• My Complaint About Garry
    19 replies, posted
I need to tell you a little about how Garry has allied himself with the devil and serves him faithfully. And so I shall. I assume you already know that it took no time at all for Garry to succumb to the demons of greed, power, and wealth, but I have something more important to tell you. Let us be witness to the horrifying effects of his uncompanionable insinuations. Let us examine how Garry seeks to disguise the complexity of color, the brutality of class, and the importance of religion and sexual identity in the construction and practice of racism. Let us exhibit the moral values, empathy, and wisdom needed to tell the world that I want you to know that mudslinging is Garry's forte. Knowing, as they say, is half the battle. What remains is to derail Garry's saturnine little schemes. As the adherents of Randian objectivism believe, Garry has the seeds of his own destruction built right into his shallow worldview. Furthermore, as the adherents of empiricism observe, if we do not act now, revolting, cruel fanatics will own our country. If you and I do not speak up now, militant used-car salesmen will attack my character. Not only will our nation pay a terrible price for that, but Garry's grand plan is to replace discourse and open dialogue with sinful mind games and blatant ugliness. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, Garry uses big words like “saccharomucilaginous” to make himself sound important. For that matter, benevolent Nature has equipped another puny creature, the skunk, with a means of making itself seem important, too. Although Garry's criticisms may reek like a skunk, I know some yellow-bellied, ill-natured gilly-gaupuses who actually believe that causing a marked deterioration in our literature, amusements, and social conduct is essential for the safety and welfare of the public. Incredible? Those same people have told me that individual worth is defined by race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that if Garry's attempts to talk about you and me in terms that are not fit to be repeated have spurred us to get the facts out in the hope that somebody will do something to solve the problem, then Garry may have accomplished a useful thing. Although ordinary men and women want to free people from the spell of nonrepresentationalism that Garry has cast over them, Garry wants to stifle the free inquiry of science and the application of its discoveries towards bettering the lot of mankind. This incongruity reveals that he is interpersonally exploitative. That is, he takes advantage of others to achieve his own malapert ends. Why does he do that? I'm sure you already know the answer so I won't bother repeating it. I'd like to emphasize, however, that the acid test for Garry's “kinder, gentler” new publicity stunts should be, “Do they still reap a whirlwind of destroyed marriages, damaged children, and, quite possibly, a globe-wide expression of incurable sexually transmitted diseases?” If the answer is yes then we can conclude that Garry claims to have data supporting his assertion that he is the way, the truth, and the light. 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 is willing to promote truth and justice when it's convenient. But when it threatens his creature comforts, he throws principle to the wind. Garry undoubtedly intends to alter laws, language, and customs in the service of regulating social relations. The direful sequence of that result, so flagrantly hubristic and presumptuous in itself, is that worthless scandalmongers will rub salt into our wounds by next weekend. I like to speak of him as “obdurate”. That's a reasonable term to use, I feel, but let's now try to understand it a little better. For starters, Garry frequently accuses his adversaries of turning us into easy prey for stubborn devotees of conspiracy theories. This is yet another example of the growing lack of civility in our civil discourse that ranges from the mean-spirited to the aberrant and even unprincipled. In a more proper debate, one would instead politely point out that Garry's expositions are based on a technique I'm sure you've heard of. It's called “lying”. Garry, you are welcome to get off my back this time and stay off. He makes it sound like the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. That's the rankest sort of pretense I've ever heard. The reality is that Garry coins polysyllabic neologisms to make his blandishments sound like they're actually important. In fact, his treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary. I use such language purposefully—and somewhat sardonically—to illustrate how Garry would not hesitate to rot our minds with the hallucinatory drug of sexism if he felt he could benefit from doing so. Do you really think that filthy crackpots should be given absolute authority to dominate or intimidate others, as Garry claims? Wake up! If it weren't for Garry's double standards he would have no standards at all. Hence, it's completely a waste of time even to address Garry's hypocrisy. That's why I'll state merely that he certainly wants me to languish in prison on trumped-up charges. If I did, I'm sure the chortles from Garry and his peuplade would be rich and prolonged, especially given how Garry likes to posture as a guardian of virtue and manners. However, when it comes right down to it, what he is pushing is both unsavory and muzzy-headed. As we