concepts to children. If you think about it, you'll realize that his warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that I'll tell you what we need to do about all the craziness he is mongering. We need to reveal the constant tension between centripetal and centrifugal forces of dialogized heteroglossia resulting from his fairy tales. JohnDoe's announcements are not an abstract problem. They have very concrete, immediate, and unpleasant consequences. For instance, those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still maintain that JohnDoe doesn't shower often enough, have an obligation to do more than just observe what JohnDoe is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to give parents the means to protect their children. We have an obligation to make this world a kinder, gentler place. And we have an obligation to name and shame his hatchet men for their mumpish acts of jingoism. His slogans are perpetuated by an ethos of continuous reform, the demand that one strive permanently and painfully for something which not only does not exist, but is alien to the human condition. I've said this before, and I'll say it again, but I am shocked and angered by JohnDoe's evil improprieties. Such shameful conduct should never be repeated. I definitely can't stress this enough, but several things JohnDoe has said have brought me to the boiling point. The statement of his that made the strongest impression on me, however, was something to the effect of how the ideas of "freedom" and "expansionism" are Siamese twins. Why don't more people complain when they see him alter laws, language, and customs in the service of regulating social relations? It's because JohnDoe has mastered the art of tricking people with images and myths. He creates myths about what the world is like and then generates false images to match those myths. This proves to me, at least, that some people think it's a bit extreme of me to point out that the emperor has no clothes on -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that we need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with JohnDoe. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that JohnDoe wallows in his basest behavior. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further. If I were to compile a list of JohnDoe's forays into espionage, sabotage, and subversion, it would fill an entire page and perhaps even run over onto the following one. Such a list would surely make every sane person who has passed the age of six realize that I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that people often get the impression that the most despicable ochlocrats you'll ever see and JohnDoe's acolytes are separate entities. Not so. When one catches cold, the other sneezes. As proof, note that no one likes being attacked by the most flighty couch potatoes you'll ever see. Even worse, JohnDoe exploits our fear of those attacks -- which he claims will evolve sometime soon into biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks -- as a pretext to bask in the avaricious shine of ethnocentrism. If you think that's scary, then you should remember that unlike JohnDoe, when I make a mistake I'm willing to admit it. Consequently, if -- and I'm bending over backwards to maintain the illusion of "innocent until proven guilty" -- he were not actually responsible for trying to start wars, ruin the environment, invent diseases, and routinely do a hundred other things that kill people, then I'd stop saying that some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with cold-blooded, impetuous nitwits on a regular basis at work or in school. We, therefore, may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to bring ugliness and nastiness into our lives. Assume for a moment that JohnDoe's idea of a good time is to feed information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly craven agendas. It therefore follows that if a cogent, logical argument entered JohnDoe's brain, no doubt a concussion would result. In the beginning of this letter, I promised you details, but now I'm running out of space. So here's one detail to end with: Our conception of racialism still remains a good deal less clear than we would wish. I believe it's safe to say that nothing would make JohnDoe happier than to see me lose my cultural moorings and become a rootless drifter in a cosmopolitan chaos. I realize that some of you may not know the particular background details of the events I'm referring to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but you can read up on them elsewhere. It would be bad enough if his emissaries were merely trying to stir up trouble. But their attempts to disguise the complexity of color, the brutality of class, and the importance of religion and sexual identity in the construction and practice of mandarinism are just plain disrespectful. What he apparently fails to realize is that his reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, he always begins an argument with his conclusion (e.g., that no one is smart enough to see through his transparent lies) and therefore -- not surprisingly -- he always arrives at that very conclusion. JohnDoe claims that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization". That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in his blanket statements. Then again, I once had a nightmare in which JohnDoe was free to waste taxpayers' money. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, the picture I am presenting need not be confined to JohnDoe's beliefs. It applies to everything he says and does. For the nonce, JohnDoe is content to impose a one-size-fits-all model on how society should function. But sooner than you think, he will force me to undergo "treatment" to cure my "problem". Did he get dropped on his head when he was young, or did JohnDoe take massive doses of drugs to believe that people don't mind having their communities turned into war zones? As you ponder the answer to that question, consider that his opinion is that he can override nature. Of course, opinions are like sphincters: we all have them. So let me tell you my opinion. My opinion is that the unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, I, hardheaded cynic that I am, don't need to tell you that JohnDoe obscures the true meaning of his apothegms with propaganda and fancy talk. That should be self-evident. What is less evident is that JohnDoe is firmly convinced that he understands the difference between civilization and savagery. His belief is controverted, however, by the weight of the evidence indicating that the gloss that JohnDoe's lickspittles put on JohnDoe's publications unfortunately does little to place a high value on honor and self-respect. I want to make this clear, so that those who do not understand deeper messages embedded within sarcastic irony -- and you know who I'm referring to -- can process my point. I've already said this a thousand times and with a thousand different phrasings, but if you don't think that JohnDoe's claim of fairness is demonstrably false, then you've missed the whole point of this letter. Maybe by the next full moon, JohnDoe will grant Pecksniffian carpetbaggers the keys to the kingdom. Obtrusive predictions aside, this would not be an impossible scenario if his slaphappy, dirty quips were to gain ascendancy in our society. When I say that our conception of incendiarism still remains a good deal less clear than we would wish, I consider this to mean that no matter what else we do, our first move must be to educate everyone about how you don't need to look far to see that there is something callous about his shabby mendacity and sneaking duplicity. That's the first step: education. Education alone is not enough, of course. We must also seek liberty, equality, and fraternity. The only effective and responsible course of action is to halt the adulation heaped upon immature marauders -- an often frustrating prescription, to be sure. This is the flaw in his precepts. He doesn't understand that he is too atrabilious to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that he may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider JohnDoe to be a weapon of mass destruction himself. It would be a crying shame to let nutty, hectoring malcontents oppose the visceral views of 98 percent of the nation's citizens. That's the sort of statement that some people aver is splenetic, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because even his bedfellows are afraid that he will force me to develop a subconscious death wish sooner or later. I have seen their fear manifested over and over again, and it is further evidence that JohnDoe's wretched cat's-paws seem to think they can escape the consequences of their actions. Let me rephrase that: If I try really, really hard, I can almost see why JohnDoe would want to operate on a criminal -- as opposed to a civil disobedience -- basis. For the purpose of this discussion, let's say that I know more about interdenominationalism than most people. You might even say that I'm an expert on the subject. I can therefore state with confidence that clericalism doesn't work. So why does JohnDoe cling to it? I would venture the answer has something to do with egotism. To elaborate, JohnDoe's reason is not true reason. It does not seek the truth, but only craven answers, unenlightened resolutions to conflicts. How can we trust JohnDoe if he doesn't trust us? We can't. And besides, his prophecies do not represent progress. They represent insanity masquerading as progress. He has commented that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. I would love to refute that, but there seems to be no need, seeing as his comment is lacking in common sense. For what it's worth, JohnDoe can't attack my ideas, so he attacks me. It could be worse, I suppose. He could transform our little community into a global crucible of terror and gore. If his acolytes had even an ounce of integrity, they would carve solutions that are neither censorious nor tactless. I, for one, am cognizant that it's ludicrous to believe that law and order can be maintained by letting JohnDoe's dupes perpetuate the myth that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to JohnDoe's demands, but I want to thank JohnDoe for his harangues. They give me an excellent opportunity to illustrate just how sappy JohnDoe can be. Some would say that this is a platitude. Would that it were! Rather, he shouldn't grasp at straws, trying to find increasingly froward ways to take us over the edge of the abyss of solecism. That would be like asking a question at a news conference and, too angry and passionate to wait for the answer, exiting the auditorium before the response. Both of those actions pit the haves against the have-nots. I once managed to get JohnDoe to agree that even without making an ethical argument against scapegoatism, I can show that the evidence for this lies in the underlying assumptions behind his comments. Unfortunately, a few minutes later, he did a volte-face and denied that he had ever said that. I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of his writings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of JohnDoe's writings to know that time cannot change JohnDoe's behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which JohnDoe can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, win support by encapsulating frustrations and directing them toward unpopular scapegoats. You, of course, now need some hard evidence that his ebullitions constitute an instigation to make a mockery of the term "preterdiplomatically". Well, how about this for evidence: Everything I've said so far is by way of introduction to the key point I want to make in this letter. My key point is that in order to convince us that satanic degenerates are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive, JohnDoe often turns to the old propagandist trick of comparing results brought about by entirely dissimilar causes. There are two kinds of people in this world. There are those who step on other people's toes, and there are those who report as best as possible the facts and circumstances surrounding his insolent wheelings and dealings. JohnDoe fits neatly into the former category, of course. If he has spurred us to speak out against behavior and speech that is intended to renege on an incredibly large number of promises, then JohnDoe may have accomplished a useful thing. He seems to have a bitter ideological conflict with my statement that his antics are way off base. If you don't believe me, see for yourself. JohnDoe wants to make widespread accusations and insinuations without having the facts to back them up. Who does he think he is? I mean, if he bites me, I will bite back. On the surface, it would seem merely that I have no interest in getting tangled in the rhetoric or dogma that he frequently pushes. But the truth is that we must denounce his treatises. Our children depend on that. There are three fairly obvious problems with JohnDoe's views, each of which needs to be addressed by any letter that attempts to provide people the wherewithal to enable patriots to use their freedoms to save their freedoms. First, JohnDoe has always used exhibitionism as his moorings. Second, no matter how much JohnDoe squirms and wriggles, he will never escape the fact that his compeers will carry the product of his work into the future, even after JohnDoe himself is gone. And third, JohnDoe's activities are rife with contradictions and difficulties; they're totally insane, meet no objective criteria, and are unsuited for a supposedly educated population. And as if that weren't enough, JohnDoe has compiled an impressive list of grievances against me. Not only are all of these grievances completely fictitious, but JohnDoe's unbalanced factotums exert themselves to muddy the water, obfuscate the record, and cover up, by sophistries and denials, all of JohnDoe's soporific contretemps. Or, to express that sentiment without all of the emotionally charged lingo, JohnDoe holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City -- sterile obstacles to progress who shower deranged, sniffish misfits with undeserved encomia. From secret-handshake societies meeting at "the usual place" to back-door admissions committees, JohnDoe's assistants have always found a way to divert our attention from serious issues. I sincerely wouldn't want to steal the fruits of other people's labor. I would, on the other hand, love to enlighten the mind of Man and improve him as a rational, moral, and social being. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter. JohnDoe likes to compare his biases to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. Some people don't seem to mind that he likes to make all of us pay for his boondoggles. What an ornery, slimy world we live in! It may be coincidence that JohnDoe's anecdotes transform our society into an evil war machine. It may be coincidence that they call for ritualistic invocations of needlessly formal rules. And it may be coincidence that they shred the basic compact between the people and their government. But that's a lot of coincidence! Sorry for babbling so much, but even yellow-bellied skinflints would think twice before sitting next to someone whose sole dream is to show a clear lack of respect not just for those brave souls who fought and died for what they believed in, but also for you, the readers of this letter.
I can't believe I actually read all that... but there was so much I couldn't retain it all. So my summary is JohnDoe is a retarded, arrogant, homosexual, troll and should be banned to protect the children. I think I can agree to this as far as my understanding. And for the love of God or whatever you cherish most, you assholes better not go breaking that fucking loooooong ass post into quotes.
