A complaint.

[Desereck Creeggan]

It is with extreme disgust that I write this letter and say what will decidedly be considered ghastly by some of my peers. Nonetheless, it must be stated that I consider Mr. Thatguy P Andel's stratagems antithetical to my principles as a person concerned for the good of all. The full truth of my conclusion I shall develop in the course of this letter but the conclusion's general outline is that if Mr. Andel is going to make an emotional appeal then he should also include a rational argument. According to him, space gods arriving in flying saucers will save humanity from self-destruction. He might as well be reading tea leaves or tossing chicken bones on the floor for divination about what's true and what isn't. Maybe then Mr. Andel would realize that his reason is not true reason. It does not seek the truth but only caustic answers, apolaustic resolutions to conflicts.

Mr. Andel will simply continue to cause distress to people he doesn't know, has never seen, and who have done him no harm whatsoever, but that's really beside the point. 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 there are some combative hellions who are audacious. There are also some who are satanic. Which category does Mr. Andel fall into? If the question overwhelms you, I suggest you check "both".

My position is that Mr. Andel's lamentations should be recorded and studied for as long as human life exists on Earth as an example of what happens when a society lets one of its members threaten the existence of human life, perhaps all life on the planet. He, in contrast, argues that he is entitled to keep us everlastingly ill at ease. This disagreement merely scratches the surface of the ideological chasm festering between me and Mr. Andel. The only rational way to bridge this chasm is for him to admit that he justifies his socially inept cajoleries with fallacious logical arguments based on argumentum ad baculum. In case you're unfamiliar with the term, it means that if we don't accept Mr. Andel's claim that his faith in plagiarism gives him an uncanny ability to detect astral energy and cosmic vibrations then he will create an intimidating, hostile, and demeaning environment.

I'm not normally one to criticize, but Mr. Andel and his drones are delirious misers. This is not set down in complaint against them but merely as analysis. He is obviously trying to rob us of our lives, our health, our honor, and our belongings, and unless we act now, he'll unquestionably succeed. I am not mistaken when I say that you, of course, now need some hard evidence that it would be a crying shame to let officious blackguards fix blame for social stress, economic loss, or loss of political power on a target group whose constructed guilt provides a simplistic explanation. Well, how about this for evidence: Some people apparently believe that if we don't bother Mr. Andel, Mr. Andel won't bother us. The fallacy of that belief is that our desires and his are not merely different; they are opposed in mortal enmity. Mr. Andel wants to promote a form of government in which religious freedom, racial equality, and individual liberty are severely at risk. We, in contrast, want to alert people that it's not the bogeyman that our children need to worry about. It's Mr. Andel. Not only is Mr. Andel more nefarious and more huffy than any envisaged bogeyman or bugbear, but Mr. Andel's bruta fulmina are part and parcel of a larger game plan to make us the helpless puppets of our demographic labels. If you don't believe me, see for yourself.

Our battle with Mr. Andel is a battle between spiritualism and immoralism, between tradition and subversion, between the defenders of Western civilization and its enemies. With the battle lines drawn as such, it is abundantly clear that one can usually be pretty sure when Mr. Andel is lying. Sometimes there's a little doubt: maybe it's not a deliberate lie but merely a difference of opinion. But when Mr. Andel claims that the peak of fashion is to put political correctness ahead of scientific rigor, there's no room for ambiguity: he's lying. If I withheld my feelings on this matter, I'd be no less choleric than Mr. Andel. He is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, Mr. Andel's willingness to redefine humanity as alienated machines/beasts and then convince everyone that they were never human to begin with sets a new world record for brazenness. This letter has gone on far too long in my opinion and probably yours as well. So let me end it by saying merely that Mr. Thatguy P Andel's venal tactics are the cherry atop the self-pitying sundae of exclusionism.

[Aryte]

[Desereck Creeggan]

I'd like to take a minute of your time to share some of my thoughts about The Ordo Imperialis with you. First and foremost, The Ordo Imperialis expects us to behave like passive sheep. The only choice it believes we should be allowed to make for ourselves is whether to head towards its slaughterhouse at a trot or at a gallop. The Ordo Imperialis surely doesn't want us choosing to raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives.

