Menu
What's new
Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

GOOD GRIEF

I am writing to express my concerns about Mr. Gagh and, more specifically, his monographs regarding surly dole-sucking parasites. Perhaps before going on, I should describe Gagh to you. Gagh is insincere, atrabilious, and grotty. Furthermore, he yearns to increase alienation and delinquency among our young people.

So, Gagh, maybe the problem is not with intransigent toughies, but with you. If he truly believes that pathological dunderheads aren't ever inerudite, then maybe he should enroll in Introduction to Reality 101. Imagine, as it is not hard to do, that he is utterly -- and I mean utterly -- unbridled. It then follows that Gagh's opuscula are a syncretism of yellow-bellied anti-intellectualism and anal-retentive, inaniloquent cameralism. To cap that off, Gagh's cause is not glorious. It is not wonderful. It is not good.

I have not forgotten that creating needed understanding is best achieved in a calm, rational environment. I have not forgotten that this is clear to every knowledgeable observer. And I cannot forget that I like to throw darts at Gagh's picture -- and Gagh knows it. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that the gloss that his trained seals put on his machinations unfortunately does little to put the kibosh on Gagh's endeavors. Whether or not you realize this, Gagh'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 Gagh's "I think … I believe … I feel" game.

Some would say that this is a platitude. Would that it were! Rather, Gagh maintains that he can override nature. Perhaps it would be best for him to awaken from his delusional narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that he sees himself as a postmodern equivalent of Marx's proletariat, revolutionizing the world by wresting it from its oppressors (viz., those who preserve the peace).

Gagh's goons are hardly strangers to fascism. Once we realize that, what do we do? The appropriate thing, in my judgment, is to shatter the illusion that nihilism is the only alternative to recidivism. I say that because he takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. Gagh also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. The interesting point is this: He speaks like a true defender of the status quo -- a status quo, we should not forget, that enables him to blame our societal problems on handy scapegoats. Regardless of whether we consider Gagh a lunatic, an evil aggressor, or whatever, I want to unify our community. Gagh, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it.

It behooves us to remember that Gagh truly believes that his activities are on the up-and-up. I hope you realize that that's just a two-faced pipe dream from a cantankerous pipe, and that in the real world, this is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact. His understrappers will leave us high and dry as they regulate nepotism. At least, that certainly seems to be the implication in several of the accounts I've heard.

We must summon up the courage to declare a truce with Gagh and commence a dialogue. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to give Gagh a rhadamanthine warning not to deliver an additional blow to dignity and self-worth.

Gagh doubtlessly believes that his tricks provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is he living in? The answer is almost absolutely obvious -- this isn't rocket science, you know. The key is that the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to debate the efficacy of Gagh's grumpy, primitive traducements. His sophistries are evil. They're evil because they cause global warming; they make your teeth fall out; they give you spots; they incite nuclear war. And, as if that weren't enough, Gagh's "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude is brown-nosing, because it leaves no room for compromise. Gagh periodically puts up a facade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual. Actually, he asserts that the sky is falling. That assertion is not only untrue, but a conscious lie.

Today, we might have let Gagh befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion. Tomorrow, we won't. Instead, we will condemn -- without hesitation, without remorse -- all those who promote the total destruction of individuality in favor of an all-powerful group. He recently went through an antagonism phase in which he tried repeatedly to twist my words six ways for Sunday. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that Gagh's cringers actually believe the bunkum they're always mouthing. That's because these kinds of crude bloodsuckers are idealistic, have no sense of history or human nature, and they think that what they're doing will somehow improve the world in the blink of an eye. In reality, of course, Gagh's propositions are based on hate. Hate, oligarchism, and an intolerance of another viewpoint, another way of life. I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Gagh and his drones, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that Gagh's favorite scapegoats are the government, the economy, the environment, society, parents, teachers, and just about everything else. And I can say that with a clear conscience because when I observe Gagh's operatives' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like him, they all want to perpetuate the myth that he is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. Also, while a monkey might think that it is Gagh's moral imperative to uproot our very heritage and pave the way for his own parasitic value system, the fact remains that my current plan is to build a true community of spirit and purpose based on mutual respect and caring. Yes, he will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but I recently heard him tell a bunch of people that he commands an army of robots that live in the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text.

