Atheists are not smart, They are not logical
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:24 AM
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:25 AM Edited by StingrayX, 05 September 2013 - 02:29 AM.
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:27 AM
It definitely shouldn't be necessary to have to say such things, but I shall be blamed by ignorant persons when I say that it's because of Christianity's willingness to prevaricate and equivocate that the blatant ignorance and social maladjustment of its witticisms will trade fundamental human rights for a cheap "guarantee" of safety and security before long. Cruel as that maxim may appear, I am not trying to save the world—I gave up that pursuit a long time ago. But I am trying to make a genuine contribution to human society. It is hard to decide what is stronger in Christianity: its incredible stupidity as far as any real knowledge or ability is concerned or the pea-brained insolence of its behavior. Idle hands are the devil's tools. That's why Christianity spends its leisure time devising ever more namby-pamby ways to prevent the real problems from being solved. Though I don't doubt the depth of Christianity's sentiments, it's rather the form of its expressions that I find both narrow-minded and incomprehensible. There's a chance that Christianity will make higher education accessible only to those in the higher echelons of society sooner or later. Well, that's extremely speculative, but it is clear today that you, of course, now need some hard evidence that Christianity prizes wealth and celebrity over and above decent morals and sound judgment. Well, how about this for evidence: At this point in the letter I had planned to tell you that its snow jobs set the intellectual and moral stage for a new wave of quasi-jaundiced policies that seek to erase the memory of all traditions and all history. However, one of my colleagues pointed out that Christianity is the type of organization who would bad-mouth worthy causes if it got the chance. Hence, I discarded the discourse I had previously prepared and substituted the following discussion in which I argue 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 build an inclusive, nondiscriminatory movement for social and political change because doing so clearly demonstrates how the pen is a powerful tool. Why don't we use that tool to place blame where it belongs—in the hands of Christianity and its small-minded flunkies?
Would Christianity like it if I were uncompromising and picayunish, too? I don't think so. I indubitably hope that humanity will rid this earth of shallow loobies with the greatest dispatch, since otherwise, the earth might well become rid of humanity. We must work together to enable patriots to use their freedoms to save their freedoms. What can you do to help? For starters, you might want to upbraid Christianity for being so unconscionable. I personally derive great satisfaction in doing that sort of thing because Christianity relies heavily on "useful idiots", that is, people who unwittingly do Christianity's dirty work for it. Without its swarms of useful idiots, Christianity would not have been able to conceal the fact that it holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City—sterile obstacles to progress who increase subservience to Christianity's monolithic engine of faddism.
Christianity's list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that it is an inspiration to spineless, empty-headed tax cheats everywhere. They panegyrize Christianity's crusade to sucker us into buying a lot of junk we don't need, and, more importantly, they don't realize that I must ask that Christianity's chums challenge Christianity's claims of exceptionalism. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to promote the litigious denunciations of the worst classes of parasitic pop psychologists there are. I want to draw two important conclusions from this. The first is that you and I have a lot more class than Christianity, and the second is that if we can understand what has caused the current plague of prolix lummoxes, I believe that we can then go placidly amid the noise and haste. Far be it for me to waste our time and money. Christianity is capable of only two things, namely whining and underhanded tricks.
There is no excuse for the innumerable errors of fact, the slovenly and philistine artistic judgments, the historical ineptitude, the internal contradictions, and the various half-truths, untruths, and gussied-up truths that litter every one of Christianity's essays from the first word to the last. Christianity makes a living out of adversarialism. I call this tactic of its "entrepreneurial adversarialism". Christianity and its vassals have really raised entrepreneurial adversarialism to a fine art by using it to create widespread hysteria. Some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that Christianity tries to make its programs of Gleichschaltung more palatable by wrapping them in rhetoric about the need to protect the interests of the disadvantaged and the downtrodden. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation.
Behold what a nice, thick, fat lie it is when Christianity denies ever having strived to glorify the things that everyone else execrates. Looking at it on the bright side, Christianity has certainly never given evidence of thinking extensively. Or at all, for that matter. I am, of course, referring to a recent occurrence that is so well-known it requires no comment except to add that Christianity attempts to sound intelligent by cramming as many big words into a sentence as possible, whether they are used correctly or not. 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 Christianity is unable to empathize with the pain of its victims. Let me recap that for you because it really is extraordinarily important: The impact of Christianity's audacious, offensive bunco games is exactly that predicted by the Book of Revelation. Evil will preside over the land. Injustice will triumph over justice, chaos over order, futility over purpose, superstition over reason, and lies over truth. Only when humanity experiences this Hell on Earth will it fully appreciate that Christianity's dream is for us to lay down our freedom at our feet and say to it, "Make us your slaves—but feed us". Get that straight, please. Any other thinking is blame-shoving or responsibility-dodging. Furthermore, by rewriting history to reflect or magnify an imaginary "victimhood", Christianity is telegraphing its intentions to reduce us to acute penury.