organize our campaigns against stroppy jobbernowls and formulate responses to their rhetoric, it is critical that we defenestrate Garry's theories and deponticate his prank phone calls. Although Garry would like us to believe that two wrongs make a right, he has given us neither good reason nor credible evidence to believe that. His outbursts, on the other hand, give us good reason to believe that we can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we have to investigate the development of phallocentrism as a concept. The time has come to choose between freedom or slavery, revolt or submission, and liberty or Garry's particularly larcenous form of moral relativism. It's clear what Garry wants us to choose, but he insists that he can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. Although I've already discussed the abject fallaciousness of that argument, the fact remains that by brainwashing his co-conspirators with conspiracism, he makes them easy to lead, easy to program, and easy to enslave. Garry makes it sound like he can override nature. The evidence against that concept is so overwhelming, even an eight-year-old child can recognize it. Even so, it's Garry's belief that my letters demonstrate a desire to threaten our core values, allegiances, and beliefs. I can't understand how anyone could go from anything I ever wrote to such a savage idea. In fact, my letters generally make the diametrically opposite claim, that I intend to provide information and inspiration to as many people as possible. That's the path that I have chosen. It's definitely not an easy path, but then again, I strive to be consistent in my arguments. I can't say that I'm 100% true to this, but Garry's frequent vacillating leads me to believe that it's quite sad that he chooses to squander his talent on this sort of morally corrupt antidisestablishmentarianism. To fully understand that, you need to realize that Garry follows a dual code of morality—one morality for his fellow inimical nihilarians and another for the rest of the world. This is why I am not interested in debating him. One can't have a debate with someone who is so willingly ignorant of the most basic tenets of the subject being discussed. I can't help but wonder: Why does everyone hate Garry? Is it because of his business practices, exclusivity, disloyalty, disrespect, or because Garry keeps trying to rot out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values? As you ponder the answer to that question, consider that I have no doubt that he will make the pot of racialism overboil and scald the whole world before the year is over. He'll probably do so under the pretense of “humanitarian intervention” or some other equally inapposite appellation, but the reality is that Garry promises his bedfellows that as soon as he's finished weaving his misinformed traits, ornery whinges, and crime-stained jobations into a rich tapestry that is sure to lead an active disinformation campaign, 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 no thoughtful person can question that Garry cares for us in the same way that fleas care about dogs. To top that off, Garry is trying to get us to acquiesce to a Faustian bargain. In the short term this bargain may help us bring the communion of knowledge to all of us. Unfortunately, in the long term it will enable Garry to evade responsibility. The underlying reasons and causes for Garry's audacious opuscula must be defined, examined, and resolved, or they'll never cease. But it goes further than that; Garry has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which he is a protective bulwark against the advancing tyranny of mad palookas. Then again, just because Garry is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that we should derive moral guidance from his glitzy, multi-culti, hip-hop, consumption-oriented arguments. For what it's worth, his snippy, lewd philippics can be viewed as the principal threat to our personal freedoms. More emphatically, if we are powerless to rage, rage against the dying of the light, it is because we have allowed Garry to extirpate the things that I unequivocally cherish. My argument is that the hostility and boredom he is experiencing internally is quite evident externally. Ridiculous? Not so. Okay, I've written enough for one letter, so let me just finish by saying that the absurdity of Garry's ipse dixits requires no further comment. [editline]7th June 2014[/editline] [url]http://www.pakin.org/complaint/[/url]
Seems like somebody just found out about thesaurus.
I have never seen garry do much of anything. He rarely posts on the forums or directly interacts with the users, all I know of him doing is stuff regarding his games.
I understood some of that [editline]7th June 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Schmaaa;45027552]I have never seen garry do much of anything. He rarely posts on the forums or directly interacts with the users, all I know of him doing is stuff regarding his games.[/QUOTE] The last thing I read by him was a few years ago when he was making an ant colony or something
oh nevermind
...what the fuck?
[QUOTE=Complifused;45027559]I understood some of that [editline]7th June 2014[/editline] The last thing I read by him was a few years ago when he was making an ant colony or something[/QUOTE] i think they all died garry is a terrible person
It's made using a complaint generator, linked at the bottom of the post.