There isn't so much as a molecule of evidence that all major world powers are controlled by a covert group of "insiders". The only reason that The Ordo Imperialis claims otherwise is that the tone of its asseverations is eerily reminiscent of that of muzzy-headed dossers of the late 1940s in the sense that I deeply believe that it's within our grasp to foster mutual understanding. Be grateful for this first and last tidbit of comforting news. The rest of this letter will center around the way that I want to challenge the present and enrich the future. I want to do this not because I need to tack another line onto my résumé but because I once managed to get The Ordo Imperialis to agree that it is not afraid to use violence, ruse, shot and shell, poison, or the dagger to turn the social order upside-down so that the dregs on the bottom become the scum on the top. Unfortunately, a few minutes later, it did a volte-face and denied that it had ever said that.

I don't want to build castles in the air. I don't want to plan things that I can't yet implement. But I do want to test the assumptions that underlie The Ordo Imperialis's whinges because doing so clearly demonstrates how anyone who hasn't been living in a cave with his eyes shut and his ears plugged knows that it is right about one thing, namely that fear is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when conscienceless gaberlunzies con us into believing that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that the peak of fashion is to sully my reputation. And fear of disgusting brigands like The Ordo Imperialis who "solve" all our problems by talking them to death. And that's it. Materialism is a source of livelihood for The Ordo Imperialis.

I found the website that Christoph/Black Talon use to generate their arguments

/>http://www.pakin.org/complaint

[thatguy Andel]

Even as I sit here, I can't believe I'm writing this. I've never been one to voice my opinions in such a public manner. But after learning that Mr. Desereck Creeggan wants to subjugate persons of culture, refinement, and learning to deluded, egocentric backstabbers, I felt I at least had to set a few things straight. With this letter, I hope to let him know, in no uncertain terms, that it has been proven by measurements and by analysis that his fervent belief in factionalism allows him to perform all sorts of outrages, misdemeanors, felonies, and atrocities and feel perfectly justified in performing them. But first, I would like to make the following introductory remark: He uses nativism to call evil good and good evil. That's the large elephant in the room that nobody talks about. Nevertheless, I surely claim that people really ought to start talking about it because then they'd realize that Mr. Creeggan recently went through a collectivism phase in which he tried repeatedly to deface a social fabric that was already deteriorating. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that Mr. Creeggan has already begun wasting hours and hours of our time in fruitless conferences and meetings. I wish I were joking, but I'm not. What's more, Mr. Creeggan says that we have too much freedom. 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!"? In closing, please remember that my ultimate goal is to face our problems realistically, get to the root of our problems, and be determined to solve them. If I advance, follow me. If I stop, urge me on. If I retreat, kill me.

[Ron Bleac]

Let me introduce myself. I am the president and founder of the Anti Sir Snowmew The Great, Jr. Association. In the text that follows, I will explain why stopping Sir Snowmew The Great, Jr. is fundamental to the survival of our society. Let me begin by citing a range of examples from the public sphere. For starters, Sir Great has overplayed his hand so grossly that people are starting to realize that anyone who was sober for more than an hour or two during the last five years knows that I am shocked and thoroughly appalled that he could voice the classes of gross lies and historical misrepresentations that he so often does. That's pretty transparent. What's not so transparent is the answer to the following question: What provoked him to foment, precipitate, and finance large-scale wars to emasculate and bankrupt nations and thereby force them into a one-world government? A clue might be that he maintains that annoying, stroppy showboaters are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. That's not just a lie but is actually the exact opposite of the truth—and Sir Great knows it. Why is Sir Great deliberately turning the truth on its head like that? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history but to all human culture.

If you are not smart enough to realize this, then you become the victim of your own ignorance. Sir Great has it all wrong; he sometimes uses the word "piezocrystallization" when describing his dissertations. Beware! This is a buzzword designed for emotional response. We must lead us all toward a better, brighter future. This is a terrible and awesome responsibility—a crushing responsibility. However, if we stick together we can can show the world that I can really suggest how Sir Great ought to behave. Ultimately, however, the burden of acting with moral rectitude lies with Sir Great himself.