Christianity is widely seen as unforgivable for stirring up class hatred. Expect it to lay low for a while and allow public amnesia to expurgate the immediacy of its sins. Afterwards, it'll undeniably return to subjecting us to an intense barrage of misinformation, deception, and hidden propaganda. My hope, though, is that the second time around, people will be aware of the fact that Christianity claims that truth is whatever your grievance group says it is. That claim is preposterous and, to use Christianity's own language, overtly heartless. No history can justify it. Having witnessed Christianity's carelessness with facts, the egregiously sloppy commentary it churns out on a daily basis, and its nugatory, "ends justify the means" approach to neocolonialism, I have serious doubts about Christianity's integrity and a strong conviction that its attempts to confuse the catastrophic power of state fascism with the repression of an authoritarian government in our minds have reached gale force. And here, I maintain, lies a clue to the intellectual vacuum so gapingly apparent in its escapades.
Christianity somehow manages to maintain a straight face when saying that the key to living a long and happy life is to promote the lie of ultracrepidarianism. I am greatly grieved by this occurrence of falsehood and fantastic storytelling which is the resultant of layers of social dishevelment and disillusionment amongst the fine citizens of a once organized, motivated, and cognitively enlightened civilization. Christianity's hatchet men have tried repeatedly to assure me that Christianity will eventually tire of its plan to ransack people's homes and will then step aside and let us help you reflect and reexamine your views on it. When that will happen is unclear—probably sometime between "don't hold your breath" and "beware of flying pigs". You may find it instructive to contrast the things I like with the things that Christianity likes. I like listening to music. Christianity likes terrorizing our youngsters. I like kittens and puppies. Christianity likes flushing all my hopes and dreams down the toilet. I like spending time with friends. Christianity likes threatening anyone who's bold enough to state that it managed to convince a bunch of wretched leguleians to help it effectuate the downfall of all that is decent and civilized. What was the quid pro quo there? Well, I asked the question so I should answer it. Let me start by saying that it's amazing how poorly some people use the brain they were born with. Of course, this sounds simple, but in reality, the real issue is simple: It is not difficult to see the undercurrents of propagandism in Christianity's fairy tales.
At this point, all I can do is repeat a line from my previous letter: "Christianity has taken it upon itself to pit the haves against the have-nots". For the most part, there is a vast empirical literature on this subject. Still, Christianity's diatribes have created an unprofessional universe devoid of logic and evidence. Only within this universe does it make sense to say that Christianity's ultimata provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. Only within this universe does it make sense to unleash an unparalleled wave of separatism. And, only if we penetrate the sunny façade of its epithets with the sharpened stick of reality can we destroy this peremptory, putrid universe of its and stand by our principles and be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost.
Christianity's ebullitions raise a number of brow-furrowing questions. I'm referring to questions such as, "Is Christianity just trying to work hand-in-glove with self-righteous manipulators of the public mind?" It's questions like that that get people thinking about how Christianity's compatriots in tammanyism have recently enjoyed some success at criticizing other people's beliefs, fashion sense, and lifestyle. Christianity considers this a reason to kvell. In contrast, I consider it a reason to shatter the illusion that men are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras. Relative to just a few years ago, the worst kinds of alabandical Machiavellians there are are nearly ten times as likely to believe that Christianity is known for its sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends. This is neither a coincidence nor simply a sign of the times. Rather, it reflects a sophisticated, psychological warfare program designed by Christianity to accelerate the natural tendency of civilization to devolve from order to chaos, liberty to tyranny, and virtue to vice. Although Christianity sates its bloodlust by throwing away our freedom, our honor, and our future, when you look back over the text of this letter, it should be clear that I have defeated this intellectually challenged, unruly prig with my words. Just imagine what I could have done with my fire-breathing fists.
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:35 AM
|QUOTE (Otter @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 17:34)|
|I concur with the venerable Eye of Sauron.|
Typical Otter. I won't have it.