It is imperative that I give you the following information, which Mr. Garry Newman wants concealed from the public. Before I get moving here, let me point out that I frequently wish to tell Mr. Newman that I indeed feel that we need to do more to acknowledge that there is no justification on any level whatsoever for his daffy exegeses. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue. Do not be fooled by those who fund a vast web of illogical, blinkered mob bosses, puzzleheaded, verbally incontinent calumniators, and inerudite nebbishes. Such people are trying to prevent you from learning that Mr. Newman's most steadfast claim is that the Eleventh Commandment is, “Thou shalt create anomie”. If there were any semblance of truth in this, I would be the last to say anything against it. As it stands, however, several things Mr. Newman 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 aspheterism is a beautiful entelechy that makes us whole. Mr. Newman's detachment from, or denial of, the truth is not just a political tactic or say-anything-to-please character flaw. It reveals an elemental attitude that he shares with cold-blooded stentorian-types: rousing the agitated petite bourgeoisie to chauvinistic fervor and hoodwinking them into doing the devil's work. When I observe Mr. Newman's expositors' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, “monkey see, monkey do”. That's because, like him, they all want to crush the will of all individuals who have expressed political and intellectual opposition to his allegations. Also, while a monkey might think that Mr. Newman's vices are the only true virtues, the fact remains that he has inadvertently provided us with an instructive example that I find useful in illustrating certain ideas. By trivializing the issue, Mr. Newman makes it clear that whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may provide information and inspiration to as many people as possible and, as the alternative, the sticky-fingered and gutless dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Mr. Newman. Choose carefully because there are two things we need to do right away. First, we need to advocate concrete action and specific quantifiable goals. Second—and this is critical so get out your highlighter—we need to ensure that he receives his just deserts. Once those two things are accomplished we can finally start discussing how if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem. Put simply, I have a message for Mr. Newman. My message is that, for the good of us all, he should never install a puppet government that pledges allegiance to his yawping coven. He should never even try to do such a morally corrupt thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by “never” I don't mean “maybe”, “sometimes”, or “it depends”. I mean only that Mr. Newman has been teaching young children to parrot such featherbrained sentences as, “Mr. Newman can scare us by using big words like 'phoneticogrammatical'.” This assault on the innocence of childhood should be rejected in the harshest terms possible. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Mr. Newman thinks that it's okay to embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians. However, he and gnosticism are like white on rice. Think about how easy it's become for the worst types of feckless bourgeoisie there are to make our lives miserable. Before you know it, Mr. Newman's poison will infect us, sicken us, and destroy us. I've said that before and I've said it often, but perhaps I haven't been concrete enough or specific enough, so now I'll try to remedy those shortcomings. I'll try to be a lot more specific and concrete when I explain that whenever I hear Mr. Newman's grunts witter on about how at birth every living being is assigned a celestial serial number or frequency power spectrum, I interpret this poppycock as an implicit request for chemical treatment of their rampant (and generally unacknowledged) Asperger syndrome. Mr. Newman has not yet been successful at making the pot of gangsterism overboil and scald the whole world. Still, give him some time, and I'm sure he'll figure out how to do something at least that pestiferous, probably more so. In any event, if we let Mr. Newman dispense outright misinformation and flashlight-under-the-chin ghost stories, then greed, corruption, and ruffianism will characterize the government. Oppressive measures will be directed against citizens. And lies and deceit will be the stock-in-trade of the media and educational institutions. It is sad to see Mr. Newman get as many people as possible to line up behind the geek-tent barkers at the latest and greatest carnival of incendiarism. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: his asinine, nit-picky casus belli. He is not just obscene. He is unbelievably, astronomically obscene. I'm merely suggesting that Mr. Newman relies heavily on “useful idiots”, that is, people who unwittingly do Mr. Newman's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Mr. Newman would not have been able to conceal the fact that he likes to argue that violence and prejudice are funny. Even if there were a faint glimmer of truth in that argument, it would be extremely faint. The truth is that Mr. Newman maintains that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority—or even a plurality. This is hardly the case. Rather, there is growing evidence that says, to the contrary, that the concepts underlying his small-minded morals are like the Ptolemaic astronomy, which could not have been saved by positing more epicycles or eliminating some of the more glaring discrepancies. The fundamental idea—that the heavens revolve around the Earth—was wrong, just as Mr. Newman's idea that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments is wrong. Mr. Newman is like a parrot that makes noises for attention without any kind of clue as to what it is saying. The best example of this, culled from many, would have to be the time Mr. Newman tried to jawbone aimlessly. Will uncompanionable, lackluster wallies ever show Mr. Newman how he is as wrong as wrong can be? Don't bet on it. The best thing about him is the way that he encourages us to expose some of his more dubious financial dealings. No, wait; Mr. Newman doesn't encourage that. On the contrary, he discourages us from admitting that it takes more than a mass of atrabilious sciolists to purge the darkness from his heart. It takes a great many thoughtful and semi-thoughtful people who are willing to oust him and his cocky vicegerents from anywhere we find them supporting international crime while purporting to oppose it. He likes to talk about how it's okay if his slogans initially cause our quality of life to degrade because “sometime”, “someone” will do “something” “somehow” to counteract that trend. The words sound pretty until you read between the lines and see that Mr. Newman is secretly saying that he intends to eat our nation to its bones. We must balkanize Mr. Newman's backwards flock into an etiolated and sapless agglomeration. Our children depend on that. To increase alienation and delinquency among our young people is Mr. Newman's objective, and temeritous nihilism is his method. I want to talk about the big picture: the next time Mr. Newman decides to threaten the common good, he should think to himself, cui bono?—who benefits? I'm going to be honest here: If Mr. Newman thinks that he can make me apologize for squandering valuable oxygen then he's barking up the wrong tree. Teenagers who want to shock their parents sometimes maintain—with a straight face—that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. Fortunately, most parents don't fall for this fraud because they know that I am reminded of the quote, “Everyone knows of the lust and driving passion that has caused this problem.” This comment is not as sophomoric as it seems because Mr. Newman says that we can change the truth if we don't like it the way it is. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the closet and, when the cops come in, standing in front of the closet door and exclaiming, “They're not in here!”? Let me end by appealing to our collective sense of humanity: Mr. Garry Newman's plan is to impose a Luciferian ideology upon whatever remains of the human race after the final cataclysm brought about by his mindless politics.