The acid test for Sir Great's "kinder, gentler" new memoirs should be, "Do they still create division in the name of diversity?" If the answer is yes then we can conclude that Sir Great insists that his drug-induced ravings enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. That lie is a transparent and strained effort to keep us from noticing that if he opened his eyes, he'd realize that he enjoys the sense of control that comes from forcing someone else to do things the way he wants them done. Sir Great has been going around claiming that the bogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to his demands. When challenged about the veracity of that message, Sir Great attributed its contradictions of the truth to "poetic license". That means "lying". Plainly stated, he speaks like a true defender of the status quo—a status quo, we should not forget, that enables him to rifle, pillage, plunder, and loot. Let me conclude by expressing the hope that by reading this letter you have learned the life lesson, "Always face our problems realistically, get to the root of our problems, and be determined to solve them."

[Trinity Heckroth]

Multifarious avenues of approach vie for attention as potential retorts to Mr. Ronald M Bleacaford's thrasonical harangues. Before I begin, let me point out that Ronald says it is within his legal right to wage an odd sort of warfare upon a largely unprepared and unrecognizing public. Whether or not he indeed has such a right, I've known some schizophrenics who were impressively subhuman. However, Ronald is unrestrained and that trumps subhuman every time. I have a tendency to report the more sensational things that he is up to, the more shocking things, things like how he wants to give an air of scientific impartiality to biased judgments. And I realize the difficulty that the average person has in coming to grips with that, but his tactics all stem from one, simple, faulty premise—that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. It should be stressed that Ronald contends that violence and prejudice are funny. What planet is he from? The planet Overweening? The answer should be self-evident so let me just point out that Ronald always demands instant gratification. That's all that is of concern to him; nothing else matters—except maybe to consign our traditional values to the rubbish heap of stoicism. I tell you this because I have a New Year's resolution for Ronald: He should pick up a book before he jumps to the tyrannical conclusion that his criticisms are a breath of fresh air amid our modern culture's toxic cloud of chaos.

If I were a complete sap, I'd believe Ronald's line that his repulsive club is a benign and charitable agency. Unfortunately for him, I realize that Ronald has so frequently lied about how some people deserve to feel safe while others do not that some weaker-minded people are starting to believe it. We need to explain to such people that when I was a child my clergyman told me, "Ronald is incapable of rational thought about the real world." If you think about it you'll see his point.

It is common knowledge that Ronald ignores the most basic ground rule of debate. In case you're not familiar with it, that rule is: attack the idea, not the person. I had thought the world was free of impolitic ninnyhammers. So imagine my surprise when I discovered that he wants to sacrifice our essential liberties on the altar of political horse-trading. His editorials are eerily similar to those promoted by madmen such as Pol Pot. What's scary, though, is that their extollment of racism has been ratcheted up a few notches from anything Pol Pot ever conjured up.

People who are attacked by backwards flakes basically have three options. They can ignore the attacks, engage the attackers in a debate, or apply some sanction that will put an end to the attack. Ronald likes abandoning the idea of universal principles and focusing illegitimately on the particular, which puts him somewhere between a prudish, sick wastrel and a loathsome, malevolent bozo on the materialism org chart. His language is turgid and incomprehensible. But you knew that already. So let me add that if we are powerless to expose his malversation, it is because we have allowed Ronald to encourage the acceptance of scapegoating and demonization. The truth of this is by no means limited to the field of general culture, but applies to politics as well. Some people might object to that claim, and if they do, my response is: He snorts around like a truffle pig in search of proof that he is a champion of liberty and individual expression. I suspect that the only thing that Ronald will find from such a search is that his adages have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung.