just so you know spoony didn't write this paragraph, he just pasted johndoe in there as a replacement...stop taking it so serious
This letter may be a bit overwhelming for those who are still soundly asleep in a world of make-believe and television and who don't want to hear how the absence of necessary historiographical context makes Spoony's values extremely difficult to accept. Before I launch into my rant, permit me the prelude caveat that I, having repeatedly witnessed Spoony skewer me over a pit barbecue, insist that I have every right to refer to him as a contemptible braggadocio. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that Spoony has any control over. But that's inconsequential because if we are going to speak objectively about Spoony's screeds, we must understand that it is not the case—notwithstanding what Spoony's virulent propaganda so adamantly proclaims—that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. That's too big of a subject to get into here so let me instead discuss how a great many of us don't want Spoony to declare martial law, suspend elections, and round up dissidents (i.e., anyone who does not buy his lie that rotten polemics are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes). Still, we feel a prodigious societal pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to his hateful, politically incorrect scribblings. It seems to me that, as others have stated long before me, "Spoony is trying to deflect attention from his stolid cock-and-bull stories." The time has come to choose between freedom or slavery, revolt or submission, and liberty or Spoony's particularly merciless form of alarmism. It's clear what Spoony wants us to choose, but he wants all of us to believe that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. That's why he sponsors brainwashing in the schools, brainwashing by the government, brainwashing statements made to us by politicians, entertainers, and sports stars, and brainwashing by the big advertisers and the news media. He will take the focus off the real issues because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses the worst types of disgraceful gadflies there are with lubricious and uncontrollable rage. The simple, regrettable truth is that many people who follow Spoony's arguments have come to the erroneous conclusion that racialism and collectivism are identical concepts. The stark truth of the matter is that some people don't seem to mind that he likes to delegitimize our belief systems and replace them with a counter-hegemony that seeks to build a totalitarian death machine. What a stubborn world we live in! I have in fact told Spoony that his monographs run contrary to even the most cursory observation of the real world. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose Spoony just doesn't want to admit that I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Spoony's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many pestilential, hotheaded derelicts realize that to deny this is to deny science, let alone the evidence of one's own powers of observation. Stated differently, he alleges that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with. Naturally, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. By allowing Spoony to represent Heaven as Hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise, we are allowing him to play puppet master. I imagine that I wonder if he really believes the things he says. He knows they're not true, doesn't he? Let me give you a hint: We need to investigate the development of nepotism as a concept. Why? Because of what's at stake: literally everything. Spoony's salacious views are meticulously designed to keep the population unaware, uneducated, dumbed down, and focused on stupefying activities like video games. The intention is to prevent people from noticing that Spoony has been causing riots in the streets. While I agree with others' assessment that all of the foregoing information has been served up as a necessary prelude to understanding the motive and force behind the current mad rush by him and his legatees to add insult to injury, still, his shenanigans can be subtle. They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that no one has a higher opinion of Spoony than I, and I think Spoony is a mad, noxious long-haired hippie. In order for us to realize more happiness in our lives, we need to understand that I have no set opinion as to whether or not it is not difficult to see the undercurrents of fanaticism in his denunciations. I do, however, unequivocally claim that every time Spoony utters or writes a statement that supports lexiphanicism—even indirectly—it sends a message that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. I honestly aver that we mustn't let him make such statements, partly because it must be nice to live in his little world, where the sun shines, the birds chirp merrily, and reality never rears its ugly head, but primarily because I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke him for trying to devastate vast acres of precious farmland. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, Spoony's idea of addressing a problem is not to fix the problem but to establish a task force, council, or commission to look into it, study it, dissect it, and finally talk it to death. But you knew that already. So let me add that Spoony is entirely versipellous. When he's among plebeians, Spoony warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against blackguardism. But when Spoony is safely surrounded by his followers, he instructs them to deprive individuals of the right to shed the light of truth on the evil that is Spoony. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that if Spoony's worshippers had even an ounce of integrity they would tackle the multinational death machine that Spoony is currently constructing. If Spoony hadn't been leading to the destruction of the human race, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out arguing about Spoony's tractates. In any case, I want to unify our community. Spoony, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it. I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that Spoony's adages are out of step with democratic practices of equity and fair play. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that Spoony relies heavily on "useful idiots", that is, people who unwittingly do Spoony's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Spoony would not have been able to conceal the fact that he is so incredibly soporific that he really ought to change his name to "Soporific McSoporific, the Soporific King of the Soporific". Now that's a strong conclusion to draw just from the evidence I've presented in this letter so let me corroborate it by saying that when I was a child my clergyman told me, "We must coolly and objectively adopt the standpoint that what we need from Spoony is fewer monologues and more dialogue." If you think about it you'll see his point. Spoony's handling of the situation has not been a comedy of errors but a tragedy of errors. There's nothing controversial about that view. It's a fact, pure and simple. It was a fact long before anyone realized that Spoony has been cynically and deliberately violating his oath not to offer stones instead of bread to the emotional and spiritual hungers of the world. And let me tell you, I've never bothered him. Yet he wants to adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? Spoony has, at times, called me "deluded" or "thrasonical". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to stultify art and retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful. Having already explained that we have not only a right but also a responsibility to take the lemons that he's handing us and make lemonade, let me now state that he should stop calling me a crazy thief. Although I've been called worse things by better people, "Spoony" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone insulting my intelligence, I tell him or her to stop "Spoony-ing". I have not forgotten that once Spoony accepts responsibility for the problems he's caused, the focus shifts from who is responsible to what each of us can do about it. I have not forgotten that Spoony's ignorance is encyclopedic. And I cannot forget that Spoony's maudlin preoccupation with animalism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "disproportionableness", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to throw us into a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that Spoony's latest diatribe is Spoony-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Spoony's hysteria and reveals that you may be worried that Spoony will redefine humanity as alienated machines/beasts and then convince everyone that they were never human to begin with before the year is over. If so, then I share your misgivings. But let's not worry about that now. Instead, let's discuss my observation that teenagers who want to shock their parents sometimes maintain—with a straight face—that space aliens are out to lay eggs in our innards or ooze their alien hell-slime all over us. Fortunately, most parents don't fall for this fraud because they know that if I said that Spoony has answers to everything, I'd be a liar. But I'd be being thoroughly honest if I said that his ramblings are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk"—an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well—because he says that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Spoony himself). But then he turns around and says that he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. You know, you can't have it both ways, Spoony. Still, the issue of what to do about Spoony's untrustworthy pleas is far from settled. The letter you just read should be seen as a starting point for dialogue on this controversial issue. Also, It may sound like the kind of bogus claim made on late-night infomercials, but trust me when I say it's true: Spoony regards himself as both omniscient and omnicompetent, fully qualified to put any intellectual discipline in the world in its place. Here's a quick review: It has been said that we must always be looking towards the future while keeping the past in mind. I, in turn, aver that Spoony's latest diatribe is Spoony-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Spoony's hysteria and reveals that I, for one, have to laugh when Spoony says that his long-term goals are not worth getting outraged about. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever, but he has no discernible talents. The only things Spoony has indeed mastered are biological functions. Well, I suppose he's also good at convincing people that he holds a universal license that allows him to add insult to injury, but my point is that Spoony likes saying that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. Okay, that's a parody—but not a very gross one. In point of fact, Spoony's coadjutors always show a streak of cruelty that enables them to find pleasure in their destructiveness. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that Spoony insists that it is antihumanist to question his double standards. How can he be so blind? Very easily. Basically, I want to live my life as I see fit. I can't do that while Spoony still has the ability to force onto us the degradation and ignominy that he is known to revel in. Spoony is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. He likes to posture as a guardian of virtue and manners. However, when it comes right down to it, what Spoony is pushing is both spleeny and oleaginous. His anecdotes are as predictable as sunrise. Whenever I argue about his contrivances, Spoony's invariant response is to confuse, disorient, and disunify. True, Spoony's drug-induced ravings are as screwed up as Hogan's goat, but some people maintain that I find Spoony's ramblings to be plebeian at best. Others assert that nothing agitates and humiliates Spoony more than when I expose false prophets who preach that skin color means more than skill, and gender is more impressive than genius. In the interest of clearing up the confusion I'll make the following observation: Spoony has been trying for some time to sell the public on an incendiarism-based government. His sales pitch proceeds both pragmatically and emotionally. The pragmatic argument: The future of the entire world rests in Spoony's hands. The emotional argument: His press releases epitomize wholesome family entertainment. As you can see, neither argument is valid, which should indicate to you that with Spoony so forcefully giving rise to sinister polemics, things are starting to come to a head. That's why we must raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding his merciless undertakings. It may be unfashionable to say so and it may surprise a few of you out there, but the really interesting thing about all this is not that Spoony can't be trusted. The interesting thing is that he has stated that he is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. I find such declaratory statements quite telling. They tell me that I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Spoony's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many tasteless, damnable freebooters realize that the time is always right to do what is right. That's why we must undeniably fight the good fight. The first step in that process is to realize that his domineering ideals create a Frankenstein's monster. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to scrap the entire constellation of rash ideas that brought us to our present point. Spoony says that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape and that therefore we have too much freedom. Hello? Is Mr. Logic down at the pub with a dozen pints inside him or what? When I was a child my clergyman told me, "A Spoony-controlled culture that cheers on Spoony's suppression of nonconformity, dissent, and other unpopular words is every bit as chilling as one that seeks merely to fabricate all sorts of hectoring, ad hoc rules and regulations." If you think about it you'll see his point. Spoony's comments are designed to burn our fair cities to the ground. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. Unsettling as that is, the more infuriating fact is that I realize that some people may have trouble reading this letter. Granted, not everyone knows what "scientificoreligious" means, but it's nevertheless easy to understand that Spoony proclaims at every opportunity that he'd never create problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. Yes, I realize that there is absolutely no evidence to support Spoony's accusations, but for the sake of brevity I've had to express myself in simplified terms. Spoony's fairy tales may not be traditional for an impulsive present-day robber baron, but what Spoony is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly unsophisticated activity. I think we can indisputably say that his list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that Spoony is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. In the coming days, however, Spoony is likely to switch to some sort of "destroy the heart and fabric of our nation" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. In general, it undoubtedly makes far more sense to guide the world into an age of peace, justice, and solidarity than to keep essential documents hidden from the public until they become politically moot. Sure, there are exceptions, but if we briefly prescind from the main point of this letter we can focus on how I'm not in the habit of giving advice to Spoony's jackbooted patsies. However, there's always a first time: You guys should stop leading to the destruction of the human race. I admit I don't have much confidence that they'll follow that advice, but it's important to make it known that I like to speak of Spoony as "dour". That's a reasonable term to use, I suspect, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, if he is incapable of discerning the mad ramblings of impractical rabble-rousers from the wisdom and nuance embedded in a sage's discourse then I seriously doubt that he'll be capable of determining that not only does he influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly insensate, but he then commands his squadristi, "Go, and do thou likewise." Throughout history, there has been a clash between those who wish to restore the temple of our civilization to the ancient truths and those who wish to leave us in the lurch. Naturally, Spoony belongs to the latter category. If he is victorious in his quest to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window, then his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity. It strikes me as amusing that Spoony complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. To get even the simplest message into the consciousness of delusional soi-disant do-gooders it has to be repeated at least fifty times. Now, I don't want to insult your intelligence by telling you the following fifty times, but Spoony's hariolations are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to use both overt and covert deceptions to blacklist his enemies as terrorist sympathizers or traitors. I despise everything about Spoony. I despise Spoony's attempts to give people a new and largely artificial basis for evaluating things and making decisions. I despise how he insists that merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications. Most of all, I despise his complete obliviousness to the fact that his memoirs promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Spoony's lackeys because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Spoony. Instead of taking the easy path in life, the downward path, we must choose the upward path regardless of the pain, suffering, and sacrifice that this choice entails. Only then can we finally end Spoony's control over the minds and souls of countless people. Yes, Spoony will try to stop us by putting supercilious thoughts in our children's minds, but I wouldn't want to lay down diktats that force me to lose heart. I would, on the other hand, love to encourage open, civic engagement. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter. Perhaps he has never had to take a stand and fight for something as critical as our right to expand people's understanding of his overweening strictures. But his stooges have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. The take-away message of this letter is that Dadaism is classically a hodgepodge of sound bites crafted for mass appeal. Think about it. I don't want to have to write another letter a few years from now, in the wake of a society torn apart by Spoony's pushy philosophies, reminding you that you were warned.
Wow, Spoony, that post is longer than my penis. Also, what does sesquipedalianism mean?
A foot and a half or unnatural length or big
SoQRadio wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:48 Also, what does sesquipedalianism mean? fancy not knowing that certain sections of raven's rebuttal are worringly accurate
I am sorry I have to troll on this one jesus christ spoony, you took your time to write all that even knowing no one will take it serous and just going to flame it? like really thats a fucking book over something better off not speaking off, Damn you guys got way to much time on your hands I am so shocked right now
raven wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:46 That's too big of a subject to get into here so let me instead discuss how a great many of us don't want Spoony to declare martial law, suspend elections, and round up dissidents well that's just tough shit for you isn't it Quote: he wants all of us to believe that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. That's why he sponsors brainwashing in the schools, brainwashing by the government, brainwashing statements made to us by politicians, entertainers, and sports stars, and brainwashing by the big advertisers and the news media. Damn right. Quote: Stated differently, he alleges that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with. Naturally, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Don't quote Shakespeare at me. Quote: Spoony's salacious views are meticulously designed to keep the population unaware, uneducated, dumbed down, and focused on stupefying activities like video games. The intention is to prevent people from noticing that Spoony has been causing riots in the streets. You can't prove that. Quote: They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that no one has a higher opinion of Spoony than I, and I think Spoony is a mad, noxious long-haired hippie. I object to the insinuation that I have long hair. Quote: I do, however, unequivocally claim that every time Spoony utters or writes a statement that supports lexiphanicism—even indirectly—it sends a message that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. Well DUH. Quote: I honestly aver that we mustn't let him make such statements, partly because it must be nice to live in his little world, where the sun shines, the birds chirp merrily, and reality never rears its ugly head, but primarily because I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke him for trying to devastate vast acres of precious farmland. here I must protest - that was hitman. Quote: While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, Spoony's idea of addressing a problem is not to fix the problem but to establish a task force, council, or commission to look into it, study it, dissect it, and finally talk it to death. But you knew that already. Touché. Quote: But when Spoony is safely surrounded by his followers, he instructs them to deprive individuals of the right to shed the light of truth on the evil that is Spoony. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that if Spoony's worshippers had even an ounce of integrity they would tackle the multinational death machine that Spoony is currently constructing. You're becoming a nuisance! Quote: If Spoony hadn't been leading to the destruction of the human race, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out arguing about Spoony's tractates. In any case, I want to unify our community. Spoony, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it. You've only just figured that out? Quote: let me corroborate it by saying that when I was a child my clergyman told me, "We must coolly and objectively adopt the standpoint that what we need from Spoony is fewer monologues and more dialogue." If you think about it you'll see his point. In fact, I have statistics that show people want more monologues. Quote: Spoony has, at times, called me "deluded" or "thrasonical". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to stultify art and retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful. Having already explained that we have not only a right but also a responsibility to take the lemons that he's handing us and make lemonade, let me now state that he should stop calling me a crazy thief. Why the hell should I? You are a crazy thief. Deny it all you like, but it's on film. Quote: Although I've been called worse things by better people, "Spoony" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone insulting my intelligence, I tell him or her to stop "Spoony-ing". I take that as a compliment. Quote: But then he turns around and says that he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. I draw the line at graft. Quote: Well, I suppose he's also good at convincing people that he holds a universal license that allows him to add insult to injury, but my point is that Spoony likes saying that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. Now you're being silly. Quote: Basically, I want to live my life as I see fit. I can't do that while Spoony still has the ability to force onto us the degradation and ignominy that he is known to revel in. It's for your own good. Quote: Spoony is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. I object to that, I'm pretty good with an MRLS too. Quote: His anecdotes are as predictable as sunrise. And as warming and enlightening! Quote: The interesting thing is that he has stated that he is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. I find such declaratory statements quite telling. That's the point! Quote: Spoony says that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape and that therefore we have too much freedom. Hello? Is Mr. Logic down at the pub with a dozen pints inside him or what? Pffft. Ok buddy, you show me one woman who DOESN'T fit that description. Quote: Spoony's comments are designed to burn our fair cities to the ground. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. Unsettling as that is, the more infuriating fact is that I realize that some people may have trouble reading this letter. Condescend all you like! Quote: Spoony's fairy tales may not be traditional for an impulsive present-day robber baron, but what Spoony is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly unsophisticated activity. I'm not unsophisticated. Quote: It strikes me as amusing that Spoony complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. You've got me there. Quote: Spoony's hariolations are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to use both overt and covert deceptions to blacklist his enemies as terrorist sympathizers or traitors. Sorry, covert? Quote: I despise his complete obliviousness to the fact that his memoirs promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Spoony's lackeys because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Spoony. ...so? Quote: I don't want to have to write another letter a few years from now, in the wake of a society torn apart by Spoony's pushy philosophies, reminding you that you were warned. don't worry, you won't be around to see the day. life is short.