Gagh, get a life! No one likes being attacked by impulsive heretics. Even worse, Gagh exploits our fear of those attacks -- which he claims will evolve faster than you can say "scientificoreligious" into biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks -- as a pretext to deflect attention from his unwillingness to support policies that benefit the average citizen. If you think that's scary, then you should remember that Gagh thinks that his blessing is the equivalent of a papal imprimatur. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. We can say that he would have you believe that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization", and he can claim the opposite, and it won't make one bit of difference. In a nutshell, most poxy twerps think, "credo, quia absurdum" when they hear Mr. Gagh say that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not.

In a previous letter, I stated that TK's decisions are ill-advised. That will be my position in this letter, as well. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about daft carpetbaggers.

Just because I understand TK's bait-and-switch tactics doesn't mean I agree with them. TK contends that its modes of thought are our final line of defense against tyrrany. Sounds rather querulous, doesn't it? Well, that's TK for you. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: I try never to argue with TK, because it's clear it's not susceptible to reason. TK's emotionally biased and expletive-filled homilies push home the point that debate with it or a search for common ground is both a fruitless exercise and a suicidal strategy. But you knew that already. So let me add that the biggest difference between me and TK is that TK wants to turn once-flourishing neighborhoods into zones of violence, decay, and moral disregard. I, on the other hand, want to advocate social change through dialogue, passive resistance, and nonviolence.

If you've never seen TK stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest, you're either incredibly unobservant or are concealing the truth from yourself. Let's be frank: If TK has spurred us to take stock of what we know, identify areas for further research, and provide a useful starting point for debate on its indelicate announcements, then TK may have accomplished a useful thing. If history follows its course, it should be evident that TK says that free speech is wonderful as long as you're not bashing it and the satanic low-lifes in its neopaganism movement. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that all any child needs is a big dose of television every day. Despite total incompetence, TK is often afflicted with an amazing conceit which causes it to scar little children's self-image. TK may unwittingly encourage every sort of indiscipline and degeneracy in the name of freedom. I say "unwittingly" because it is apparently unaware that it operates under the influence of a particular ideology: a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why I went puce with rage when I first heard TK say that hanging out with the most clueless nincompoops you'll ever see is a wonderful, culturally enriching experience. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that time has only reinforced that conviction? TK may not be horny, but it sure is deluded. TK's rejoinders leave me with several unanswered questions: How much longer can we tolerate its blinkered litanies before the whole country collectively throws up? And what in perdition does it think it's doing? These are difficult questions to answer, because its victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of TK's henchmen, who loudly proclaim that TK has achieved sainthood. Regardless of those villainous proclamations, the truth is that it holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City -- sterile obstacles to progress who fortify a social correctness that restricts experience and defines success with narrow boundaries.

I have always assumed that TK fears nothing more than the truth, but the fact of the matter is that TK is not a responsible citizen. Responsible citizens advocate concrete action and specific quantifiable goals. Responsible citizens indisputably do not adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. It's not just that TK has let its lofty-yet-peremptory views cloud its sense of taste and reality, but also that teenagers who want to shock their parents sometimes maintain -- with a straight face -- that TK's the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread. Fortunately, most parents don't fall for this fraud because they know that there are three fairly obvious problems with TK's machinations, each of which needs to be addressed by any letter that attempts to provide a trenchant analysis of TK's invectives. First, TK's cowardly attacks not only demean TK's victims, they dehumanize all of us and are contrary to the principles of a free society. Second, I disagree both with TK's point and with the way it makes it. And third, if TK feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing it, then that's just too darn bad. Its arrogance has brought this upon itself.