No matter what Ronald thinks, by his standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children—let alone teach them to be morally fit—you're definitely a rambunctious, crafty rascal. My standards—and I suspect yours as well—are quite different from Ronald's. For instance, I sincerely assert that he once tried to convince a bunch of us that Man's eternal search for Truth is a challenge to be avoided at all costs. Fortunately, calmer heads prevailed and a number of people informed the rest of the gang that every time Ronald utters or writes a statement that supports careerism—even indirectly—it sends a message that Ronald is entitled to spoon-feed us his pabulum. I decidedly suspect that we mustn't let him make such statements, partly because he is not afraid to use violence, ruse, shot and shell, poison, or the dagger to pit race against race, religion against religion, and country against country, but primarily because I feel that writing this letter is like celestial navigation. Before directional instruments were invented, sailors navigated the seas by fixing their compass on the North Star. However, if Ronald were to trick them into fixing their compass on the wrong star they'd soon be so off-course that they'd actually be willing to help him condemn children to a life of drugs, gangs, drinking, rape, incest, verbal abuse, physical abuse, and a number of other horrors. To close, let me accentuate that if we take advantage of a rare opportunity to debunk the nonsense spouted by Mr. Ronald M Bleacaford's emissaries we shall not only survive Ronald's attacks; we shall prevail.

[RazorFox]

wtf r u talkin aboutr m8 O_o;;;

[Vinnie Lei]

wtf r u talkin aboutr m8 O_o;;;

dunno either. let's parteh.

[Rei Kuhr]

While you're probably sick of hearing about Mr. Desereck Creeggan, it is crucial that you read this letter. Let us note first of all that we should agree on definitions before saying anything further about Mr. Creeggan's dishonest views. For starters, let's say that "mysticism" is "that which makes Mr. Creeggan yearn to show us a gross miscarriage of common judgment." He will treat people like puerile, deranged dorks because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses foul-mouthed philosophasters with repressive and uncontrollable rage.

For the nonce, Mr. Creeggan is content to replace discourse and open dialogue with apolaustic philosophies and blatant ugliness. But by the next full moon, he will base racial definitions on lineage, phrenological characteristics, skin hue, and religion. Trapped by the cognitive dissonance engendered by hard evidence and common sense, he feels obligated to exploit the general public's short attention span in order to talk about you and me in terms that are not fit to be repeated in a depraved attempt to justify his obiter dicta. While there are many lousy, ignorant rubes, Mr. Creeggan is the most shameless of the lot.

On rare occasions, in order to preserve their liberties, sometimes people must level filth and slime at everyone opposed to Mr. Creeggan's musings. Mr. Creeggan does that even when his liberties aren't being threatened. Contrary to popular belief, his hatchet jobs are designed to compromise the things that define us, including integrity, justice, love, and sharing. And they're working; they're having the desired effect. He sees himself as a postmodern equivalent of Marx's proletariat, revolutionizing the world by wresting it from its oppressors (viz., those who maintain the great principles of virtue, truth, right, and honor). Unfortunately, I can already see the response to this letter. Someone, possibly Mr. Desereck Creeggan himself or one of his toadies, will write an ornery piece about how utterly sick I am. If that's the case, then so be it. What I just wrote sorely needed to be written.

[Guest Afevis]

This letter is not intended to assuage your worst fears about Mr. Criss 'The Cross" Ixtar but will, in most cases, confirm them. To start, Mr. Ixtar generally tries to keep his distance from the egocentric pickpockets who impose a particular curriculum, vision of history, and method of pedagogy on our school systems. However, he sees nothing wrong with inaugurating an era of grungy solipsism. Ah the sweet, sweet smell of hypocrisy. I'd peg the odds at about six to one that he will crucify us on the cross of totalitarianism when you least expect it. If I'm wrong, I promise that I'll gladly tear off all my clothes and run naked down the street. We must straighten out Mr. Ixtar's thinking. As mentioned above, however, that is not enough. It is necessary to do more. It is necessary to wage war on negativism.

Given Mr. Ixtar's propensity for repression in the service of paradigmatic integrity, it is little wonder that Mr. Ixtar is more than merely jackbooted. He's über-jackbooted. In fact, Mr. Ixtar is so jackbooted that I have a tendency to report the more sensational things that he is up to, the more shocking things, things like how he wants to hammer away at the characters of all those who will not help him make higher education accessible only to those in the higher echelons of society. And I realize the difficulty that the average person has in coming to grips with that, but he asserts that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not. Most reasonable people, however, recognize such assertions as nothing more than baseless, if wishful, claims unsupported by concrete evidence.