Maybe I'm naturally oversensitive, or maybe someone just slipped me decaf coffee this morning, but you consider it fair game to subvert time-tested societal norms. Those readers of brittle disposition might do well to await a ride on the next emotionally indulgent transport; this one is scheduled nonstop over rocky roads. As soon as you're strapped in I'll announce something to the effect of how you hate people who have huge supplies of the things you lack. What you lack the most is common sense, which underlies my point that your cause is not glorious. It is not wonderful. It is not good. Quite frankly, I've long thought it would be fun to try to explain to you how an understanding of philistinism is propaedeutic to an understanding of your pathetic practices. For the most part, I'm just curious as to how deep you will have to dig into his profanity thesaurus to formulate a response, Spoony. I hope I have made my views crystal-clear: you are bound to have a rude awakening when you finally realize how few people approve of your self-satisfied ventures.
You fucking assholes this thread has way too many edumacated words in it for it to be in the spam fest.
raven wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 07:26 Maybe I'm naturally oversensitive, or maybe someone just slipped me decaf coffee this morning, but you consider it fair game to subvert time-tested societal norms. Those readers of brittle disposition might do well to await a ride on the next emotionally indulgent transport; this one is scheduled nonstop over rocky roads. As soon as you're strapped in I'll announce something to the effect of how you hate people who have huge supplies of the things you lack. What you lack the most is common sense, which underlies my point that your cause is not glorious. It is not wonderful. It is not good. Quite frankly, I've long thought it would be fun to try to explain to you how an understanding of philistinism is propaedeutic to an understanding of your pathetic practices. For the most part, I'm just curious as to how deep you will have to dig into his profanity thesaurus to formulate a response, Spoony. I hope I have made my views crystal-clear: you are bound to have a rude awakening when you finally realize how few people approve of your self-satisfied ventures. I am writing this letter to persuade you that I still believe in duty, honor, and country. I will persuade you of this by providing a few examples and illustrations of the way in which Mr. Raven seeks to convert lush forests into arid deserts. Perhaps before going on, I should describe Raven to you. Raven is coldhearted, pertinacious, and cocky. Furthermore, he yearns to judge people by the color of their skin while ignoring the content of their character. If the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to move as expeditiously as possible to restore the traditions that he has abandoned. While I trust that this audience shares my indignation at Raven, to someone whose eyes are open, Raven's constantly repeated mantra that no one is smart enough to see through his transparent lies is an insanely effrontive notion. By way of contrast, consider my personal mantra that if I withheld my feelings on this matter, I'd be no less grumpy than Raven. He frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what he is doing—as opposed to what he is saying—to understand his true aims. Our national media is controlled by the most misinformed nutters I've ever seen. That's why you probably haven't heard that I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why I indisputably hate how Raven shows such callous indifference to those whose lives he's ruined. But the short answer is that if he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that he would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform an irrational act, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Eccentric Rhetoric. In the meantime, Raven takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. A good friend of mine once said that we should all rally good-hearted people to the side of our cause. Amen to that! In fact, I even informed my friend that if we don't acquire the input of a representative cross-section of the community in a non-threatening, inclusive environment then Raven will create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. This message has been brought to you by the Department of Blinding Obviousness. What might not be so obvious, however, is that Raven maintains that either sectarianism is the only alternative to fetishism or that he is a man of peace. Raven denies any other possibility. He has stated that national-security interests can and should be sidestepped whenever his personal interests are at stake. One clear inference from that statement—an inference that is never really disavowed—is that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. Now that's just slaphappy. Raven either is or elects to be ignorant of scientific principles and methods. He even intentionally misuses scientific terminology to fill the air with recrimination and rancor. It is reasonable to infer that he wants to produce an army of mindless insects who will obey his every command. To produce such an army, Raven plans to destroy people's minds using either drugs or an advanced form of lobotomy. Whichever approach he takes, if he wants to complain, he should have an argument. He shouldn't just throw out the word "archaeopterygiformes", for example, and expect us to be scared. Although theoretical differences can be drawn between Raven's stroppy expostulations and witless fascism, these are distinctions without a difference. Lest you think that I'm talking out of my hat here, I should point out that the key to Raven's soul is his longing for the effortless, irresponsible, automatic consciousness of an animal. He dreads the necessity, the risk, and the responsibility of rational cognition. As a result, Raven sells the supposed merits of teetotalism on the basis of rhetoric, not evidence. The evidence, however belated, is now in, and the evidence says that all the deals Raven makes are strictly one-way. Raven gets all the rights, and the other party gets all the obligations. I can't help but wonder: Why does everyone hate Raven? Is it because of his business practices, exclusivity, disloyalty, disrespect, or because Raven keeps trying to demonize my family and friends? I've never really gotten a clear and honest answer to that question from Raven. But what is clear is that he has stated that you and I are inferior to what I call macabre boneheads. I find such declaratory statements quite telling. They tell me that Raven has warned us that by the end of the decade, self-serving astrologers will make bigotry respectable. If you think about it, you'll realize that Raven's warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that I have one itsy-bitsy problem with Raven's nostrums. Videlicet, they sanctify Raven's depravity. And that's saying nothing about how he exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up his obvious inferiority. If I could ask Raven one thing, I'd ask him why he thinks space gods arriving in flying saucers will save humanity from self-destruction. The problem is that Raven shrinks from such questions like a vampire shrinks from a crucifix. You'd be more likely to get Raven to admit that his plan is to attack the very fabric of this nation. Raven's emissaries are moving at a frightening pace toward the total implementation of that agenda, which includes plaguing our minds. His obloquies are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk"—an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well—because he is absolutely versipellous. When Raven is among plebeians, he warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against absenteeism. But when he's safely surrounded by his co-conspirators, Raven instructs them to turn public education into a soft, mushy, touchy-feely experience whose purpose is socialization, not learning. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that Raven seeks scapegoats for his own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target he can find, that is, brown-nosing criminal masterminds. If you were to tell Raven that his continuous and deliberate misuse of the word "counterrevolutionist" in an attempt to trick us into trading freedom for serfdom is both self-indulgent and obtrusive, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. He really struck a nerve with me when he said that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to beat plowshares into swords. That lie is a painful reminder that Raven's screeds are like an enormous masochism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must address the continued social injustice shown by disorderly schmoes because Raven and his henchmen pay little or no attention to the negative impact that pessimism will have on our daily lives. And I can say that with a clear conscience because Raven has delivered exactly the opposite of what he had previously promised us. Most notably, his vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, Raven's vows of equality did little more than convince people that Raven lusts for a world in which tasteless vandals dispense bread and circuses to addlepated caitiffs to entice them to resort to underhanded tactics. That's not something that we learn in school—though it should be. That's not something that we emote about while watching movies and TV shows—though it should be. What it is is something that tells us loudly and clearly that if we were to let Raven get away with insulting my intelligence, that would be a gross miscarriage of justice. There are two related questions in this matter. The first is to what extent Raven has tried to put craven demoniacs on the federal payroll. The other is whether or not Raven is not just predatory. He is unbelievably, astronomically predatory. He will do everything in his power to render unspeakable and unthinkable whole categories of beliefs about power. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Raven is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, his willingness to give an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments sets a new record for brazenness. Raven's nugatory half-measures often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of alcoholism and cynicism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain. Taking that notion one step further, we can see that I am certain that if I asked the next person I meet if he would want Raven to bowdlerize all unfavorable descriptions of his stratagems, he would say no. Yet we all stand idly by while Raven claims that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments. In particular, there is a problem here. A large, lewd, voluble problem. Mr. Raven always tries to rationalize his conclusions with compelling gobbledegook about some "greater good". Never forget that and never let him make me the target of a constant, consistent, systematic, sustained campaign of attacks.
Nom nom nom nom.
Chew wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:15 I can't believe I actually read all that... but there was so much I couldn't retain it all. (SSnipe) -BLU3Y3Z- wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 03:54 I am sorry I have to troll on this one jesus christ spoony, you took your time to write all that even knowing no one will take it serous and just going to flame it? like really thats a fucking book over something better off not speaking off, Damn you guys got way to much time on your hands I am so shocked right now
Short post. Do i win the fight? Edit: Make 1 of me please Spoony, it'll be amusing.
This has to be the first time something was moved out of 'Spam Fest' and into a non-retarded category. Quite the achievement.
This is the best thing to ever hit these forums ever.
GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 19:06 This is the best thing to ever hit these forums ever. And the sadest part half the people here won't read it, COZ IT IS FUCKING LONG AND USES BIG WORDS.
Spoony wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 18:52 no it won't Directed towards whom? Not used to no quotes ....if it was directed to me, you meant "No i won't?", unless you consider yourself an "it"? Or the fact that it wouldn't be amusing? Well, that's an opinion, and even if it's completely random, i will find it amusing that you actually took the time to do 1 anyway.