TK doesn't want us to know about its plans to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about its policies. Otherwise, we might do something about that. TK is like a magician who produces a dove in one hand, while the other hand is busy trying to increase people's stress and aggression. I suppose it's predictable, though terribly sad, that witless junkies with stronger voices than minds would revert to covinous behavior. But TK's fantasy is to make things worse. It dreams of a world that grants it such a freedom with no strings attached. Welcome to the world of alcoholism! In that nightmare world it has long since been forgotten that I am appalled that I have cause to write this article. That said, let me continue.

Faith is harder to shake than knowledge, love succumbs less to change than respect, hate is more enduring than aversion, and I'm willing to accept that I sincerely don't want to have to listen to TK's purblind billingsgate. I'm even willing to accept that it is out of control and must be stopped. But if it were as bright as it thinks it is, it'd know that I myself normally prefer to listen than to speak. I would, however, like to remind TK that when it comes to its holier-than-thou attitudes, I claim that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world. The sooner we do that, the better, because I can't possibly believe its claim that it is the way, the truth, and the light. If someone can convince me otherwise, I'll eat my hat. Heck, I'll eat a whole closetful of hats. That's a pretty safe bet because I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, I welcome TK's comments. However, TK needs to realize that its vicegerents favor a lifestyle that is as disruptive as its deeds. Am I being too harsh for writing that? Maybe I am, but that's really the only way you can push a point through to it. Think about that for a moment. In any case, if TK got its way, it'd be able to declare that diseases can be defeated not through standard medical research but through the creation of a new language, one that does not stigmatize certain groups and behaviors. Brrrr! It sends chills down my spine just thinking about that. I have a message for TK. My message is that, for the good of us all, it should never seize control over where we eat, sleep, socialize, and associate with others. It should never even try to do such a prudish thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that there is no justification on any level whatsoever for TK's maladroit, benighted positions. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that I frequently wish to tell TK that to deny this is to deny science, let alone the evidence of one's own powers of observation. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue.

TK complains a lot. What's ironic, though, is that it hasn't made even a single concrete suggestion for improvement or identified a single problem with the system as it exists today. TK's exegeses are merely a stalking horse. They mask its secret intention to dilute the nation's sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice.

It is easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle than it is to convince TK's attendants to bring strength to our families, power to our nation, and health to our cities. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: its overweening prevarications. Some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of TK's coalition of otiose boors and fork-tongued sideshow barkers quite adamantly suspect that those of us who oppose TK would rather run than fight. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could aver such a thing, but then again, given a choice of having TK control, manipulate, and harm other people or having my bicuspids extracted sans Novocaine, I would embrace the pliers, purchase some Polident Partials, and call it a day. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that if we contradict TK, we are labelled unholy rabble-rousers. If we capitulate, however, we forfeit our freedoms. As long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, TK's apostles don't really care that it would be charitable of me not to mention that there is another side to the issue. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity, so I will instead maintain that I decidedly hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before TK does any real damage. Or is it already too late? In classic sophist fashion, I ask another question in reply: Do incomprehensible Neanderthals like TK's collaborators actually have lives, or do they exist solely to create a factitious demand for TK's indecent perceptions? I mean, all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of TK's intellectually challenged, froward personal attacks. They are not a cause; they are an effect. We are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light of a bright, shining future in which dim-witted poltroons like TK are thoroughly absent. The other road leads into the darkness of revisionism. The question, therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? One might as well ask, "What is TK's secret agenda?" As you no doubt realize, that's a particulary timely question. In fact, just half an hour ago, I heard someone express the opinion that TK should be responsible for its own actions. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. TK does, and that's why we could opt to sit back and let it truck away our freedoms for safekeeping. Most people, however, would argue that the cost in people's lives and self-esteem is an extremely high price to pay for such inaction on our part.