To most people, the idea that the quest to leave behind a wake of hideous reaction is the true inner kernel of Mr. Ixtar's philosophy, insofar as this figment of a coldhearted brain can be designated a "philosophy", is so endemic, so long ingrained, that when others conclude that he's so accustomed to lying about everything that he doesn't even stop to consider the consequences of his lies, this merely seems to be affirming an obvious truth. If you read Mr. Ixtar's writings while mentally out of focus, you may get the sense that you and I are objects for Mr. Ixtar to use then casually throw away and forget like old newsprint that's performed its duty catching bird droppings. But if you read his writings while mentally in focus and weigh each point carefully, it's clear that his vassals actually believe the bunkum they're always mouthing. That's because these classes of gutless, nerdy crazy-types are idealistic, have no sense of history or human nature, and they think that what they're doing will somehow improve the world sooner or later. In reality, of course, Mr. Ixtar has recently been going around claiming that there is an international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids. You really have to tie your brain in knots to be gullible enough to believe that junk. Let me close where I began: Mr. Criss 'The Cross" Ixtar's drug-induced ravings have led to date rape, domestic violence, pornography, and other social ills.

[RazorFox]

I've been patient with Mr. Christoph 'Snowmew" Naumova, Esq., I've even avoided being drawn in by his provocative rhetoric. But I've finally had enough. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about condescending stirrers. He has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. Then again, just because Mr. Naumova is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that he has the mandate of Heaven to initiate a reign of drugged-out terror. He makes it sound like it's okay to leave the educational and emotional needs of our children in the corrupt hands of wily megalomaniacs. The evidence against that concept is so overwhelming, even an eight-year-old child can recognize it. Even so, some of my acquaintances express the view that Mr. Naumova has a near-legendary lack of common sense, decency, and manners. Others express the view that thanks to Mr. Naumova, the epidemic of immoralism is spreading rapidly. I am prepared to offer a cheer and a half for each view; together, they paint a sufficiently complete picture of Mr. Naumova to warrant a full three cheers.

Mr. Naumova's idiotic claim that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli is just that, an idiotic claim. I believe it was Hegel who said, "The erroneous things he says about me are sometimes entertaining, oftentimes sad, and frequently utterly deplorable". What does this mean for our future? For one thing, it means that Mr. Naumova used to complain about being persecuted. Now he is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that evidence exists to suggest that Mr. Naumova's loyalists are blissfully ignorant of his clumsy bromides. If you don't believe me, see for yourself.

I call upon Mr. Naumova to stop his oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon him to be a man of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon him to forgo his desire to court a xenophobic minority of disingenuous dingbats. He does not tolerate any view that differs from his own. Rather, Mr. Naumova discredits and discards those people who contradict him along with the ideas that they represent. The take-away message of this letter is that Mr. Christoph "Snowmew" Naumova, Esq.'s barbs are one of those things that will put the gods of heaven into the corner as obsolete and outmoded and, in their stead, burn incense to the idol Mammon. 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 Mr. Naumova's villainous sound bites, reminding you that you were warned.

[Mark Karlfeldt]

The funny thing is that this thread now contains more intelligent conversation using an automatic complaint generator than a thread with only human input.

[Desereck Creeggan]

Dep spaecships.

[Agares Tretiak]

This isn't intelligent. I can talk like you guys use a computer to do for you, in my sleep. :|

It's the same as putting rabid attack dogs in silk suits. The words seem pretty, until you put together what it means. Then you realize essentially thinly veiled attacks on other people, using emotional arguments rather than rational debate, in an effort to detach you, my dear listener, from your morally established system of beliefs. That is why I oppose Mr. Witherspoon, Esq, of 156 J, Downing Road, Essex New Hampshire. He is a man who utilizes his silver tongue in a manner to beguile and obfuscate genuine rhetorical exchanges of finely cogitated thought, with nothing less than haberdashery and a peculiar form of demagoguery, concealing his ill intent in esoteric vocabularian abuses of our beloved language. This unwarranted harassment of our principled and civilized discussions regarding the ephemeral and indefatigable non-physical manifestation of greatness and liberty that is our democratically appointed legislative representatives is an affront to our very humanity.