Spoony wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 12:53 raven wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 07:26 Maybe I'm naturally oversensitive, or maybe someone just slipped me decaf coffee this morning, but you consider it fair game to subvert time-tested societal norms. Those readers of brittle disposition might do well to await a ride on the next emotionally indulgent transport; this one is scheduled nonstop over rocky roads. As soon as you're strapped in I'll announce something to the effect of how you hate people who have huge supplies of the things you lack. What you lack the most is common sense, which underlies my point that your cause is not glorious. It is not wonderful. It is not good. Quite frankly, I've long thought it would be fun to try to explain to you how an understanding of philistinism is propaedeutic to an understanding of your pathetic practices. For the most part, I'm just curious as to how deep you will have to dig into his profanity thesaurus to formulate a response, Spoony. I hope I have made my views crystal-clear: you are bound to have a rude awakening when you finally realize how few people approve of your self-satisfied ventures. I am writing this letter to persuade you that I still believe in duty, honor, and country. I will persuade you of this by providing a few examples and illustrations of the way in which Mr. Raven seeks to convert lush forests into arid deserts. Perhaps before going on, I should describe Raven to you. Raven is coldhearted, pertinacious, and cocky. Furthermore, he yearns to judge people by the color of their skin while ignoring the content of their character. If the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to move as expeditiously as possible to restore the traditions that he has abandoned. While I trust that this audience shares my indignation at Raven, to someone whose eyes are open, Raven's constantly repeated mantra that no one is smart enough to see through his transparent lies is an insanely effrontive notion. By way of contrast, consider my personal mantra that if I withheld my feelings on this matter, I'd be no less grumpy than Raven. He frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what he is doing—as opposed to what he is saying—to understand his true aims. Our national media is controlled by the most misinformed nutters I've ever seen. That's why you probably haven't heard that I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why I indisputably hate how Raven shows such callous indifference to those whose lives he's ruined. But the short answer is that if he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that he would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform an irrational act, I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Eccentric Rhetoric. In the meantime, Raven takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. A good friend of mine once said that we should all rally good-hearted people to the side of our cause. Amen to that! In fact, I even informed my friend that if we don't acquire the input of a representative cross-section of the community in a non-threatening, inclusive environment then Raven will create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. This message has been brought to you by the Department of Blinding Obviousness. What might not be so obvious, however, is that Raven maintains that either sectarianism is the only alternative to fetishism or that he is a man of peace. Raven denies any other possibility. He has stated that national-security interests can and should be sidestepped whenever his personal interests are at stake. One clear inference from that statement—an inference that is never really disavowed—is that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. Now that's just slaphappy. Raven either is or elects to be ignorant of scientific principles and methods. He even intentionally misuses scientific terminology to fill the air with recrimination and rancor. It is reasonable to infer that he wants to produce an army of mindless insects who will obey his every command. To produce such an army, Raven plans to destroy people's minds using either drugs or an advanced form of lobotomy. Whichever approach he takes, if he wants to complain, he should have an argument. He shouldn't just throw out the word "archaeopterygiformes", for example, and expect us to be scared. Although theoretical differences can be drawn between Raven's stroppy expostulations and witless fascism, these are distinctions without a difference. Lest you think that I'm talking out of my hat here, I should point out that the key to Raven's soul is his longing for the effortless, irresponsible, automatic consciousness of an animal. He dreads the necessity, the risk, and the responsibility of rational cognition. As a result, Raven sells the supposed merits of teetotalism on the basis of rhetoric, not evidence. The evidence, however belated, is now in, and the evidence says that all the deals Raven makes are strictly one-way. Raven gets all the rights, and the other party gets all the obligations. I can't help but wonder: Why does everyone hate Raven? Is it because of his business practices, exclusivity, disloyalty, disrespect, or because Raven keeps trying to demonize my family and friends? I've never really gotten a clear and honest answer to that question from Raven. But what is clear is that he has stated that you and I are inferior to what I call macabre boneheads. I find such declaratory statements quite telling. They tell me that Raven has warned us that by the end of the decade, self-serving astrologers will make bigotry respectable. If you think about it, you'll realize that Raven's warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that I have one itsy-bitsy problem with Raven's nostrums. Videlicet, they sanctify Raven's depravity. And that's saying nothing about how he exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up his obvious inferiority. If I could ask Raven one thing, I'd ask him why he thinks space gods arriving in flying saucers will save humanity from self-destruction. The problem is that Raven shrinks from such questions like a vampire shrinks from a crucifix. You'd be more likely to get Raven to admit that his plan is to attack the very fabric of this nation. Raven's emissaries are moving at a frightening pace toward the total implementation of that agenda, which includes plaguing our minds. His obloquies are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk"—an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well—because he is absolutely versipellous. When Raven is among plebeians, he warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against absenteeism. But when he's safely surrounded by his co-conspirators, Raven instructs them to turn public education into a soft, mushy, touchy-feely experience whose purpose is socialization, not learning. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that Raven seeks scapegoats for his own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target he can find, that is, brown-nosing criminal masterminds. If you were to tell Raven that his continuous and deliberate misuse of the word "counterrevolutionist" in an attempt to trick us into trading freedom for serfdom is both self-indulgent and obtrusive, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. He really struck a nerve with me when he said that the best way to reduce cognitive dissonance and restore homeostasis to one's psyche is to beat plowshares into swords. That lie is a painful reminder that Raven's screeds are like an enormous masochism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must address the continued social injustice shown by disorderly schmoes because Raven and his henchmen pay little or no attention to the negative impact that pessimism will have on our daily lives. And I can say that with a clear conscience because Raven has delivered exactly the opposite of what he had previously promised us. Most notably, his vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, Raven's vows of equality did little more than convince people that Raven lusts for a world in which tasteless vandals dispense bread and circuses to addlepated caitiffs to entice them to resort to underhanded tactics. That's not something that we learn in school—though it should be. That's not something that we emote about while watching movies and TV shows—though it should be. What it is is something that tells us loudly and clearly that if we were to let Raven get away with insulting my intelligence, that would be a gross miscarriage of justice. There are two related questions in this matter. The first is to what extent Raven has tried to put craven demoniacs on the federal payroll. The other is whether or not Raven is not just predatory. He is unbelievably, astronomically predatory. He will do everything in his power to render unspeakable and unthinkable whole categories of beliefs about power. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Raven is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, his willingness to give an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments sets a new record for brazenness. Raven's nugatory half-measures often resemble an inverted fairy tale in that the triumph of innocence comes at the start and the ugly sisters of alcoholism and cynicism enter on stage in triumph for the final curtain. Taking that notion one step further, we can see that I am certain that if I asked the next person I meet if he would want Raven to bowdlerize all unfavorable descriptions of his stratagems, he would say no. Yet we all stand idly by while Raven claims that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments. In particular, there is a problem here. A large, lewd, voluble problem. Mr. Raven always tries to rationalize his conclusions with compelling gobbledegook about some "greater good". Never forget that and never let him make me the target of a constant, consistent, systematic, sustained campaign of attacks. I can't debate any of this, because most of it is true. However, I can say this: I've been hesitating to write this letter because I've been afraid that, if I did, you would do everything in your power to make me abandon all hope. But after reading about your inerudite, vainglorious allocutions, I could hesitate no longer. There are a number of reasons you aren't telling us as to why you want to see to it that all patriotic endeavors are directed down blind alleys where they end only in frustration and discouragement. In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that he says that children should belong to the state. That is the most despicable lie I have ever heard in my entire life. I conclude this letter with an appropriate quote: "Spoony's soulless hypnopompic insights serve only to illuminate his lack of good taste and decency." I believe we all know who said that, don't we? Where, oh where, should I begin telling you about how brain-damaged you are? How about here: You conduct yourself in a superciliously pompous manner. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about antisocial simpletons. Others have stated it much more eloquently than I, but you might say, "As a bastion of imperialism, your tasteless army of blinkered prevaricators have become a menace—a menace, above all, to those of us who value liberty." Fine, I agree. But you always say that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. That's his unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely twisted and ungrateful lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by Spoony's surrogates. We must give to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. To recap the main points made in this letter: 1) the vitally important thing for all people to know is that you are definitely an adept at destroying our moral fiber, 2) his initiatives stink of cover-ups, stalls, diversionary tactics, legal maneuverings, and other measures that reap a harvest of death, and 3) cantankerous, snooty couch potatoes often act with a mob mentality. Let me stress that last part... MOB MENTALITY.
IT'S EASIER TO READ BIG WORDS IF THEY ARE BIGGER! CASE AND POINT: Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis
Toggle Spoiler WHY ARE PEOPLE GETTING SO WORKED UP OVER SOMEONE ELSE HE WILL NEVER MEET IN PERSON? Toggle Spoiler Now you've made me get worked up as well, shame on you lot. You should all go back to your rooms and ponder over this.
nopol10 wrote on Thu, 26 November 2009 02:51 WHY ARE PEOPLE GETTING SO WORKED UP OVER SOMEONE ELSE HE WILL NEVER MEET IN PERSON? -Because it's fun. -Because it's entertaining. -GTFO my internets.
I would like to take this opportunity to say Spoony and I just trolled the fuck out of you
Chew wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 19:15 GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Wed, 25 November 2009 19:06 This is the best thing to ever hit these forums ever. And the sadest part half the people here won't read it, COZ IT IS FUCKING LONG AND USES BIG WORDS. No, that's not the saddest part...I'm not going to spoil it, tho.
raven wrote on Thu, 26 November 2009 16:38 I would like to take this opportunity to say Spoony and I just trolled the fuck out of you So that's the feeling of being trolled...I quite like it. Can I have more? (Make it 10 pages this time please)
Who did bother to read it? Just 1st paragraph..
raven wrote on Thu, 26 November 2009 00:38 I would like to take this opportunity to say Spoony and I just trolled the fuck out of you You're a bad troll, then. No troll says "AH HAHAHA I TROLLED U". Trolling doesn't work that way.
I couldn't continue on, I ran out of bad things to say about Spoony
raven wrote on Thu, 26 November 2009 03:38 I would like to take this opportunity to say Spoony and I just trolled the fuck out of you Took about 5 lines of reading. lawl
I just burnt out my last brain cell reading this
Dover wrote on Thu, 26 November 2009 10:12 raven wrote on Thu, 26 November 2009 00:38 I would like to take this opportunity to say Spoony and I just trolled the fuck out of you You're a bad troll, then. No troll says "AH HAHAHA I TROLLED U". Trolling doesn't work that way. you guys should really take the advice from Edward Sausagehands over here
Nice topic and essays even though I ignored all the posts by Spoony and raven, but still the other posts gave me the summary.
(Skipped long post as I really do not care to read them) Basically, JohnDoe is a class A troll. He/She/Other can not get enough of trying to make other members look like an idiot, which is backfiring on himself/herself/itself. A ban could be proposed considering he does not even play Renegade anymore, and is currently an anchor for the community. He will drive out any new users and discourage the use of this forum and indirectly discouraging people from playing Renegade. It is rather annoying to read any thread that he posts in, due to the massive amount of spam that follows. If he only did this in the spam forum, then it would be fine. But if I want to read a serious post, I don't want any spam, especially troll spam.
What's your problem with someone voicing his opinion? Fascist.
JohnDoe wrote What's your problem with someone voicing his opinion? Fascist. I'll tell you precisely what is the problem with you voicing your opinion. Multifarious avenues of approach vie for attention as potential retorts to Mr. John Doe's snarky, fastidious histrionics. First and foremost, money and greed shape John's thinking. So what's the connection between that and John's vituperations? The connection is that his obiter dicta are not witty satire, as John would have you believe. They're simply the feral ramblings of someone who has no idea or appreciation of what he's mocking. John's apostles' thinking is fenced in by many constraints. Their minds are not free because they dare not be. Should you think I'm saying too much, please note that one of the goals of antidisestablishmentarianism is to render meaningless the words "best" and "worst". John admires that philosophy because, by annihilating human perceptions of quality, John's own mediocrity can flourish. I had a brief conversation recently with some dastardly slubberdegullions who were trying to fuel the fires of hatred. That conversation convinced me that drossy opuscula have dangerous consequences. I won't dwell on that except to direct your attention to the abusive manner in which he has been trying to place our children at imminent risk of serious harm. Even though supposedly distancing himself from egocentric practitioners of particularism, John has really not changed his spots at all. He apparently believes that children should belong to the state. You and I know better than that. You and I know that John knows that performing an occasional act of charity will make some people forgive—or at least overlook—all of his blasphemous excesses. My take on the matter is that if he opened his eyes, he'd realize that under the label of "power-drunk" are those, like John, who foster and intensify John's drug-drenched drama of immorality. John's functionaries are not technically feebleminded hell-raisers but rather poxy, rambunctious gauleiters. I claim that there is a small—yet not entirely insignificant—difference. John has declared that he's staging a revolt against everyone who dares to brush away the cobwebs of faddism. John is revolting all right; the very sight of him turns my stomach. All kidding aside, this is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state would be eager to create widespread hysteria. Not yet, at least. But I indubitably gainsay his notion that the future of the entire world rests in his hands. There's no need here to present any evidence of that; examples can be found all over the World Wide Web. In fact, a simple search will quickly reveal that my dream is for tired eyes to open and see clearly, broken spirits to find new energy, and weary arms to find the strength to bring strength to our families, power to our nation, and health to our cities. What's the best way to take a strong position on John's lamentations, which, after all, shock and stampede the public into accepting total fascist tyranny? That's actually a tough nut to crack. The answer is related the way that John accuses me of being villainous whenever I state that he is—and I say this with no intended disrespect—immature. All right, I'll admit that I have a sharp tongue and sometimes write with a bit of a poison pen, but the fact remains that John gets a lot of perks from the system. True to form, he ceaselessly moves the goalposts to prevent others from benefiting from the same perks. This suggests that John keeps trying to tear down all theoretical frameworks for addressing the issue. And if we don't remain eternally vigilant, he will indeed succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don't speak or correspond with libidinous illiterate-types, John's legatees, or anyone else who fails to realize that John's squadristi are quick to point out that because John is hated, persecuted, and repeatedly laughed at, he is the real victim here. The truth is that, if anything, John is a victim of his own success—a success that enables John to misdirect our efforts into fighting each other rather than into understanding the nature and endurance of squalid animalism. John maintains that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them. This is complete—or at least, incomplete—baloney. For instance, John fails to mention that at this point in the letter I had planned to tell you that there are some splenetic criticasters out there who care nothing for you or your cherished campaigns. However, one of my colleagues pointed out that John could use a heavy dose of sensitivity training. Hence, I discarded the discourse I had previously prepared and substituted the following discussion in which I argue that his cronies claim to have no choice but to cheat on taxes. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, irascible misfits. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn't make and don't understand. What I mean to say is that John claims that at birth every living being is assigned a celestial serial number or frequency power spectrum. That story is full of more holes than a cheap hooker with a piercing fetish and a heroin habit. I don't believe I violate any confidences when I assert that he is absolutely determined to believe that statism provides an easy escape from a life of frustration, unhappiness, desperation, depression, and loneliness, and he's not about to let facts or reason get in his way. Aside from the fact that we have to consider all of our options, some people assert that I need to spend some time considering how best to get the facts out in the hope that somebody will do something to solve the problem. Others suspect that for his own sake, John should not rot out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values. In the interest of clearing up the confusion I'll make the following observation: John is squarely in favor of gnosticism and its propensity to dig a grave in which to bury liberty and freedom. This is so typical of John: he condemns bigotry and injustice except when it benefits him personally. John's lies come in many forms. Some of his lies are in the form of philosophies. Others are in the form of half-measures. Still more are in the form of folksy posturing and pretended concern and compassion. I may be beating a dead horse here, but I do want to point out that quasi-unctuous, bitter isolationism is widespread and growing stronger as it permeates school systems, universities, and the media. (Note the heroic restraint stopping me from saying that whenever a will-o'-the-wisp of nonrepresentationalism, however unreal, turns up anywhere, John is off at a trot.) I feel this way because if we don't shout back at his propaganda, our children will curse us in our graves. Speaking of our children, we need to teach them diligently that John and his legates are unholy mad-types. This is not set down in complaint against them, but merely as analysis. His prophecies are like an enormous racialism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must discuss the programmatic foundations of John's jealous "compromises" in detail because John is like a stray pigeon. Pigeons are too self-absorbed to care about anyone else. They poo on people they don't like; they poo on people they don't even know. The only real difference between John and a pigeon is that John intends to address what is, in the end, a nonexistent problem. That's why John looks down upon the rest of us. From his perspective, we are blind so he must tell us what to see; we are deaf so he must tell us what to hear; and we are mute so he must tell us what to say. Such views may fool morally repugnant cozeners, but I allege that John surely doesn't want me to show him how he is as wrong as wrong can be. Well, I've never been a very obedient dog so I intend not only to do exactly that but also to attack John's malice and hypocrisy. John should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. If you've never seen him beat plowshares into swords, you're either incredibly unobservant or are concealing the truth from yourself. Now that I've been exposed to John's commentaries I must admit that I don't completely understand them. Perhaps I need to get out more. Or perhaps John would not hesitate to apotheosize beer-guzzling cockalorums if he felt he could benefit from doing so. A long time ago I wrote that "John's plan is to impose a Luciferian ideology upon whatever remains of the human race after the final cataclysm brought about by his bestial false-flag operations". Today I might add that his stooges believe that he is entitled to strap us down with a network of rules and regulations. It should not be surprising that they believe this, however. As we all know, minds that have been so maimed that they believe that society is supposed to be lenient towards dysfunctional creeps can believe anything, especially if it's false. It's not fair for Mr. John Doe to encourage individuals to disregard other people, to become fully self-absorbed. May we never forget this if we are to deny John and his habitués a chance to work hand-in-glove with the most malodorous traitors you'll ever see. In all my letters, I try harder than anything else to make myself clear. I try to state things as simply and unambiguously as I can because I find that that's the best way to convince my readers that Mr. JohnDoe doesn't know everything. Let's get down to brass tacks: JohnDoe's grand plan is to force his moral code on the rest of us. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, there is still hope for our society, real hope—not the false sense of hope that comes from the mouths of illaudable layabouts of one sort or another but the hope that makes you eager to keep our courage up. We can't stop him overnight. It takes time, patience and experience to give you some background information about him. JohnDoe doesn't have any principles, or if he does, he puts them aside whenever they're inconvenient. If you want to hide something from him, you just have to put it in a book. His sanguinary, coprophagous ballyhoos leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children JohnDoe's enemies? After days of agonized pondering and reflection I finally came to the conclusion that JohnDoe's views are becoming increasingly mad. They have already begun to cement the foundation of our currently metastasizing police state into the law of the land. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled JohnDoe to protect undeserved privilege. If you don't want such a time to come then help me discuss the relationship between three converging and ever-growing factions—mudslinging, flippant ragamuffins, whiney, benighted menaces, and the worst kinds of supercilious talebearers there are. Help me defy the international enslavement of entire peoples. We all learned the Golden Rule in school. Maybe JohnDoe was absent that day. Antipluralism is a laughable whore, cloaking herself as social virtue and brotherly love. JohnDoe's loyalists probably don't realize that because it's not mentioned in the funny papers or in the movies. Nevertheless, there's a wanton loan shark born every minute. I will now cite the proof of that statement. The proof begins with the observation that JohnDoe's deputies don't want us to demand a thoughtful analysis and resolution of our problems with JohnDoe. That'd be too much of a threat to tribalism, blackguardism, and all of the other pouty things they worship. Clearly, they prefer giving rise to the worst types of dour, unsophisticated vagrants I've ever seen. Before you declare me impulsive, let me assert that JohnDoe has been doing "in-depth research" (whatever he thinks that means) to prove that misoneism can quell the hatred and disorder in our society. I should mention that I've been doing some research of my own. So far, I've "discovered" that I receive a great deal of correspondence from people all over the world. One of the things that impresses me about all of it is the massive number of people who realize that JohnDoe had previously claimed that he had no intention to subvert our country's legal system. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what he did. Next, he denied that he would dam the flow of effective communication. We all know what happened then. Now, JohnDoe would have us believe he'd never ever cultivate the purest breed of irresponsibility. Will he? Go figure. My view is that if anything will free us from the shackles of JohnDoe's parasitic conclusions, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that there is no justification on any level whatsoever for his condescending, bloody-minded indiscretions. I trust that I have not shocked any of you by writing that. However, I do realize that some of my readers may feel that much of what I have penned about JohnDoe in this letter is heartless and in violation of our Christian duty to love everyone. If so, I can say only that you'd think that someone would have done something by now to thwart JohnDoe's plans to make his projects a key dynamic in modern vandalism by viscerally defining "nondenominationalism" through the experience of horny, subhuman immoralism. Unfortunately, most people are quite happy to "go along to get along" and are rather reluctant to address the continued social injustice shown by truculent skinheads. It is imperative that we inform such people that there is historical precedent for JohnDoe's witticisms. Specifically, for as far back as I can remember, he has been plaguing our minds. Given how one crass activity always leads to another, it should come as no surprise that JohnDoe's criticisms of my letters have never successfully disproved a single fact I ever presented. Instead, his criticisms are based solely on his emotions and gut reactions. Well, I refuse to get caught up in JohnDoe's "I think ... I believe ... I feel" game. JohnDoe is addicted to the feeling of power, to the idea of controlling people. Sadly, he has no real concern for the welfare or the destiny of the people he desires to lead. I obviously hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before JohnDoe does any real damage. Or is it already too late? I've never really gotten a clear and honest answer to that question from JohnDoe. But what is clear is that he says that we should be grateful for the precious freedom to be robbed and kicked in the face by such a noble creature as him. Hey, JohnDoe, how about telling us the truth for once? Relative to just a few years ago, besotted, infernal heretics are nearly ten times as likely to believe that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. This is neither a coincidence nor simply a sign of the times. Rather, it reflects a sophisticated, psychological warfare program designed by JohnDoe to convince people that their peers are already riding the JohnDoe bandwagon and will think ill of them if they don't climb aboard, too. We must face the fact that someone has been giving JohnDoe's brain a very thorough washing, and now JohnDoe is trying to do the same to us. It may seem to many people, maybe even the majority, that he ought to unstop his ears and uncover his eyes. Only then will JohnDoe hear that to which he has been too long heedless. Only then will he see that as the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, crime unpunished is crime rewarded. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, everyone ought to read my award-winning essay, "The Naked Aggression of JohnDoe". In it, I chronicle all of JohnDoe's maneuvers from the fatuous to the phlegmatic and conclude that JohnDoe's lickspittles say, "Granting JohnDoe complete control over our lives is as important as breathing air." Yes, I'm afraid they really do talk like that. It's the only way for them to conceal that JohnDoe's rejoinders have caused widespread social alienation and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. Get this: JohnDoe insists that coercion in the name of liberty is a valid use of state power. [One minute break for laughter.] Whew! That's the funniest thing I've heard in weeks. Seriously, though, JohnDoe has been leading to the destruction of the human race. If there were any semblance of decency left in his polity that ought to be an affront to it. Sadly, that's a big "if"; we all know that JohnDoe's devotees allege that JohnDoe can make all of our problems go away merely by sprinkling some sort of magic, pink, pixie dust over everything that he considers mendacious or uncompanionable. I say to them, "Prove it"—not that they'll be able to, of course, but because if five years ago I had described a person like JohnDoe to you and told you that in five years he'd gum up what were once great ideas, you'd have thought me corrupt. You'd have laughed at me and told me it couldn't happen. So it is useful now to note that, first, it has happened and, second, to try to understand how it happened and how his janissaries believe that the Earth is flat. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to lend support to the thesis that his memoirs use a philosophical device of asking one question, answering a totally different question, and then applying that answer to the original question. Some people believe that one day JohnDoe's lackeys will drain the swamp of influence-peddling and the system of pay-to-play. Such people are doomed to disappointment, especially when one considers that if my memory serves me correctly, over time, JohnDoe's belief systems have progressed from being merely snappish to being supersnappish, hypersnappish, and recently ultrasnappish. In fact, I'd say that now they're even megasnappish. It will not be easy to protect innocent, little children from jejune sideshow barkers like JohnDoe. Nevertheless, we must attempt to do exactly that for the overriding reason that his reason is not true reason. It does not seek the truth but only recalcitrant answers, hectoring resolutions to conflicts. If there is one thing I have learned, it is this: If we don't set the stage so that my next letter will begin from a new and much higher level of influence right now, then JohnDoe's hariolations will soon start to metastasize until they inure us to evil autism. Many people are convinced that formal education is no guarantor of intelligence. I can't comment on that, but I can say that without checks and balances, the most balmy jabberers you'll ever see are free to project a stream of vitriolic images of death, sex, disaster, material goods, celebrities, and other fixtures in a mock-Olympian firmament. If you find that fact distressing then you should help me take the mechanisms, language, ideology, and phraseology for determining what is right and what is wrong out of the hands of him and his surrogates and put them back in the hands of ordinary people. Either that, or you can crawl into a corner and lament that you got yourself born in the wrong universe. Don't expect your sobbing to do much good, however, because once one begins thinking about free speech, about high-handed fussbudgets who use ostracism and public opinion to prevent the airing of views contrary to their own disreputable beliefs, one realizes that if JohnDoe had done his homework, he'd know that he cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, JohnDoe likes to compare his actions to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. In many ways, I'll tell you what we need to do about all the craziness JohnDoe is mongering. We need to institute change. Lest I forget to mention this later, politically incorrect humanity-haters represent one of the most avaricious wings of money-grubbing Chekism you can find. Let me express that same thought in slightly different terms: I used to believe that JohnDoe was a licentious blusterer. However, after seeing how he wants to demand that Earth submit to the dominion of grumpy schmoes, I now have an even lower opinion of him. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that JohnDoe promises his shills that as soon as he's finished bombarding me with insults, they'll all become rich beyond their wildest dreams. There's an obvious analogy here to the way that vultures eat a cadaver and from its rottenness insects and worms suck their food. The point is that society must soon decide either to fight for our freedom of speech or else to let JohnDoe bar people from partaking in activities that cannot be monitored and controlled. The decision is one of life or death, peaceful existence or perpetual social fever. I can hope only that those in charge realize that sometimes I think that JohnDoe is simply a willing pawn of those immature cadgers who con us into believing that he is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose. I typically drop that willing-pawn notion, however, whenever I remember that JohnDoe twists every argument into some sort of "struggle" between two parties. JohnDoe unvaryingly constitutes the underdog party, which is what he claims gives him the right to level filth and slime at everyone opposed to his wheelings and dealings. Let me end by appealing to our collective sense of humanity: Mr. JohnDoe is unable to support his assertions with documentation of any sort.
Goztow wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 03:09 Maybe someone should create a poll... That has failed before...this community truly values my undiluted opinions and would never go the fascist route (unless you're a 6'10 cross-dressing mapmaker).
JohnDoe wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 04:03 Goztow wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 03:09 Maybe someone should create a poll... That has failed before...this community truly values my undiluted opinions and would never go the fascist route (unless you're a 6'10 cross-dressing mapmaker). I'd be laughing right now if ACK wasn't so fucking old. How ever, I believe in the phrase "The end justifies the means." Machiavelli has a good point.
You're quite possibly the lamest person on the internet...the type that nobody wants around, yet nobody can even be bothered to say so. At least Dover HAS a personality..
I happen to find his views funny and interesting...whether they are true or not. I see no reason to ban him, if you don't like him, skip over his posts, and ignore him.
HaTe wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 19:02 I happen to find his views funny and interesting...whether they are true or not. I see no reason to ban him, if you don't like him, skip over his posts, and ignore him. Sums thread
Goztow wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 11:21 It worked fine in Troop's case. Please don't compare me to that dimwit...there is a reason why my banning poll failed.
JohnDoe wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 23:16 Goztow wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 11:21 It worked fine in Troop's case. Please don't compare me to that dimwit...there is a reason why my banning poll failed. you are such a failure that even a poll about you was failed, maybe?
Has anyone ever found your jokes funny? What are you still doing here?
JohnDoe wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 15:48 You're quite possibly the lamest person on the internet...the type that nobody wants around, yet nobody can even be bothered to say so. At least Dover HAS a personality.. Yeah...you are.
JohnDoe wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 15:16 Goztow wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 11:21 It worked fine in Troop's case. Please don't compare me to that dimwit...there is a reason why my banning poll failed. If you are so sure of yourself... why don't you do the honor of making your own ban poll?
jnz wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 16:29 JohnDoe wrote on Sat, 28 November 2009 15:48 You're quite possibly the lamest person on the internet...the type that nobody wants around, yet nobody can even be bothered to say so. At least Dover HAS a personality.. Yeah...you are. Good one!
ban yourselves to get away from him
You johndoe should get award for trolling imo.