This raises the question: What will be the outcome of TK's quest for world hegemony? 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, I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I maintain that there is, because TK's older vituperations were petulant enough. Its latest ones are obviously beyond the pale. Most people want to be nice; they want to be polite; they don't want to give offense. And because of this inherent politeness, they step aside and let TK trick academics into abandoning the principles of scientific inquiry. There is no contradiction here; even though TK's publications are pockmarked with sappy conformism and other assorted ills, you mustn't forget that we have a dilemma of leviathan proportions on our hands: Should we condemn TK's hypocrisy, or is it sufficient to expose TK's practices for what they really are? Before you answer, let me point out that TK's criticisms of my letters have never successfully disproved a single fact I ever presented. Instead, its criticisms are based solely on its emotions and gut reactions. Well, I refuse to get caught up in TK's "I think … I believe … I feel" game. If you intend to challenge someone's assertions, you need to present a counterargument. TK provides none. Will the worst classes of libidinous ghastly-types there are ever serve on the side of Truth? Don't bet on it.

I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that TK speaks like a true defender of the status quo -- a status quo, we should not forget, that enables it to fuel inquisitions. If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. And if you think that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by TK itself), then you aren't thinking very clearly. There's a little-known truth that isn't readily acknowledged by viperine, raving parvenus: If everyone does his own, small part, together we can expose TK's malversation. The important point here is not that the conflation of incompetent doofuses and pretentious loons in TK's histrionics is either dramatic hyperbole or a fatal methodological flaw. The vital matter is that TK's jokes are like a Hydra. They continually acquire new heads and new strength. The only way to stunt their growth is to break the spell of great expectations that now binds snivelling dossers to TK. The only way to destroy TK's Hydra entirely is to provide more people with the knowledge that life isn't fair. We've all known this since the beginning of time, so why is it so compelled to complain about situations over which it has no control? Well, I'm sure TK would rather prepare the ground for an ever-more vicious and brutal campaign of terror than answer that particular question. Now that you've heard what I've had to say, I want you to think about it. And I want you to join me and solve the problems that are important to most people.
 
Mystery D8 said:
I am writing to express my concerns about Mr. Gagh and, more specifically, his monographs regarding surly dole-sucking parasites. Perhaps before going on, I should describe Gagh to you. Gagh is insincere, atrabilious, and grotty. Furthermore, he yearns to increase alienation and delinquency among our young people.

So, Gagh, maybe the problem is not with intransigent toughies, but with you. If he truly believes that pathological dunderheads aren't ever inerudite, then maybe he should enroll in Introduction to Reality 101. Imagine, as it is not hard to do, that he is utterly -- and I mean utterly -- unbridled. It then follows that Gagh's opuscula are a syncretism of yellow-bellied anti-intellectualism and anal-retentive, inaniloquent cameralism. To cap that off, Gagh's cause is not glorious. It is not wonderful. It is not good.

I have not forgotten that creating needed understanding is best achieved in a calm, rational environment. I have not forgotten that this is clear to every knowledgeable observer. And I cannot forget that I like to throw darts at Gagh's picture -- and Gagh knows it. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that the gloss that his trained seals put on his machinations unfortunately does little to put the kibosh on Gagh's endeavors. Whether or not you realize this, Gagh'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 Gagh's "I think … I believe … I feel" game.

Some would say that this is a platitude. Would that it were! Rather, Gagh maintains that he can override nature. Perhaps it would be best for him to awaken from his delusional narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that he sees himself as a postmodern equivalent of Marx's proletariat, revolutionizing the world by wresting it from its oppressors (viz., those who preserve the peace).

Gagh's goons are hardly strangers to fascism. Once we realize that, what do we do? The appropriate thing, in my judgment, is to shatter the illusion that nihilism is the only alternative to recidivism. I say that because he takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. Gagh also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. The interesting point is this: He speaks like a true defender of the status quo -- a status quo, we should not forget, that enables him to blame our societal problems on handy scapegoats. Regardless of whether we consider Gagh a lunatic, an evil aggressor, or whatever, I want to unify our community. Gagh, in contrast, wants to drive divisive ideological wedges through it.

It behooves us to remember that Gagh truly believes that his activities are on the up-and-up. I hope you realize that that's just a two-faced pipe dream from a cantankerous pipe, and that in the real world, this is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact. His understrappers will leave us high and dry as they regulate nepotism. At least, that certainly seems to be the implication in several of the accounts I've heard.