We immerse ourselves in clever hyperbole, detracting from the essential formation of a conscionable public process of political examination, one that Mr. Witherspoon and certain key figures within the supposedly 'esteemed' media utilize at every turn to not so much set the agenda for discourse, but to set what we are being told the agenda might be. I realize my phlegmatic approach to such issues might not elucidate some of my audience, but it is time to show that this is not the time for meiosis in my address to you, but a strong dose of the characteristic gumption and vigor that makes us a great public.

Thus, we must raise our voices, despite petty internecine disagreements, and see the gestalt of what besets our very way of living. I know I am not alone, when I quote Cicero, "Appetitus Rationi Pareat" or "Let our desires be ruled by reason." (for those of us who didn't pass Dr. Hardwick's Classical Latin class). We should hold these words to our bosom, use them as a shield against the inequities of our foes, and wield them unilaterally against those who would deprive us of our divinely instated rights. Let us not consider, for even a moment, that our opposition would show a moment of mercy, for in that moment, they will have won. Rather, let us quickly understand our rights of suffrage, and utilize them properly in the pursuit of egalitarian policies in our electoral jungle. Allow me to close, by stating this is a giant steaming heap of bullshit and that if you read through this and understand what I said, I will shake your hand. Admittedly, I will then use hand-sanitizer afterwards.

[Desereck Creeggan]

I've been patient with Mr. Christoph 'Snowmew" Naumova, Esq., I've even avoided being drawn in by his provocative rhetoric. But I've finally had enough. And that's why I feel compelled to say something about condescending stirrers. He has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which he can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. Then again, just because Mr. Naumova is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that he has the mandate of Heaven to initiate a reign of drugged-out terror. He makes it sound like it's okay to leave the educational and emotional needs of our children in the corrupt hands of wily megalomaniacs. The evidence against that concept is so overwhelming, even an eight-year-old child can recognize it. Even so, some of my acquaintances express the view that Mr. Naumova has a near-legendary lack of common sense, decency, and manners. Others express the view that thanks to Mr. Naumova, the epidemic of immoralism is spreading rapidly. I am prepared to offer a cheer and a half for each view; together, they paint a sufficiently complete picture of Mr. Naumova to warrant a full three cheers.

Mr. Naumova's idiotic claim that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli is just that, an idiotic claim. I believe it was Hegel who said, "The erroneous things he says about me are sometimes entertaining, oftentimes sad, and frequently utterly deplorable". What does this mean for our future? For one thing, it means that Mr. Naumova used to complain about being persecuted. Now he is our primary persecutor. This reversal of roles reminds me that evidence exists to suggest that Mr. Naumova's loyalists are blissfully ignorant of his clumsy bromides. If you don't believe me, see for yourself.

I call upon Mr. Naumova to stop his oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon him to be a man of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon him to forgo his desire to court a xenophobic minority of disingenuous dingbats. He does not tolerate any view that differs from his own. Rather, Mr. Naumova discredits and discards those people who contradict him along with the ideas that they represent. The take-away message of this letter is that Mr. Christoph "Snowmew" Naumova, Esq.'s barbs are one of those things that will put the gods of heaven into the corner as obsolete and outmoded and, in their stead, burn incense to the idol Mammon. 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 Mr. Naumova's villainous sound bites, reminding you that you were warned.

I vote we actually turn this into something. It makes so much sense with his name in there.

[RazorFox]

I vote we actually turn this into something. It makes so much sense with his name in there.

Mr. Christoph "Snowmew" Naumova, Esq.'s barbs

[Agares Tretiak]

He is not an esquire. Or a squire. To be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, he is nothing much at all.

[RazorFox]

He is not an esquire. Or a squire. To be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, he is nothing much at all.

He deserves an equestrian title insofar as he is a horse-fucker, a gallant fucker of horses, gallantly fucking horses all the live-long day.

[Singularity Phenomena]

Did you gais like copy and paste some paste arguments between VG and Mercz but just changed some things around. I didn't bother reading them cause of walls of texts but some of what I skimmed seemed familiar like I have seen the arguments once before. Not sure exactly where I have heard if not on SL but on a website. Eh, I need some sleep > <. Been up all night.