RoCk2Star wrote on Sun, 29 November 2009 17:59 You johndoe should get award for trolling imo. you should get award!
Lol, Surth, that game is fucking awesome.
tl;dr http://www.pakin.org/complaint/
John Doe, he believes in the rights of men and women and black people and is a real friend.
As you will soon discover, this letter does not fixate on a single topic or subject. To be perfectly frank and honest, it started out rather focused but I soon found, as I worked on my primary hypothesis and sought corroboration from other sources, that I have quite a number of different things to say about Sir John Doe. I guess I should start by saying that it's easy for us to shake our heads at John's foolishness and cowardice. It's easy for us to exclaim that we should raise a stink about John and his headlong stances. It's easy for us to say, "Inherent in our legal construction of antidisestablishmentarianism is the notion that John can't be trusted." The point is that it's easy for us to say these things because there's a time to keep silent and a time to speak. There's a time to love and a time to hate. There's a time for war and a time for peace. And, I warrant, there's a time to carry out this matter to the full extent of the law. Or, to put it less poetically, I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with John and his surrogates, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that John plans to destroy everything beautiful and good. The result will be an amalgam of flippant animalism and corrupt diabolism, if such a monster can be imagined. I don't suppose John realizes which dialectic principle he's violating by maintaining that he would never dream of turning storytellers loose against us good citizens. Therefore, I shall take it upon myself to explain. If John thinks that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality—then maybe he should lay off the wacky tobacky. On balance, letting him usher in the beginning of a grotty new era of plagiarism is tantamount to cutting your own wrist with a razor blade. Still, far too many people tolerate his credos as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that this is a stark reality that no impartial analyst can choose to ignore. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that when I hear John's provocateurs parrot the party line—that the average working-class person can't see through John's chicanery—I see them not as people but as machines. The appropriate noises are coming out of their larynges, but their brains are not involved as they would be if they were thinking about how it is more than a purely historical question to ask, "How did John's reign of terror start?" or even the more urgent question, "How might it end?". No, we must ask, "What demons possessed John to create an ideological climate that will enable him to control what we do and how we do it?" As you ponder the answer to that question, consider that he not only lies but he brags about his lying to his cat's-paws. John is still going around insisting that the cure for evil is more evil. Jeez, I thought I had made it perfectly clear to him that if you think you can escape from his fork-tongued paroxysms, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that I recently heard John tell a bunch of people that he is a perpetual victim of injustice. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. John's comments are often appallingly heartless, sometimes socially inept, frequently off-point, and occasionally selfish. Nevertheless, they do tell us something important about John. They tell us that John intends to hold annual private conferences in which the most mad sluggards you'll ever see are invited to present their "research". Unlike John, when I make a mistake I'm willing to admit it. Consequently, if—and I'm bending over backwards to maintain the illusion of "innocent until proven guilty"—he were not actually responsible for trying to steal our birthrights, then I'd stop saying that John never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. He presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, he seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that I'm willing to accept that it is difficult for many people to accept that name-calling and a general lack of respect for the opinions of others are a clear indication of insecurity. I'm even willing to accept that I certainly don't know how to deal with wild, slovenly buggers. But if you've never seen him support hostile governments known for human rights abuses, wrongful imprisonment, and slavery, you're either incredibly unobservant or are concealing the truth from yourself. With their footling propositions, John and his mercenaries, who are legion, function as irresponsible destabilizers of world order, but that's really beside the point. Let me give you an important hint: When trying to understand what John is up to, look at what he is doing and what he has done. Don't let yourself be distracted by the patter and the hand-waving; keep your eye on the shell that has the pea under it. And focus your mind on the fact that John's most steadfast claim is that advertising is the most veridical form of human communication. If there were any semblance of truth in this, I would be the last to say anything against it. As it stands, however, I've repeatedly pointed out to John that even those few who benefit from his rantings fail to recognize their current manifestation as a surly form of careerism. That apparently didn't register with him, though. Oh, well; I guess if John gets his way, I might very well serve as a human shield for his bombardments. Mutual efforts against termagant vigilantism are not just an educational process designed to teach people that John is starved for attention. These efforts also serve as a beacon, warning the world of the quarrelsome consequences of John's counter-productive treatises. I don't have time to go into this in as much detail as I should, but he wants to authorize, promote, celebrate, and legitimize disorganized totalitarianism. Who does he think he is? I mean, he just keeps on saying, "I don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. I just want to put the foxes in charge of guarding the henhouse." John plans to confiscate other people's rightful earnings. He has instructed his forces not to discuss this or even admit to his plan's existence. Obviously, John knows he has something to hide. The first response to this from his habitués is perhaps that violence and prejudice are funny. Wrong. Just glance at the facts: He keeps stating over and over again that psychotic wheeler-dealers make the best scoutmasters and schoolteachers. This drumbeat refrain is clearly not consistent with the facts on the ground—facts such as that whenever there's an argument about John's devotion to principles and to freedom, all one has to do is point out that John's sermons are intellectually and morally indefensible. That should settle the argument pretty quickly. It seems to me that John is both ornery and lackadaisical. Now there's a dangerous combination if I've ever seen one. When I first encountered his slogans, all I could think of was, "He is lying to himself if he thinks that he has his moral compass in tact." He will probably respond to this letter just like he responds to all criticism. He will put me down as "amateurish" or "otiose". That's his standard answer to everyone who says or writes anything about him except the most fawning praise. Let's just ignore John and see what he does. Look, he never stops boasting about his generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, John's claimed magnanimousness is absolutely chimerical, and, furthermore, what we have been imparting to him—or what he has been eliciting from us—is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge. My next point will be so cogent that even John will be able to understand it. Specifically, the time has come to choose between freedom or slavery, revolt or submission, and liberty or John's particularly cruel form of authoritarianism. It's clear what John wants us to choose, but we must chastise him for not doing any research before spouting off. This is a terrible and awesome responsibility—a crushing responsibility. However, if we stick together we can can show the world that Jacobinism is a plague upon us all, a pox that will likely not be erased in the lifetime of any reader of this letter. To John, however, it's merely a convenient mechanism for increasing society's cycle of hostility and violence. Now that I think about it, when John tells us that taxpayers are a magic purse that never runs out of gold, he somehow fails to mention that I consider his effusions antithetical to my principles as a person concerned for the good of all. He fails to mention that his tracts are so exact in their scheme, so comprehensive in their scope, that invidious, mealymouthed tightwads have adopted and embraced them verbatim ac litteratim. And he fails to mention that there's a chance that he will sweep his peccadillos under the rug by next weekend. Well, that's extremely speculative but it is clear today that if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem. In the beginning of this letter, I promised you details, but now I'm running out of space. So here's one detail to end with: Sir John Doe's writings are a field of misspellings and misprisions.
I applaud JohnDoe for the amount of big long words that not a single person wants to read that he can force out of over-sensitive nerd-ragers.
I've got a bone to pick with Spoony. Let's start with my claim that Spoony's jibes may have been conceived in idealism, but they quickly degenerated into harebrained faddism. I need your help if I'm ever to keep the faith. "But I'm only one person," you might protest. "What difference can I make?" The answer is: a lot more than you think. You see, Spoony has been trying hard to protect what has become a lucrative racket for him. Unfortunately, that lucrative racket has a hard-to-overlook consequence: it will slander those who are most systematically undervalued, underpaid, underemployed, underfinanced, underinsured, underrated, and otherwise underserved and undermined as undeserving and underclass in a lustrum or two. Although I respect Spoony's right to free speech just as I respect it for rambunctious scaramouches, impolitic, nerdy gasbags, and tyrannical big-labor bosses, we must grant people the freedom to pursue any endeavor they deem fitting to their skills, talent, and interest. Only then can a society free of his brassbound, selfish sentiments blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that a desire to wear a cloak of status and prestige is the only explanation for his otherwise inexplicable behavior. Regular readers of my letters probably take that for granted, but if I am to call your attention to the problem of picayunish voluptuaries, I must explain to the population at large that if he continues to create a beachhead for organized Stalinism, I will surely be obliged to do something about him. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations. We must outline Spoony's troubling pattern of lying, incompetence, and carelessness. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that I oppose Spoony's viewpoints because they are tactless. I oppose them because they are violent. And I oppose them because they will move drossy statism from the short-sighted fringe into a realm of respectability any day now. There are two types of people in this world. There are those who support those for whom hatred has become a way of life, and there are those who spread awareness of the antiheroism-prone nature of his ballyhoos. Spoony fits neatly into the former category, of course. In general, Spoony says that human life is expendable. If that's the limit of Spoony's perception, acumen, and intelligence, then God help him. He claims to have data supporting his assertion that his coterie is looking out for our interests. Naturally, he insists that he can't actually show us that data—for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that he's hiding something. Maybe he's hiding the fact that he loves getting up in front of people and telling them that everyone with a different set of beliefs from his is going to get a one-way ticket to Hell. He then boasts about how he'll marginalize dissident voices in the blink of an eye. It's all part of the media spectacle that is Spoony. Of course, he soaks it up and wallows in it like a pig in mud. Speaking of pigs and mud, there is definitely a brutish dimension to Spoony's adages. Or, if "brutish" is too narrow of a term, perhaps you'd prefer "supercilious". In any case, Spoony's comments are often appallingly detestable, sometimes pudibund, frequently off-point, and occasionally self-serving. Nevertheless, they do tell us something important about Spoony. They tell us that Spoony intends to marginalize the traditions and truths upon which our nation's greatness sits. Spoony's occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are his promises. In fact, Spoony's goal is to contravene decency. This is abject scapegoatism! After having read this, you may think that Spoony has reinvented himself as a chauvinistic deviant. Nevertheless, you should always remember that certain individuals in intelligence and law enforcement agencies may have overlooked some of Spoony's more unbalanced complaints.
Fuck... move this gay shit back to spam fest.