man this thread sure is a doozy [B]edit:[/B] 'Randian objectivism' holy shit this generator is great
Within the compass of this letter, I can do no more than indicate, as concisely as I can, relevant considerations that must be taken into account if we are to discuss My Fat Butt's gormless perversions in a rational manner. Whoa! Don't stampede for the exits! I promise I'll get to the main topic of this letter, My's besotted declamations, in just a few sentences. I simply feel it's important first to provide some additional context by mentioning that My is causing all sorts of problems for us. We must grasp these problems with both hands and deal with them in a forthright way. My has managed to mollify his more trusting critics simply by promising not to spread hatred, animosity, and divisiveness. We shall see how long that lasts. In the meantime, My keeps saying that we have no reason to be fearful about the criminally violent trends in our society today and over the past ten to fifteen years. In such statements, as in most of his propaganda, there are major omissions and layers of codswallop wrapped around a small piece of the truth. The real story is that My can't possibly believe that he can walk on water. He's sadistic but he's not that sadistic. It is common knowledge that My really ought to to take something for his hysterical paranoia. I've heard that chlorpromazine works well. Doubtlessly, some sort of medication should awaken My to the fact that he has been offering heinous vendors of sexism a lot of money to revile everything in the most obscene terms and drag it into the filth of the basest possible outlook. This is blood money, plain and simple. Anyone thinking of accepting it should realize that My's viewpoints reek of zabernism. I use the word “reek” because My really struck a nerve with me when he said that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. That lie is a painful reminder that I suspect that My is an unsophisticated demagogue. How else can I characterize a person who did all of the following and then some? Manufacture outrage at his opponents by attributing to them all sorts of money-grubbing, crafty shenanigans Subject us to an intense barrage of misinformation, deception, and hidden propaganda Mollycoddle wily, bookish mooncalves I could lengthen this list, but I shall rest my case. The point is that My's ability to escape punishment for shaking belief in all existing institutions through the systematic perversion of both contemporary and historical facts obviously tells us one thing. It tells us that our passage to Perdition has been booked. I believe it also tells us that by denying us the opportunity to act honorably, My is telegraphing his intentions to pooh-pooh the reams of solid evidence pointing to the existence and operation of an unforgiving coterie of terrorism. Many people respond to My's homicidal treatises in much the same way that they respond to television dramas. They watch them; they talk about them; but they feel no overwhelming compulsion to do anything about them. That's why I insist we change the direction in which our society is headed. Of all the delusions I have ever known, the most xenophobic is the idea that My answers to no one. Still, that doesn't prevent My from implementing a confused parody of justice called “My-ism”. And what about his buddies? They, like My, are callous dunderheads. My hates people who criticize the obvious incongruities presented by him and his attendants. He wants such people nabbed, grabbed, and thrown out of the country. If we don't expose all of his filthy, subversive, and destructive activities, our children will curse us in our graves. Speaking of our children, we need to teach them diligently that My has wandered into the long grass of barbarism. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame My. He needs to realize that he's not special. He's not a beautiful or unique snowflake. He's just another subversive weasel who wants to impose a one-size-fits-all model on how society should function. One of the great mysteries of modern life is, Is My so querimonious as to think that this can go on forever? You see, My attributes the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous “meanings” to ordinary personality characteristics. For example, if you're shy, he calls you “fearful and withdrawn”. If, instead, you're the outgoing and active type, My says you're “acting out due to trauma”. Why does he say such things? I have searched numerous sources for answers to that question. No two sources seem to agree on any given point except for one, that if one could get a Ph.D. in Feudalism, My would be the first in line to have one. Anyway, that's it for this letter. Let My Fat Butt read it and weep.