[Agares Tretiak]

Mine was completely made up on the spot, to point out what political double talk looks like.

The rest of theirs seem like cut and paste "Insert name here" speeches of some sort of outrage.

[fatalitywolf firehawk]

I would like to clarify some comments I made recently regarding Mr. Christoph "Snowmew" Naumova, Esq.. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I discuss the advantages of two-parent families, the essential role of individual and family responsibility, the need for uniform standards of civil behavior, and the primacy of the work ethic. He denies ever having tried to poke someone's eyes out. I assume he's merely trying to cover his posterior, as the truth is that Mr. Naumova's doctrines always follow the same pattern. He puts the desired twist on the actual facts, ignores inconvenient facts, and invents as many new "facts" as necessary to convince us that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says self-satisfied things.

The time is always right to do what is right. That's why we must compare, contrast, and identify the connections among different classes of vapid, puerile narcissism. The first step in that process is to realize that he wants nothing less than to transform fear and its inculcation into the preeminent force ruling human existence, hence his repeated, almost hypnotic, insistence on the importance of his lecherous ideologies. My prediction that Mr. Naumova would assail all that is holy came true so quickly, so brutally, so horribly, that even I was stunned by the magnitude and viciousness of it all.

Some people are responsible and others are not. Mr. Naumova falls into the category of "not". His commentaries are not just retroactively ineffective but proactively inert, by which I mean that society must soon decide either to give our propaganda fighters an instrument that is very much needed at this time or else to let Mr. Naumova create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. The decision is one of life or death, peaceful existence or perpetual social fever. I can hope only that those in charge realize that my position is that Mr. Naumova's seemingly egalitarian ideas lead only to results that are both slimy and unfair. He, in contrast, argues that the majority of grungy, unpatriotic hucksters are heroes, if not saints. This disagreement merely scratches the surface of the ideological chasm festering between me and Mr. Naumova. The only rational way to bridge this chasm is for him to admit that I'm not a malicious person. I'd like nothing more than to extend my hand in friendship to Mr. Naumova's secret police and convey my hope that in the days to come we can work together to nourish children with good morals and self-esteem. Unfortunately, knowing them, they'd rather champion censorship in the name of free speech, intolerance in the name of tolerance, and oppression in the name of freedom because that's what Mr. Naumova wants.

Before Mr. Naumova once again claims that there won't be any blowback from his excoriating attempts to bring questions of antidisestablishmentarianism into the (essentially apolitical) realm of pedagogy in language and writing, he should do some real research rather than simply play a game of bias reinforcement with his provocateurs. If his rejoinders were intended as a joke, he forgot to include the punchline. Mr. Naumova actually believes that his ideas are a breath of fresh air amid our modern culture's toxic cloud of chaos. True, Mr. Naumova has a right to his opinion. In his mind, he also apparently has a right to be a clueless, simple-minded meany as evidenced by his endless attempts to convert houses of worship into houses of charlatanism.

Mr. Naumova condones the perfidious hariolations that will advocate hotheaded animadversions. I see two problems with his hatchet jobs on a very fundamental level. First, his callous, cold-blooded greed leads him to force his moral code on the rest of us. And second, if he doesn't realize that it's generally considered bad style to rob Peter to pay Paul, then he should read one of the many self-help books on the subject. I recommend he buy one with big print and lots of pictures. Maybe then Mr. Naumova will grasp the concept that he is careless with data, makes all sorts of causal interpretations of things without any real justification, has a way of combining disparate ideas that don't seem to hang together, seems to show a sort of pride in his own biases, gets into all sorts of raffish speculation, and then makes no effort to test out his speculations—and that's just the short list!

Those of us who are too lazy or disinterested to raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding Mr. Naumova's abhorrent prognoses have no right to complain when he and his bootlickers criticize other people's beliefs, fashion sense, and lifestyle. Maybe it's just me, but don't you think that Mr. Naumova's pestilential, frowsy machinations run counter to human nature and, as such, are doomed to failure? All this aside, the basal lie that underlies all of Mr. Naumova's homophobic paroxysms is that he has answers to everything. Translation: The few of us who complain regularly about Mr. Naumova's words are simply spoiling the party. I doubt you need any help from me to identify the supreme idiocy of those views, but you should nevertheless be aware that Mr. Naumova's grievances reflect several layers of moral concern for many religions. Sad, but true. And it'll only get worse if Mr. Naumova finds a way to saddle the economy with crippling debt.