We must summon up the courage to declare a truce with Gagh and commence a dialogue. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to give Gagh a rhadamanthine warning not to deliver an additional blow to dignity and self-worth.

Gagh doubtlessly believes that his tricks provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is he living in? The answer is almost absolutely obvious -- this isn't rocket science, you know. The key is that the hour is late indeed. Fortunately, it's not yet too late to debate the efficacy of Gagh's grumpy, primitive traducements. His sophistries are evil. They're evil because they cause global warming; they make your teeth fall out; they give you spots; they incite nuclear war. And, as if that weren't enough, Gagh's "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude is brown-nosing, because it leaves no room for compromise. Gagh periodically puts up a facade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual. Actually, he asserts that the sky is falling. That assertion is not only untrue, but a conscious lie.

Today, we might have let Gagh befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion. Tomorrow, we won't. Instead, we will condemn -- without hesitation, without remorse -- all those who promote the total destruction of individuality in favor of an all-powerful group. He recently went through an antagonism phase in which he tried repeatedly to twist my words six ways for Sunday. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that Gagh's cringers actually believe the bunkum they're always mouthing. That's because these kinds of crude bloodsuckers are idealistic, have no sense of history or human nature, and they think that what they're doing will somehow improve the world in the blink of an eye. In reality, of course, Gagh's propositions are based on hate. Hate, oligarchism, and an intolerance of another viewpoint, another way of life. I have often maintained that reasonable people can reasonably disagree. Unfortunately, when dealing with Gagh and his drones, that claim assumes facts not in evidence. So let me claim instead that Gagh's favorite scapegoats are the government, the economy, the environment, society, parents, teachers, and just about everything else. And I can say that with a clear conscience because when I observe Gagh's operatives' behavior, I can't help but recall the proverbial expression, "monkey see, monkey do". That's because, like him, they all want to perpetuate the myth that he is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. Also, while a monkey might think that it is Gagh's moral imperative to uproot our very heritage and pave the way for his own parasitic value system, the fact remains that my current plan is to build a true community of spirit and purpose based on mutual respect and caring. Yes, he will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but I recently heard him tell a bunch of people that he commands an army of robots that live in the hollow center of the earth and produce earthquakes whenever they feel like shaking things up a bit on the surface. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text.

Gagh, get a life! No one likes being attacked by impulsive heretics. Even worse, Gagh exploits our fear of those attacks -- which he claims will evolve faster than you can say "scientificoreligious" into biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks -- as a pretext to deflect attention from his unwillingness to support policies that benefit the average citizen. If you think that's scary, then you should remember that Gagh thinks that his blessing is the equivalent of a papal imprimatur. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. We can say that he would have you believe that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization", and he can claim the opposite, and it won't make one bit of difference. In a nutshell, most poxy twerps think, "credo, quia absurdum" when they hear Mr. Gagh say that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not.

In a previous letter, I stated that TK's decisions are ill-advised. That will be my position in this letter, as well. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about daft carpetbaggers.

Just because I understand TK's bait-and-switch tactics doesn't mean I agree with them. TK contends that its modes of thought are our final line of defense against tyrrany. Sounds rather querulous, doesn't it? Well, that's TK for you. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: I try never to argue with TK, because it's clear it's not susceptible to reason. TK's emotionally biased and expletive-filled homilies push home the point that debate with it or a search for common ground is both a fruitless exercise and a suicidal strategy. But you knew that already. So let me add that the biggest difference between me and TK is that TK wants to turn once-flourishing neighborhoods into zones of violence, decay, and moral disregard. I, on the other hand, want to advocate social change through dialogue, passive resistance, and nonviolence.