tried entering "this complaint-letter generator" I am writing this letter to express my concerns about Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator. The main problem with Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is that it's so much fun to use, it's utterly addictive. I find that I spend all of my time using it to generate hysterical complaints about people. I know I should be spending my time commenting on people who complain about the complaint-letter generator's warnings or perhaps rousing people's indignation at people who complain about the complaint-letter generator, but it's just too exciting being able to enter someone's name into a program and getting back a humorous, randomly generated complaint letter that sounds almost like it was written by a human. What surprises me, though, is that some people are so lazy, uncreative, or avaricious as to try to use Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator against itself. Surely, one can find someone or something to complain about, right? Perhaps people who complain about the complaint-letter generator are merely asinine buggers. Another possibility is that they have only half (if that) of the information needed to make an informed decision about pharisaism. In either case, the important point is that Scott Pakin's automatic complaint-letter generator is one of greatest sites on the Web—one that is sure to provide hours of fun for the entire family.
I wish I didn't have to write a letter like this one, but recent events leave me no choice. For complete details, I refer you to my forthcoming book on the subject. I shall here mention only a few random items that may be new or especially interesting to you. For instance, I am annoyed by the bilious and sometimes mingy manifestations of rebelliousness against an inherited civilization of which Facepunch's eulogists do not have the slightest understanding. Let's remember that. Facepunch attributes the most distorted, bizarre, and ludicrous “meanings” to ordinary personality characteristics. For example, if you're shy, it calls you “fearful and withdrawn”. If, instead, you're the outgoing and active type, Facepunch says you're “acting out due to trauma”. Why does it say such things? To answer that question, we need first to consider Facepunch's thought process, which generally takes the following form: (1) Facepunch's crimes are victimless, so (2) the majority of unpatriotic mafia dons work 25 hours a day, eight days a week and thus deserve occasionally to concentrate all the wealth of the world into its own hands. Therefore, (3) the Earth is flat and thus, (4) every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to judge people based solely on hearsay. As you can see, Facepunch's reasoning makes no sense, which leads me to believe that it has wandered into the long grass of Pyrrhonism. 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 most people would agree that it must be reemphasized that Facepunch's helpmeets are stampeding happily and mindlessly toward the precipice of satanic, termagant clericalism. But once you've admitted that, you've admitted that it maintains control over its surrogates using intense peer pressure, manipulation of their guilt feelings, attacks on their sexuality, and fear. And it follows inexorably that, except in special cases, we must drive off and disperse the flighty, antisocial moochers who work both sides of the political fence. This is a terrible and awesome responsibility—a crushing responsibility. However, if we stick together we can can show the world that Facepunch holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City—sterile obstacles to progress who shove the nation towards pauperism. I once told Facepunch that there are a number of complex psychological and social reasons as to why it wants to create division in the name of diversity. How did it respond to that? It proceeded to curse me off using a number of colorful expletives not befitting this letter, which serves only to show that Facepunch's use of the term “incomprehensibility” displays, at best, a tone deafness. The term drips with echoes of classism and warns us all that Facepunch has accused me of writing that there should be publicly financed centers of libertinism. I would clearly hope that even dotty, beastly publicity hounds realize that when you put words in someone else's mouth, you're obviously bound to hear exactly the conclusions you wanted. There is more at play here than Facepunch's purely political game of promoting promiscuity and obscene language. There are ideologies at work, hidden agendas to infantilize and corrupt the public. No matter what else we do, our first move must be to educate everyone about how the inexorable cultural atrophy engendered by Facepunch's homilies will divert us from proclaiming what in our innermost conviction is absolutely necessary before you know it. That's the first step: education. Education alone is not enough, of course. We must also investigate Facepunch's pathological principles, ideals, and objectives. Although I respect Facepunch's right to free speech just as I respect it for corrupt, delirious fribbles, oppugnant, ghastly sensualists, and uninformed palookas, some reputed—as opposed to reputable—members of its coalition quite adamantly warrant that Facepunch's calumnies are Holy Writ. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could contend such a thing, but then again, Facepunch keeps saying that everyone and everything discriminates against it—including the writing on the bathroom stalls. I suggest taking such statements with a grain of salt because its posse has found a rallying cry for its upcoming battle against our most treasured liberties. That rallying cry is, “Facepunch has a close-to-perfect existence that's the envy of the exploitative curmudgeons around it!” It's quotes like that that make me realize that when I hear Facepunch say that everyone who fails to think and act in strict accordance with its requirements is a birdbrained rixatrix, I have to wonder about it. Is it completely jackbooted? Is it simply being power-hungry? Or is it merely embracing a delusion in which it must believe in order to continue believing in itself? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history but to all human culture. Do you really want Facepunch to do the entire country a grave disservice? I think not. Alas, Facepunch can justify anything that brings it a profit. A person could write a whole book on that topic alone. In order to be as brief as possible, though, I'll state simply that Facepunch's reasoning is circular and therefore invalid. In other words, it always begins an argument with its conclusion (e.g., that it has the authority to issue licenses for practicing sadism) and therefore—not surprisingly—it always arrives at that very conclusion. Facepunch is completely unaware of the difference between a correlation and a causation. Although others may disagree with that claim, few would dispute that even Facepunch's emissaries are afraid that Facepunch will practice human sacrifice on a grand scale in some sort of shameless death cult in the immediate years ahead. I have seen their fear manifested over and over again, and it is further evidence that Facepunch is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside itself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of its wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. If Facepunch can't cite the basis for its claim that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to its combative prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers then it should just shut up about it. As this letter draws to a close, let us remind our foes that we will provide light, information, and knowledge about Facepunch's spineless, conscienceless insults. In this task we shall not flag or fail. Whatever the cost may be, we shall take away as many of Facepunch's opportunities for mischief as possible. We shall go on to the end. We shall, with growing confidence and growing strength, protect innocent, little children from querulous drotchels like Facepunch. We shall never surrender.
Parts of what follows below were actually painful to write. However, because of the ongoing misinformation campaigns launched by Facepunch and its apostles I feel it is my duty to write this. The full truth of my conclusion I shall develop in the course of this letter but the conclusion's general outline is that if Facepunch's thinking were cerebral rather than glandular, it wouldn't consider it such a good idea to justify, palliate, or excuse the evils of its heart. While everybody believes in something, Facepunch's simple faith in Maoism will indeed shock and stampede the public into accepting total fascist tyranny. There exists a concerted, well-funded, and aggressive anti-science campaign whose charter is to condemn children to a life of drugs, gangs, drinking, rape, incest, verbal abuse, physical abuse, and a number of other horrors. Facepunch supports this jujuism-oriented campaign's activities by paralyzing needed efforts to shatter the illusion that the cure for evil is more evil. In Facepunch's quest to draw unsuspecting lugs into the orbit of doctrinaire, lackluster drazels it has left no destructive scheme unutilized. It must be pointed out over and over again to Facepunch's spin doctors and, in a broader sense, to the most carnaptious peculators you'll ever see that Facepunch's dream is to assume total control over society's means of production. Those with membership cards in its club will be given whatever they want while the rest of us will be sent away empty-handed. In addition to being completely unfair, such policies promote hurting people's feelings. Furthermore, we must soon make one of the most momentous decisions in history. We must decide whether to let Facepunch make nonrepresentationalism socially acceptable or, alternatively, whether we should work together in an atmosphere of friendship and hope. Upon this decision rests the stability of society and the future peace of the world. My view on this decision is that if my own experience has taught me anything, it's that the facts as I see them simply do not support the false but widely accepted notion that Facepunch can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. That's the end of this letter. If I was unable to convince you that Facepunch is morally irresponsible and mentally feeble, then you should definitely consider contacting me with your supporting or refuting evidence, opinions, personal stories, etc., so that I can make a better argument in my next letter.
a.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/uFfaOp2.png[/img]
I wasn't aware this was the "Post a wall of text V1: We're like War and Peace except less intelligent" thread.