Consider the issue of disgraceful negativism. Everyone agrees that my methods of interpretation are clearly in defense of decency and human dignity and violate nobody's rights, but there are still some hostile, impractical fanatics out there who doubt that I have had to restrain myself from rebuking Mr. Naumova more vehemently. To them I say: We need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with Mr. Naumova. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that Mr. Naumova's inability to fathom what I am talking about is betrayed by his insistence that he has his moral compass in tact. That's the sort of statement that some people aver is impolitic but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made because his grunts all look like him, think like him, act like him, and enslave us, suppress our freedom, regiment our lives, confiscate our property, and dictate our values, just like Mr. Naumova does. And all this in the name of—let me see if I can get their propaganda straight—brotherhood and service. Ha!

Mr. Naumova's mottos have created a shrewish, naive universe devoid of logic and evidence. Only within this universe does it make sense to say that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive. Only within this universe does it make sense to throw away our freedom, our honor, and our future. And, only if we reach out to the poor, the marginalized, and those unfortunate enough to have been labeled as flippant by Mr. Naumova's propaganda machine can we destroy this aberrant universe of Mr. Naumova's and pronounce an enlightened and just judgment upon Mr. Naumova. We've tolerated his feral arguments long enough. It's time to lose our patience and chill our kindness. It's time to unmask Mr. Naumova's true face and intentions in regard to racism. It's time to shout to the world that he should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants every time he wants to.

Mr. Naumova counts what I call vile, illogical agitators as his friends. Unfortunately for him, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that the ultimate aim of Mr. Naumova's artifices is to restructure society as a pyramid with Mr. Naumova at the top, Mr. Naumova's cronies directly underneath, unrestrained drug addicts beneath them, and the rest of at the bottom. This new societal structure will enable Mr. Naumova to arouse inter-ethnic suspicion, which makes me realize that if he honestly believes that some of my points are not valid, I would love to get some specific feedback from him. Were he alive today, Hideki Tojo would be Mr. Naumova's most trustworthy ally. I can see Tojo joining forces with Mr. Naumova to help him agitate for indoctrination programs in local schools. Believe you me, I and Mr. Naumova part company when it comes to the issue of poststructuralism. He feels that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd while I claim that malignant sluggards are like putty in his hands. Mr. Naumova effortlessly molds them into loyal cult followers who don't think twice about drawing young children into his morbid way of life.

This much is clear: Mr. Naumova has for a long time been arguing that granting him complete control over our lives is as important as breathing air. Had he instead been arguing that anger is contagious, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Mr. Naumova's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how I have some of his writings in front of me right now. In one of them, Mr. Naumova maintains that he has the authority to issue licenses for practicing conformism. If you don't find that shocking then consider that Mr. Naumova has found a way to avoid compliance with government regulations, circumvent any further litigation, and initiate a reign of tactless terror—all by trumping up a phony emergency. Mr. Naumova is too stiff-necked to read the writing on the wall. This writing warns that a person who wants to get ahead should try to understand the long-range consequences of his/her actions. Mr. Naumova has never had that faculty. He always does what he wants to do at the moment and figures he'll be able to lie himself out of any problems that arise. Mr. Christoph Snowmew Naumova, Esq. is too nit-picky to reason with. That is why, come what may, we must give the needy a helping hand as opposed to an elbow in the face.

i wanted to join in too

[RazorFox]

Mine was completely made up on the spot, to point out what political double talk looks like.

The rest of theirs seem like cut and paste "Insert name here" speeches of some sort of outrage.

There's a generator thing.

[Trinity Heckroth]

I made a ten paragraphed one and read it through. It's tl;dr, but there is a bit in there I liked.

Authority without wisdom is mere noise against the music of eternity. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame the Vanguard Armed Forces.