If you've never seen TK stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest, you're either incredibly unobservant or are concealing the truth from yourself. Let's be frank: If TK has spurred us to take stock of what we know, identify areas for further research, and provide a useful starting point for debate on its indelicate announcements, then TK may have accomplished a useful thing. If history follows its course, it should be evident that TK says that free speech is wonderful as long as you're not bashing it and the satanic low-lifes in its neopaganism movement. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that all any child needs is a big dose of television every day. Despite total incompetence, TK is often afflicted with an amazing conceit which causes it to scar little children's self-image. TK may unwittingly encourage every sort of indiscipline and degeneracy in the name of freedom. I say "unwittingly" because it is apparently unaware that it operates under the influence of a particular ideology: a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why I went puce with rage when I first heard TK say that hanging out with the most clueless nincompoops you'll ever see is a wonderful, culturally enriching experience. I don't think anyone questions that. But did you know that time has only reinforced that conviction? TK may not be horny, but it sure is deluded. TK's rejoinders leave me with several unanswered questions: How much longer can we tolerate its blinkered litanies before the whole country collectively throws up? And what in perdition does it think it's doing? These are difficult questions to answer, because its victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of TK's henchmen, who loudly proclaim that TK has achieved sainthood. Regardless of those villainous proclamations, the truth is that it holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City -- sterile obstacles to progress who fortify a social correctness that restricts experience and defines success with narrow boundaries.

I have always assumed that TK fears nothing more than the truth, but the fact of the matter is that TK is not a responsible citizen. Responsible citizens advocate concrete action and specific quantifiable goals. Responsible citizens indisputably do not adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. It's not just that TK has let its lofty-yet-peremptory views cloud its sense of taste and reality, but also that teenagers who want to shock their parents sometimes maintain -- with a straight face -- that TK's the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread. Fortunately, most parents don't fall for this fraud because they know that there are three fairly obvious problems with TK's machinations, each of which needs to be addressed by any letter that attempts to provide a trenchant analysis of TK's invectives. First, TK's cowardly attacks not only demean TK's victims, they dehumanize all of us and are contrary to the principles of a free society. Second, I disagree both with TK's point and with the way it makes it. And third, if TK feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing it, then that's just too darn bad. Its arrogance has brought this upon itself.

TK doesn't want us to know about its plans to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about its policies. Otherwise, we might do something about that. TK is like a magician who produces a dove in one hand, while the other hand is busy trying to increase people's stress and aggression. I suppose it's predictable, though terribly sad, that witless junkies with stronger voices than minds would revert to covinous behavior. But TK's fantasy is to make things worse. It dreams of a world that grants it such a freedom with no strings attached. Welcome to the world of alcoholism! In that nightmare world it has long since been forgotten that I am appalled that I have cause to write this article. That said, let me continue.

Faith is harder to shake than knowledge, love succumbs less to change than respect, hate is more enduring than aversion, and I'm willing to accept that I sincerely don't want to have to listen to TK's purblind billingsgate. I'm even willing to accept that it is out of control and must be stopped. But if it were as bright as it thinks it is, it'd know that I myself normally prefer to listen than to speak. I would, however, like to remind TK that when it comes to its holier-than-thou attitudes, I claim that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world. The sooner we do that, the better, because I can't possibly believe its claim that it is the way, the truth, and the light. If someone can convince me otherwise, I'll eat my hat. Heck, I'll eat a whole closetful of hats. That's a pretty safe bet because I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, I welcome TK's comments. However, TK needs to realize that its vicegerents favor a lifestyle that is as disruptive as its deeds. Am I being too harsh for writing that? Maybe I am, but that's really the only way you can push a point through to it. Think about that for a moment. In any case, if TK got its way, it'd be able to declare that diseases can be defeated not through standard medical research but through the creation of a new language, one that does not stigmatize certain groups and behaviors. Brrrr! It sends chills down my spine just thinking about that. I have a message for TK. My message is that, for the good of us all, it should never seize control over where we eat, sleep, socialize, and associate with others. It should never even try to do such a prudish thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that there is no justification on any level whatsoever for TK's maladroit, benighted positions. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that I frequently wish to tell TK that to deny this is to deny science, let alone the evidence of one's own powers of observation. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue.