I've reached a point where I feel the need to express my disappointment with Fast Threads. First and foremost, Fast Threads's satellites have learned their scripts well and the rhetoric comes gushing forth with little provocation. I know the following is a cheap shot, but Fast Threads's inclinations are built on lies, and they depend on make-believe for their continuation. Fast Threads's domineering dream is starting to come true. Liberties are being killed by attrition. Deconstructionism is being installed by accretion. The only way that we can reverse these jaundiced, sordid trends is to expose some of Fast Threads's more dubious financial dealings. To be precise, what really irks me is that it has presented us with a Hobson's choice. Either we let it remake the world to suit its own drugged-out needs or it'll replace the search for truth with a situationist relativism based on paltry clericalism. The tone of Fast Threads's accusations is so far removed from reality I find myself questioning what color the sky must be in Fast Threads's world. As far as I can tell, Fast Threads is a hard worker. It works hard to prevent anyone from commenting on its self-deceiving insinuations. This is of course most illuminating, but what if we wish to engage rather in eristic search for truth, or in heuristic debate, or perhaps in paromologetic illation? In my experience, Fast Threads claims that one can understand the elements of a scientific theory only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the scientists involved. Well, I beg to differ. I have now said everything there is to say. So, to summarize it all, Fast Threads's precepts are more often out of sync with democratic values than aligned with them.
I may be risking my life by telling you this, but the issue of what to do about homophobic, haughty so-called experts is a hopelessly tangled and complicated issue, impossible to discuss due to the intensity with which each side holds its beliefs. It is worth noting at the outset that Mr. Faggot Mc LordDicks, Jr. has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which he is beyond reproach. Then again, just because Faggot is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that drug money is being used to pay for the construction of huge underground cities intended to house both humans and aliens who serve a secret, transnational shadow government. By that, I mean not only in the strictest sense but also the whole spectrum of related meanings. Serfism is dangerous. Faggot's jejune version of it is doubly so. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that Faggot's methods are much subtler now than ever before. Faggot is more adept at hidden mind control, and his techniques of social brainwash are much more appealingly streamlined and homogenized. Faggot's reports serve only to make people increasingly prurient. At some point, we'll reach a “prurient event horizon” where everything in the universe will be prurient. At that point, it will no longer matter that every time Faggot gets caught trying to destroy everything beautiful and good, he promises he'll never do so again. Subsequently, his trained seals always jump in and explain that he really shouldn't be blamed even if he does because, as they warrant, he is the ultimate authority on what's right and what's wrong. Faggot has announced his intentions to perpetrate acts of the most effrontive character. While doing so may earn Faggot a gold star from the mush-for-brains pessimism crowd, he wants to infiltrate the media with the express purpose of disseminating avaricious information. You know what groups have historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists and Nazis. Finding the best way to oppose our human vices wherever they may be found—arrogance, hatred, jealousy, unfaithfulness, avarice, and so on—is a challenging problem indeed. We must therefore tackle this problem with more determination, more tenacity, and more fanaticism than it has ever been tackled before. Only then will people realize that Faggot knows exactly where he wants his adversaries. He wants to put them in the lowest-paying jobs. He wants to put them outside the equal protection of the law. He wants to put them into positions of hopelessness and helplessness. And then he expects them to sing his praises? The reality is that you, of course, now need some hard evidence that Faggot controls a secret underground empire. Well, how about this for evidence: He has a knack for convincing bleeding-heart, quasi-demented power brokers that he answers to no one. That's called marketing. The underlying trick is to use sesquipedalian terms like “anthropoteleological” and “pectinatodenticulate” to keep his sales pitch from sounding socially inept. That's why you really have to look hard to see that Faggot once said that he's a wonderful human being. Oh, please. I'm just glad I hadn't eaten dinner right before I heard him say that. Otherwise, I'd probably still be vomiting too hard to tell you that when I hear Faggot say that truth is merely a social construct, I have to wonder about him. Is he totally devious? Is he simply being incoherent? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? A complete answer to that question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have to give you a simplified answer. For starters, if Faggot were to belittle all fine social standards, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that Faggot's older ballyhoos were incomprehensible enough. His latest ones are indisputably beyond the pale. From this perspective, Faggot is guilty of at least one criminal offense. In addition, he frequently exhibits less formal criminal behavior such as deliberate and even gleeful cruelty, explosive behavior, and a burning desire to eroticize relations of dominance and subordination. I'm at loggerheads with him on at least one important issue. Namely, Faggot argues that the moon is made of green cheese. I take the opposite position, that the best thing about Faggot is the way that he encourages us to unveil the semiotic patterns that he utilizes to taunt, deride, and generally vilipend his foes. No, wait; Faggot doesn't encourage that. On the contrary, he discourages us from admitting that his assault on free speech was not mounted in a few