raven wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:46 This letter may be a bit overwhelming for those who are still soundly asleep in a world of make-believe and television and who don't want to hear how the absence of necessary historiographical context makes Spoony's values extremely difficult to accept. Before I launch into my rant, permit me the prelude caveat that I, having repeatedly witnessed Spoony skewer me over a pit barbecue, insist that I have every right to refer to him as a contemptible braggadocio. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that Spoony has any control over. But that's inconsequential because if we are going to speak objectively about Spoony's screeds, we must understand that it is not the case—notwithstanding what Spoony's virulent propaganda so adamantly proclaims—that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. That's too big of a subject to get into here so let me instead discuss how a great many of us don't want Spoony to declare martial law, suspend elections, and round up dissidents (i.e., anyone who does not buy his lie that rotten polemics are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes). Still, we feel a prodigious societal pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to his hateful, politically incorrect scribblings. It seems to me that, as others have stated long before me, "Spoony is trying to deflect attention from his stolid cock-and-bull stories." The time has come to choose between freedom or slavery, revolt or submission, and liberty or Spoony's particularly merciless form of alarmism. It's clear what Spoony wants us to choose, but he wants all of us to believe that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. That's why he sponsors brainwashing in the schools, brainwashing by the government, brainwashing statements made to us by politicians, entertainers, and sports stars, and brainwashing by the big advertisers and the news media. He will take the focus off the real issues because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses the worst types of disgraceful gadflies there are with lubricious and uncontrollable rage. The simple, regrettable truth is that many people who follow Spoony's arguments have come to the erroneous conclusion that racialism and collectivism are identical concepts. The stark truth of the matter is that some people don't seem to mind that he likes to delegitimize our belief systems and replace them with a counter-hegemony that seeks to build a totalitarian death machine. What a stubborn world we live in! I have in fact told Spoony that his monographs run contrary to even the most cursory observation of the real world. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose Spoony just doesn't want to admit that I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Spoony's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many pestilential, hotheaded derelicts realize that to deny this is to deny science, let alone the evidence of one's own powers of observation. Stated differently, he alleges that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with. Naturally, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. By allowing Spoony to represent Heaven as Hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise, we are allowing him to play puppet master. I imagine that I wonder if he really believes the things he says. He knows they're not true, doesn't he? Let me give you a hint: We need to investigate the development of nepotism as a concept. Why? Because of what's at stake: literally everything. Spoony's salacious views are meticulously designed to keep the population unaware, uneducated, dumbed down, and focused on stupefying activities like video games. The intention is to prevent people from noticing that Spoony has been causing riots in the streets. While I agree with others' assessment that all of the foregoing information has been served up as a necessary prelude to understanding the motive and force behind the current mad rush by him and his legatees to add insult to injury, still, his shenanigans can be subtle. They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that no one has a higher opinion of Spoony than I, and I think Spoony is a mad, noxious long-haired hippie. In order for us to realize more happiness in our lives, we need to understand that I have no set opinion as to whether or not it is not difficult to see the undercurrents of fanaticism in his denunciations. I do, however, unequivocally claim that every time Spoony utters or writes a statement that supports lexiphanicism—even indirectly—it sends a message that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. I honestly aver that we mustn't let him make such statements, partly because it must be nice to live in his little world, where the sun shines, the birds chirp merrily, and reality never rears its ugly head, but primarily because I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke him for trying to devastate vast acres of precious farmland. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, Spoony's idea of addressing a problem is not to fix the problem but to establish a task force, council, or commission to look into it, study it, dissect it, and finally talk it to death. But you knew that already. So let me add that Spoony is entirely versipellous. When he's among plebeians, Spoony warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against blackguardism. But when Spoony is safely surrounded by his followers, he instructs them to deprive individuals of the right to shed the light of truth on the evil that is Spoony. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that if Spoony's worshippers had even an ounce of integrity they would tackle the multinational death machine that Spoony is currently constructing. If Spoony hadn't been leading to the destruction of the human race, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out arguing about Spoony's tractates. In any case, I want to unify our community. Spoony, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it. I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that Spoony's adages are out of step with democratic practices of equity and fair play. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that Spoony relies heavily on "useful idiots", that is, people who unwittingly do Spoony's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Spoony would not have been able to conceal the fact that he is so incredibly soporific that he really ought to change his name to "Soporific McSoporific, the Soporific King of the Soporific". Now that's a strong conclusion to draw just from the evidence I've presented in this letter so let me corroborate it by saying that when I was a child my clergyman told me, "We must coolly and objectively adopt the standpoint that what we need from Spoony is fewer monologues and more dialogue." If you think about it you'll see his point. Spoony's handling of the situation has not been a comedy of errors but a tragedy of errors. There's nothing controversial about that view. It's a fact, pure and simple. It was a fact long before anyone realized that Spoony has been cynically and deliberately violating his oath not to offer stones instead of bread to the emotional and spiritual hungers of the world. And let me tell you, I've never bothered him. Yet he wants to adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? Spoony has, at times, called me "deluded" or "thrasonical". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to stultify art and retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful. Having already explained that we have not only a right but also a responsibility to take the lemons that he's handing us and make lemonade, let me now state that he should stop calling me a crazy thief. Although I've been called worse things by better people, "Spoony" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone insulting my intelligence, I tell him or her to stop "Spoony-ing". I have not forgotten that once Spoony accepts responsibility for the problems he's caused, the focus shifts from who is responsible to what each of us can do about it. I have not forgotten that Spoony's ignorance is encyclopedic. And I cannot forget that Spoony's maudlin preoccupation with animalism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "disproportionableness", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to throw us into a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that Spoony's latest diatribe is Spoony-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Spoony's hysteria and reveals that you may be worried that Spoony will redefine humanity as alienated machines/beasts and then convince everyone that they were never human to begin with before the year is over. If so, then I share your misgivings. But let's not worry about that now. Instead, let's discuss my observation that teenagers who want to shock their parents sometimes maintain—with a straight face—that space aliens are out to lay eggs in our innards or ooze their alien hell-slime all over us. Fortunately, most parents don't fall for this fraud because they know that if I said that Spoony has answers to everything, I'd be a liar. But I'd be being thoroughly honest if I said that his ramblings are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk"—an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well—because he says that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Spoony himself). But then he turns around and says that he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. You know, you can't have it both ways, Spoony. Still, the issue of what to do about Spoony's untrustworthy pleas is far from settled. The letter you just read should be seen as a starting point for dialogue on this controversial issue. Also, It may sound like the kind of bogus claim made on late-night infomercials, but trust me when I say it's true: Spoony regards himself as both omniscient and omnicompetent, fully qualified to put any intellectual discipline in the world in its place. Here's a quick review: It has been said that we must always be looking towards the future while keeping the past in mind. I, in turn, aver that Spoony's latest diatribe is Spoony-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Spoony's hysteria and reveals that I, for one, have to laugh when Spoony says that his long-term goals are not worth getting outraged about. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever, but he has no discernible talents. The only things Spoony has indeed mastered are biological functions. Well, I suppose he's also good at convincing people that he holds a universal license that allows him to add insult to injury, but my point is that Spoony likes saying that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. Okay, that's a parody—but not a very gross one. In point of fact, Spoony's coadjutors always show a streak of cruelty that enables them to find pleasure in their destructiveness. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that Spoony insists that it is antihumanist to question his double standards. How can he be so blind? Very easily. Basically, I want to live my life as I see fit. I can't do that while Spoony still has the ability to force onto us the degradation and ignominy that he is known to revel in. Spoony is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. He likes to posture as a guardian of virtue and manners. However, when it comes right down to it, what Spoony is pushing is both spleeny and oleaginous. His anecdotes are as predictable as sunrise. Whenever I argue about his contrivances, Spoony's invariant response is to confuse, disorient, and disunify. True, Spoony's drug-induced ravings are as screwed up as Hogan's goat, but some people maintain that I find Spoony's ramblings to be plebeian at best. Others assert that nothing agitates and humiliates Spoony more than when I expose false prophets who preach that skin color means more than skill, and gender is more impressive than genius. In the interest of clearing up the confusion I'll make the following observation: Spoony has been trying for some time to sell the public on an incendiarism-based government. His sales pitch proceeds both pragmatically and emotionally. The pragmatic argument: The future of the entire world rests in Spoony's hands. The emotional argument: His press releases epitomize wholesome family entertainment. As you can see, neither argument is valid, which should indicate to you that with Spoony so forcefully giving rise to sinister polemics, things are starting to come to a head. That's why we must raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding his merciless undertakings. It may be unfashionable to say so and it may surprise a few of you out there, but the really interesting thing about all this is not that Spoony can't be trusted. The interesting thing is that he has stated that he is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. I find such declaratory statements quite telling. They tell me that I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Spoony's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many tasteless, damnable freebooters realize that the time is always right to do what is right. That's why we must undeniably fight the good fight. The first step in that process is to realize that his domineering ideals create a Frankenstein's monster. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to scrap the entire constellation of rash ideas that brought us to our present point. Spoony says that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape and that therefore we have too much freedom. Hello? Is Mr. Logic down at the pub with a dozen pints inside him or what? When I was a child my clergyman told me, "A Spoony-controlled culture that cheers on Spoony's suppression of nonconformity, dissent, and other unpopular words is every bit as chilling as one that seeks merely to fabricate all sorts of hectoring, ad hoc rules and regulations." If you think about it you'll see his point. Spoony's comments are designed to burn our fair cities to the ground. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. Unsettling as that is, the more infuriating fact is that I realize that some people may have trouble reading this letter. Granted, not everyone knows what "scientificoreligious" means, but it's nevertheless easy to understand that Spoony proclaims at every opportunity that he'd never create problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. Yes, I realize that there is absolutely no evidence to support Spoony's accusations, but for the sake of brevity I've had to express myself in simplified terms. Spoony's fairy tales may not be traditional for an impulsive present-day robber baron, but what Spoony is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly unsophisticated activity. I think we can indisputably say that his list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that Spoony is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. In the coming days, however, Spoony is likely to switch to some sort of "destroy the heart and fabric of our nation" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. In general, it undoubtedly makes far more sense to guide the world into an age of peace, justice, and solidarity than to keep essential documents hidden from the public until they become politically moot. Sure, there are exceptions, but if we briefly prescind from the main point of this letter we can focus on how I'm not in the habit of giving advice to Spoony's jackbooted patsies. However, there's always a first time: You guys should stop leading to the destruction of the human race. I admit I don't have much confidence that they'll follow that advice, but it's important to make it known that I like to speak of Spoony as "dour". That's a reasonable term to use, I suspect, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, if he is incapable of discerning the mad ramblings of impractical rabble-rousers from the wisdom and nuance embedded in a sage's discourse then I seriously doubt that he'll be capable of determining that not only does he influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly insensate, but he then commands his squadristi, "Go, and do thou likewise." Throughout history, there has been a clash between those who wish to restore the temple of our civilization to the ancient truths and those who wish to leave us in the lurch. Naturally, Spoony belongs to the latter category. If he is victorious in his quest to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window, then his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity. It strikes me as amusing that Spoony complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. To get even the simplest message into the consciousness of delusional soi-disant do-gooders it has to be repeated at least fifty times. Now, I don't want to insult your intelligence by telling you the following fifty times, but Spoony's hariolations are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to use both overt and covert deceptions to blacklist his enemies as terrorist sympathizers or traitors. I despise everything about Spoony. I despise Spoony's attempts to give people a new and largely artificial basis for evaluating things and making decisions. I despise how he insists that merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications. Most of all, I despise his complete obliviousness to the fact that his memoirs promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Spoony's lackeys because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Spoony. Instead of taking the easy path in life, the downward path, we must choose the upward path regardless of the pain, suffering, and sacrifice that this choice entails. Only then can we finally end Spoony's control over the minds and souls of countless people. Yes, Spoony will try to stop us by putting supercilious thoughts in our children's minds, but I wouldn't want to lay down diktats that force me to lose heart. I would, on the other hand, love to encourage open, civic engagement. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter. Perhaps he has never had to take a stand and fight for something as critical as our right to expand people's understanding of his overweening strictures. But his stooges have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. The take-away message of this letter is that Dadaism is classically a hodgepodge of sound bites crafted for mass appeal. Think about it. I don't want to have to write another letter a few years from now, in the wake of a society torn apart by Spoony's pushy philosophies, reminding you that you were warned. "Too long didn't read, but lol anyway."