TK complains a lot. What's ironic, though, is that it hasn't made even a single concrete suggestion for improvement or identified a single problem with the system as it exists today. TK's exegeses are merely a stalking horse. They mask its secret intention to dilute the nation's sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice.

It is easier to get a camel through the eye of a needle than it is to convince TK's attendants to bring strength to our families, power to our nation, and health to our cities. But let's not lose sight of the larger, more important issue here: its overweening prevarications. Some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of TK's coalition of otiose boors and fork-tongued sideshow barkers quite adamantly suspect that those of us who oppose TK would rather run than fight. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could aver such a thing, but then again, given a choice of having TK control, manipulate, and harm other people or having my bicuspids extracted sans Novocaine, I would embrace the pliers, purchase some Polident Partials, and call it a day. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that if we contradict TK, we are labelled unholy rabble-rousers. If we capitulate, however, we forfeit our freedoms. As long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, TK's apostles don't really care that it would be charitable of me not to mention that there is another side to the issue. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity, so I will instead maintain that I decidedly hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before TK does any real damage. Or is it already too late? In classic sophist fashion, I ask another question in reply: Do incomprehensible Neanderthals like TK's collaborators actually have lives, or do they exist solely to create a factitious demand for TK's indecent perceptions? I mean, all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of TK's intellectually challenged, froward personal attacks. They are not a cause; they are an effect. We are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light of a bright, shining future in which dim-witted poltroons like TK are thoroughly absent. The other road leads into the darkness of revisionism. The question, therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? One might as well ask, "What is TK's secret agenda?" As you no doubt realize, that's a particulary timely question. In fact, just half an hour ago, I heard someone express the opinion that TK should be responsible for its own actions. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. TK does, and that's why we could opt to sit back and let it truck away our freedoms for safekeeping. Most people, however, would argue that the cost in people's lives and self-esteem is an extremely high price to pay for such inaction on our part.

This raises the question: What will be the outcome of TK's quest for world hegemony? 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, I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I maintain that there is, because TK's older vituperations were petulant enough. Its latest ones are obviously beyond the pale. Most people want to be nice; they want to be polite; they don't want to give offense. And because of this inherent politeness, they step aside and let TK trick academics into abandoning the principles of scientific inquiry. There is no contradiction here; even though TK's publications are pockmarked with sappy conformism and other assorted ills, you mustn't forget that we have a dilemma of leviathan proportions on our hands: Should we condemn TK's hypocrisy, or is it sufficient to expose TK's practices for what they really are? Before you answer, let me point out that TK's criticisms of my letters have never successfully disproved a single fact I ever presented. Instead, its criticisms are based solely on its emotions and gut reactions. Well, I refuse to get caught up in TK's "I think … I believe … I feel" game. If you intend to challenge someone's assertions, you need to present a counterargument. TK provides none. Will the worst classes of libidinous ghastly-types there are ever serve on the side of Truth? Don't bet on it.

I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that TK speaks like a true defender of the status quo -- a status quo, we should not forget, that enables it to fuel inquisitions. If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem. And if you think that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by TK itself), then you aren't thinking very clearly. There's a little-known truth that isn't readily acknowledged by viperine, raving parvenus: If everyone does his own, small part, together we can expose TK's malversation. The important point here is not that the conflation of incompetent doofuses and pretentious loons in TK's histrionics is either dramatic hyperbole or a fatal methodological flaw. The vital matter is that TK's jokes are like a Hydra. They continually acquire new heads and new strength. The only way to stunt their growth is to break the spell of great expectations that now binds snivelling dossers to TK. The only way to destroy TK's Hydra entirely is to provide more people with the knowledge that life isn't fair. We've all known this since the beginning of time, so why is it so compelled to complain about situations over which it has no control? Well, I'm sure TK would rather prepare the ground for an ever-more vicious and brutal campaign of terror than answer that particular question. Now that you've heard what I've had to say, I want you to think about it. And I want you to join me and solve the problems that are important to most people.
Click to expand...
Too long, didn't read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top