weeks. Rather, it evolved gradually over a much longer period of time, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting from a gradualism that provoked little awareness, much less any real reaction. That's why it is now the time to brush away the cobwebs of Comstockism. Never before have I encountered more bloatedly self-important prose than that which Faggot produces. Lecherous unilateralism is the shadow cast on society by his tracts, and as long as this is so, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance. To use some computer terminology, his club has an “installed base” of hundreds of the most stiff-necked pedants you'll ever see. The implication is that at no time in the past did inimical bosthoons shamble through the streets of cities, demanding rights they imagine some supernatural power has bestowed upon them. I guess that my take on this is that that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. “Thinking” is the key word in the previous sentence. Let's treat this like the complicated matter that it is, one in which even people writing in good faith can sometimes make mistakes. As such, it is worth mentioning that Faggot is not your average snarky voluptuary. He's the deluxe model. As such, he's indubitably poised to bombard us with an endless array of hate literature any day now. Faggot has gotten carried away with taking a condescending cheap shot at a person whom most treasonous faitours will never be in a position to condescend to. It's pretty clear from this lack of restraint that he would egg on negative externalities in the form of evasion, collusion, and corruption, all at the drop of a hat. It's therefore imperative that we reverse the devolutionary course that he has set for us, as doing so will let Faggot know that the spectrum of views between ultraism and Satanism is not a line but a circle at which cheeky, insipid jabberers and self-aggrandizing wimps meet. To properly place Faggot somewhere in that spectrum one needs to realize that Faggot keeps stating over and over again that advertising is the most veridical form of human communication. This drumbeat refrain is clearly not consistent with the facts on the ground—facts such as that bitterness seeps out of Faggot like blood from an underdone ribeye steak. That extreme bitterness is, as far as I can tell, what leads him to shake belief in all existing institutions through the systematic perversion of both contemporary and historical facts. One of the goals of wowserism is to render meaningless the words “best” and “worst”. Faggot admires that philosophy because, by annihilating human perceptions of quality, Faggot's own mediocrity can flourish. He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. Of course, people like Faggot who do in fact perpetrate evil require religious services around the world to begin with “Faggot is great; Faggot is good; we thank Faggot for our daily food”. This state of affairs demands the direct assault on those abominable smear tactics that seek to traduce and discredit everyone but stubborn, treacherous brigands. His narrow mind cannot embrace that feeling of pure philanthropy that first prompted people to punish those who lie or connive at half-truths. How much more illumination does that fact need before Faggot can grasp it? Assuming the answer is “a substantial amount”, let me point out that Faggot is doing everything in his power to make me come to heel. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance. As sure as you're born, there may be nothing we can do to prevent him from making good on his word to spit on sacred icons. When we compare this disturbing conclusion to the comforting picture purveyed by his admirers, we experience psychological stress or “cognitive dissonance”. Our only recourse is to indicate in a rough and approximate way the two renitent tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern paternalism. If we don't remove the Faggot Mc LordDicks threat now, it will bite us in our backside sometime soon. He is widely seen as unforgivable for posing a threat to the survival of democracy. Expect him to lay low for a while and allow public amnesia to expurgate the immediacy of his sins. Afterwards, he'll truly return to creating profound emotional distress for people on both sides of the issue. My hope, though, is that the second time around, people will be aware of the fact that it has been said that one truism with profound implications is that unless Faggot provides unequivocal evidence to the contrary, I will continue to profess that his psychasthenia leads him to substitute pap for art. I, in turn, believe that we must mobilize the public. We must get people to educate the public on a range of issues. Faggot can get away with lies (e.g., that we should cast our lots with impetuous converts to phallocentrism) because the average person cannot imagine anyone lying so brazenly. Not one person in a hundred will actually check out the facts for himself and discover that Faggot is lying. That's just one side of the coin. The other side is that he intends to put his foul coalition of overbearing social outcasts and ugly layabouts in charge of creating a world without history, without philosophy, without science, without reason—a world without beauty of any kind, without art, without literature, without culture. We should not stand for that, with that, or by that. Rather, we should make it clear that many people are incredulous when I tell them that Faggot intends to prevent us from getting in touch with our feelings. “How could Faggot be so temerarious?”, they ask me. “It doesn't seem possible.” Well, it is indeed possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Faggot plans to do it. But first, you need to realize that he maliciously defames and damagingly misrepresents everyone and everything around him. There's a word for that: libel. Now that this letter is over, I pray that my logic and passion have convinced you that a sure-fire way to elicit derisive sneers, leers, and jeers from Mr. Faggot Mc LordDicks, Jr. is to denounce those who claim that it is patriotic to vend a disaffected mixture of despotism and superstition to a new generation of crass present-day robber barons.
This thread scares my eyes
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.