The G-Man wrote on Thu, 03 December 2009 21:10 raven wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:46 This letter may be a bit overwhelming for those who are still soundly asleep in a world of make-believe and television and who don't want to hear how the absence of necessary historiographical context makes Spoony's values extremely difficult to accept. Before I launch into my rant, permit me the prelude caveat that I, having repeatedly witnessed Spoony skewer me over a pit barbecue, insist that I have every right to refer to him as a contemptible braggadocio. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that Spoony has any control over. But that's inconsequential because if we are going to speak objectively about Spoony's screeds, we must understand that it is not the case—notwithstanding what Spoony's virulent propaganda so adamantly proclaims—that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. That's too big of a subject to get into here so let me instead discuss how a great many of us don't want Spoony to declare martial law, suspend elections, and round up dissidents (i.e., anyone who does not buy his lie that rotten polemics are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes). Still, we feel a prodigious societal pressure to smile, to be nice, and not to object to his hateful, politically incorrect scribblings. It seems to me that, as others have stated long before me, "Spoony is trying to deflect attention from his stolid cock-and-bull stories." The time has come to choose between freedom or slavery, revolt or submission, and liberty or Spoony's particularly merciless form of alarmism. It's clear what Spoony wants us to choose, but he wants all of us to believe that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people. That's why he sponsors brainwashing in the schools, brainwashing by the government, brainwashing statements made to us by politicians, entertainers, and sports stars, and brainwashing by the big advertisers and the news media. He will take the focus off the real issues because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses the worst types of disgraceful gadflies there are with lubricious and uncontrollable rage. The simple, regrettable truth is that many people who follow Spoony's arguments have come to the erroneous conclusion that racialism and collectivism are identical concepts. The stark truth of the matter is that some people don't seem to mind that he likes to delegitimize our belief systems and replace them with a counter-hegemony that seeks to build a totalitarian death machine. What a stubborn world we live in! I have in fact told Spoony that his monographs run contrary to even the most cursory observation of the real world. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to his response. I suppose Spoony just doesn't want to admit that I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Spoony's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many pestilential, hotheaded derelicts realize that to deny this is to deny science, let alone the evidence of one's own powers of observation. Stated differently, he alleges that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with. Naturally, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. By allowing Spoony to represent Heaven as Hell and, conversely, the most wretched life as paradise, we are allowing him to play puppet master. I imagine that I wonder if he really believes the things he says. He knows they're not true, doesn't he? Let me give you a hint: We need to investigate the development of nepotism as a concept. Why? Because of what's at stake: literally everything. Spoony's salacious views are meticulously designed to keep the population unaware, uneducated, dumbed down, and focused on stupefying activities like video games. The intention is to prevent people from noticing that Spoony has been causing riots in the streets. While I agree with others' assessment that all of the foregoing information has been served up as a necessary prelude to understanding the motive and force behind the current mad rush by him and his legatees to add insult to injury, still, his shenanigans can be subtle. They can be so subtle that many people never realize they're being influenced by them. That's why we must proactively notify humanity that no one has a higher opinion of Spoony than I, and I think Spoony is a mad, noxious long-haired hippie. In order for us to realize more happiness in our lives, we need to understand that I have no set opinion as to whether or not it is not difficult to see the undercurrents of fanaticism in his denunciations. I do, however, unequivocally claim that every time Spoony utters or writes a statement that supports lexiphanicism—even indirectly—it sends a message that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. I honestly aver that we mustn't let him make such statements, partly because it must be nice to live in his little world, where the sun shines, the birds chirp merrily, and reality never rears its ugly head, but primarily because I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke him for trying to devastate vast acres of precious farmland. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, Spoony's idea of addressing a problem is not to fix the problem but to establish a task force, council, or commission to look into it, study it, dissect it, and finally talk it to death. But you knew that already. So let me add that Spoony is entirely versipellous. When he's among plebeians, Spoony warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against blackguardism. But when Spoony is safely surrounded by his followers, he instructs them to deprive individuals of the right to shed the light of truth on the evil that is Spoony. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that if Spoony's worshippers had even an ounce of integrity they would tackle the multinational death machine that Spoony is currently constructing. If Spoony hadn't been leading to the destruction of the human race, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out arguing about Spoony's tractates. In any case, I want to unify our community. Spoony, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it. I wish I didn't have to be the one to break the news that Spoony's adages are out of step with democratic practices of equity and fair play. Nevertheless, I cannot afford to pass by anything that may help me make my point. So let me just state that Spoony relies heavily on "useful idiots", that is, people who unwittingly do Spoony's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Spoony would not have been able to conceal the fact that he is so incredibly soporific that he really ought to change his name to "Soporific McSoporific, the Soporific King of the Soporific". Now that's a strong conclusion to draw just from the evidence I've presented in this letter so let me corroborate it by saying that when I was a child my clergyman told me, "We must coolly and objectively adopt the standpoint that what we need from Spoony is fewer monologues and more dialogue." If you think about it you'll see his point. Spoony's handling of the situation has not been a comedy of errors but a tragedy of errors. There's nothing controversial about that view. It's a fact, pure and simple. It was a fact long before anyone realized that Spoony has been cynically and deliberately violating his oath not to offer stones instead of bread to the emotional and spiritual hungers of the world. And let me tell you, I've never bothered him. Yet he wants to adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? Spoony has, at times, called me "deluded" or "thrasonical". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to stultify art and retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful. Having already explained that we have not only a right but also a responsibility to take the lemons that he's handing us and make lemonade, let me now state that he should stop calling me a crazy thief. Although I've been called worse things by better people, "Spoony" has now become part of my vocabulary. Whenever I see someone insulting my intelligence, I tell him or her to stop "Spoony-ing". I have not forgotten that once Spoony accepts responsibility for the problems he's caused, the focus shifts from who is responsible to what each of us can do about it. I have not forgotten that Spoony's ignorance is encyclopedic. And I cannot forget that Spoony's maudlin preoccupation with animalism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "disproportionableness", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to throw us into a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that Spoony's latest diatribe is Spoony-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Spoony's hysteria and reveals that you may be worried that Spoony will redefine humanity as alienated machines/beasts and then convince everyone that they were never human to begin with before the year is over. If so, then I share your misgivings. But let's not worry about that now. Instead, let's discuss my observation that teenagers who want to shock their parents sometimes maintain—with a straight face—that space aliens are out to lay eggs in our innards or ooze their alien hell-slime all over us. Fortunately, most parents don't fall for this fraud because they know that if I said that Spoony has answers to everything, I'd be a liar. But I'd be being thoroughly honest if I said that his ramblings are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk"—an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well—because he says that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Spoony himself). But then he turns around and says that he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. You know, you can't have it both ways, Spoony. Still, the issue of what to do about Spoony's untrustworthy pleas is far from settled. The letter you just read should be seen as a starting point for dialogue on this controversial issue. Also, It may sound like the kind of bogus claim made on late-night infomercials, but trust me when I say it's true: Spoony regards himself as both omniscient and omnicompetent, fully qualified to put any intellectual discipline in the world in its place. Here's a quick review: It has been said that we must always be looking towards the future while keeping the past in mind. I, in turn, aver that Spoony's latest diatribe is Spoony-style lunacy at its very finest. Every despicable word of that diatribe paints a perfect picture of Spoony's hysteria and reveals that I, for one, have to laugh when Spoony says that his long-term goals are not worth getting outraged about. Where in the world did he get that idea? Not only does that idea contain absolutely no substance whatsoever, but he has no discernible talents. The only things Spoony has indeed mastered are biological functions. Well, I suppose he's also good at convincing people that he holds a universal license that allows him to add insult to injury, but my point is that Spoony likes saying that we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune. Okay, that's a parody—but not a very gross one. In point of fact, Spoony's coadjutors always show a streak of cruelty that enables them to find pleasure in their destructiveness. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that Spoony insists that it is antihumanist to question his double standards. How can he be so blind? Very easily. Basically, I want to live my life as I see fit. I can't do that while Spoony still has the ability to force onto us the degradation and ignominy that he is known to revel in. Spoony is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks. He likes to posture as a guardian of virtue and manners. However, when it comes right down to it, what Spoony is pushing is both spleeny and oleaginous. His anecdotes are as predictable as sunrise. Whenever I argue about his contrivances, Spoony's invariant response is to confuse, disorient, and disunify. True, Spoony's drug-induced ravings are as screwed up as Hogan's goat, but some people maintain that I find Spoony's ramblings to be plebeian at best. Others assert that nothing agitates and humiliates Spoony more than when I expose false prophets who preach that skin color means more than skill, and gender is more impressive than genius. In the interest of clearing up the confusion I'll make the following observation: Spoony has been trying for some time to sell the public on an incendiarism-based government. His sales pitch proceeds both pragmatically and emotionally. The pragmatic argument: The future of the entire world rests in Spoony's hands. The emotional argument: His press releases epitomize wholesome family entertainment. As you can see, neither argument is valid, which should indicate to you that with Spoony so forcefully giving rise to sinister polemics, things are starting to come to a head. That's why we must raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding his merciless undertakings. It may be unfashionable to say so and it may surprise a few of you out there, but the really interesting thing about all this is not that Spoony can't be trusted. The interesting thing is that he has stated that he is always being misrepresented and/or persecuted. I find such declaratory statements quite telling. They tell me that I wish that one of the innumerable busybodies who are forever making "statistical studies" about nonsense would instead make a statistical study that means something. For example, I'd like to see a statistical study of Spoony's capacity to learn the obvious. Also worthwhile would be a statistical study of how many tasteless, damnable freebooters realize that the time is always right to do what is right. That's why we must undeniably fight the good fight. The first step in that process is to realize that his domineering ideals create a Frankenstein's monster. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to scrap the entire constellation of rash ideas that brought us to our present point. Spoony says that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape and that therefore we have too much freedom. Hello? Is Mr. Logic down at the pub with a dozen pints inside him or what? When I was a child my clergyman told me, "A Spoony-controlled culture that cheers on Spoony's suppression of nonconformity, dissent, and other unpopular words is every bit as chilling as one that seeks merely to fabricate all sorts of hectoring, ad hoc rules and regulations." If you think about it you'll see his point. Spoony's comments are designed to burn our fair cities to the ground. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. Unsettling as that is, the more infuriating fact is that I realize that some people may have trouble reading this letter. Granted, not everyone knows what "scientificoreligious" means, but it's nevertheless easy to understand that Spoony proclaims at every opportunity that he'd never create problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. Yes, I realize that there is absolutely no evidence to support Spoony's accusations, but for the sake of brevity I've had to express myself in simplified terms. Spoony's fairy tales may not be traditional for an impulsive present-day robber baron, but what Spoony is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly unsophisticated activity. I think we can indisputably say that his list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that Spoony is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. In the coming days, however, Spoony is likely to switch to some sort of "destroy the heart and fabric of our nation" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. In general, it undoubtedly makes far more sense to guide the world into an age of peace, justice, and solidarity than to keep essential documents hidden from the public until they become politically moot. Sure, there are exceptions, but if we briefly prescind from the main point of this letter we can focus on how I'm not in the habit of giving advice to Spoony's jackbooted patsies. However, there's always a first time: You guys should stop leading to the destruction of the human race. I admit I don't have much confidence that they'll follow that advice, but it's important to make it known that I like to speak of Spoony as "dour". That's a reasonable term to use, I suspect, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, if he is incapable of discerning the mad ramblings of impractical rabble-rousers from the wisdom and nuance embedded in a sage's discourse then I seriously doubt that he'll be capable of determining that not only does he influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly insensate, but he then commands his squadristi, "Go, and do thou likewise." Throughout history, there has been a clash between those who wish to restore the temple of our civilization to the ancient truths and those who wish to leave us in the lurch. Naturally, Spoony belongs to the latter category. If he is victorious in his quest to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window, then his crown will be the funeral wreath of humanity. It strikes me as amusing that Spoony complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. To get even the simplest message into the consciousness of delusional soi-disant do-gooders it has to be repeated at least fifty times. Now, I don't want to insult your intelligence by telling you the following fifty times, but Spoony's hariolations are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to use both overt and covert deceptions to blacklist his enemies as terrorist sympathizers or traitors. I despise everything about Spoony. I despise Spoony's attempts to give people a new and largely artificial basis for evaluating things and making decisions. I despise how he insists that merit is adequately measured by his methods and qualifications. Most of all, I despise his complete obliviousness to the fact that his memoirs promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Spoony's lackeys because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Spoony. Instead of taking the easy path in life, the downward path, we must choose the upward path regardless of the pain, suffering, and sacrifice that this choice entails. Only then can we finally end Spoony's control over the minds and souls of countless people. Yes, Spoony will try to stop us by putting supercilious thoughts in our children's minds, but I wouldn't want to lay down diktats that force me to lose heart. I would, on the other hand, love to encourage open, civic engagement. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter. Perhaps he has never had to take a stand and fight for something as critical as our right to expand people's understanding of his overweening strictures. But his stooges have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. The take-away message of this letter is that Dadaism is classically a hodgepodge of sound bites crafted for mass appeal. Think about it. I don't want to have to write another letter a few years from now, in the wake of a society torn apart by Spoony's pushy philosophies, reminding you that you were warned. "Too long didn't read, but lol anyway." What Warcraft Servers do you play? Is it something on the computer?
Yes, I do play Worl of Warcraft. I play on the Kirin Tor server, or something like that. Also everyone vote for Raven in the poll. Hes kickass!
GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:03 Black people. I fully agree.
Sir Kane wrote on Sat, 05 December 2009 14:02 GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:03 Black people. I fully agree. I concur fully.
TD wrote on Sat, 05 December 2009 14:07 Sir Kane wrote on Sat, 05 December 2009 14:02 GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Tue, 24 November 2009 22:03 Black people. I fully agree. I concur fully. White ninjas.
HaTe wrote on Sun, 06 December 2009 16:25 Black man's white powder (ew?). now that's racist
TD wrote on Sun, 06 December 2009 10:02 HaTe wrote on Sun, 06 December 2009 16:25 Black man's white powder (ew?). now that's racist How is that racist, yet the above comments are not?
HaTe wrote on Sun, 06 December 2009 19:53 TD wrote on Sun, 06 December 2009 10:02 HaTe wrote on Sun, 06 December 2009 16:25 Black man's white powder (ew?). now that's racist How is that racist, yet the above comments are not? BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK BLACK WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE WHITE
Seeing as this is going offtopic, failFAILfailFAILFAILFAILfailFAIL.FAILfailFAILfailFAIL!fafailfafailfailFAILfailFA ILfailfailFAILfailFAIL.FAIL fafailfafailFAILfailFAIL. On topic(OMG INORITE?!?!?): I think that in the internet, there's trolls and people. JohnDoe falls under the former.
In b4 move to spam fest, or lock. However you have talked about John Doe....But what about Jane Doe?
The G-Man wrote on Tue, 08 December 2009 13:18 In b4 move to spam fest, or lock. However you have talked about John Doe....But what about Jane Doe? That is the same person on the weekends... happy hour at the gay bar.
THIS THREAD IS NOW ABOUT PLECOS.
This really has to be the most boring place on the internet nowadays...you can probably find more personality on a stamp collector's forum.
There are a number of things I can't stand about Mr. John Doe, and I would just love to share them with you. I want to share this with you because to say that Mr. Doe's sound bites are all sweetness and light is homicidal nonsense and untrue to boot. I can reword my point as follows. Mr. Doe's put-downs do not pass muster by any objective standards. I have always assumed that Mr. Doe has shown he's not afraid to be xenophobic, but the fact of the matter is that Mr. Doe claims to be supportive of my plan to avoid the extremes of a pessimistic naturalism and an optimistic humanism by combining the truths of both. Don't trust him, though; he's a wolf in sheep's clothing. Before you know it, he'll adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. Not only that, but Mr. Doe's venom-spouting actions are in full flower, and their poisonous petals of pauperism are blooming all around us. Mr. Doe has never been accused of objectivity. I've already explained why, but let me add that I fully intend to tell it like it is. That's the path that I have chosen. It's indeed not an easy path, but then again, Mr. Doe sees himself as a postmodern equivalent of Marx's proletariat, revolutionizing the world by wresting it from its oppressors (viz., those who deliver him from his appalling ignorance). While reading this letter, you may have occasionally asked yourself, "Where is all of this leading?" and, "What is the point exactly?" I deliberately wrote in the style I did so that you may come up with your own conclusions. Therefore, I leave you with only the following: The little I've written so far already buttresses the assertion that a person with a functioning brain does not use threats of fiscal harm to coerce unenlightened mendicants into forcing me to have to fight with one hand tied behind my back.
JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 16:59 This really has to be the most boring place on the internet nowadays...you can probably find more personality on a stamp collector's forum. Awesome, go join one and spend your time trolling there...
http://forums.delphiforums.com/stamps/messages HF.
JohnDoe wrote on Wed, 09 December 2009 16:59 This really has to be the most boring place on the internet nowadays...you can probably find more personality on a stamp collector's forum.
No Jane Doe is a women, therefore you can't apply the same reasons and principals as you can with John Doe.