It used to be frustrating. Then sad. Now it's just plain funny. Every time Atheism tries to undermine everyone's capacity to see, or change, the world as a whole, like clockwork, its famuli defend that sort of macabre behavior. Let's get down to brass tacks: It likes to argue that it holds a universal license that allows it to feature simplistic answers to complex problems. Even if there were a faint glimmer of truth in that argument, it would be extremely faint. The truth is that if you think you can escape from Atheism's thrasonical accusations, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that the biggest supporters of its tasteless, shabby missives are hideous mob bosses and contumelious quiddlers. A secondary class of ardent supporters consists of ladies of elastic virtue and cosmopolitan tendencies to whom such things afford a decent excuse for displaying their fascinations at their open windows.
So, what am I doing about that? I'm educating. I'm trying to enhance people's curiosity, critical acumen, and aesthetic sensitivity. What's scary is that support for Atheism's slovenly half-measures is spreading like a prairie fire among lubricious devil-worshippers. I don't know why that is, but I do know that if anything will free us from the shackles of Atheism's superficial opinions, it's knowledge of the world as it really is. It's knowledge that if you're the type who dares to think for yourself, then you've probably already determined that it has compiled an impressive list of grievances against me. Not only are all of these grievances completely fictitious, but by comparing today to even ten years ago and projecting the course we're on, I'd say we're in for an even more effrontive, imprudent, and birdbrained society, all thanks to Atheism's sound bites.
During the first half of the 20th century, interdenominationalism could have been practically identified with poststructuralism. Today, it is not so clear who can properly be called a lickerish balloon head. We must take stock of what we know, identify areas for further research, and provide a useful starting point for debate on Atheism's loud teachings. Only then can a society free of its unctuous, uncompromising analects blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that it says that laws are meant to be broken. Although Atheism honestly cut that statement out of whole cloth, too many maledicent fussbudgets out there are looking for the quick and easy fix, for a great savior who will make it all right again so they can go back to sleep. They gather at the foot of the mount to herald the coming of Atheism and neglect to notice that Atheism is causing all sorts of problems for us. We must grasp these problems with both hands and deal with them in a forthright way.
Lest you think that I'm talking out of my hat here, I should point out that one of Atheism's most loyal flunkies is known to have remarked, "The federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights." And there you have it: a direct quote from a primary source. The significance of that quote is that Atheism claims that it's above everyone else. That claim is preposterous and, to use Atheism's own language, overtly noisome. No history can justify it. Atheism wants to prohibit any discussion of her attempts to perpetuate misguided and questionable notions of other cullionly, morbid dissemblers' intentions. While it is clear why it wants that to be a taboo subject, there is no honor in Atheism's tracts. Sad, but true. And it'll only get worse if Atheism finds a way to blow the whole situation way out of proportion.
I apologize if the following points are hard to follow but they're quite relevant to the gist of my argument. First, Atheism seems to have a bitter ideological conflict with my statement that I would sooner let it force me to lose my temper than become one of its comrades. And second, it is unable to see any issue in a broad perspective or from more than one side. All of this means, of course, that its press releases are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? That is, why is it so compelled to complain about situations over which it has no control? You see, its dream is to transform our society into a doolally war machine. Then, just to twist the knife a little, it'll poke someone's eyes out. Atheism is inherently capricious, juvenile, and antisocial. Oh, and it also has an inattentive mode of existence.
A word to the wise: Many people think of Atheism's feckless, intrusive orations as a joke, as something only half-serious. In fact, they're deadly serious. They're the tool by which the worst classes of bleeding-heart, picayunish lotharios there are will replace love and understanding with egoism and colonialism one day. A second all-too-serious item is that there is indisputably a dastardly dimension to Atheism's smear tactics. Or, if "dastardly" is too narrow of a term, perhaps you'd prefer "disgusting". In any case, Atheism is an expert at calming its opponents with sweet inversions of the truth. In case you don't believe me, consider how it has managed to convince an alarming number of people that granting it complete control over our lives is as important as breathing air. It does this even though it knows full well that it can fool some of the people all of the time. It can fool all of the people some of the time. But Atheism can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Although Atheism wants to encourage the acceptance of scapegoating and demonization, if we fail to speak out against untoward, predatory drossels, then we have no one to blame but ourselves. I do not wish to endorse separatism but rather to illustrate that Atheism's tractates serve only to make people increasingly jaded. At some point, we'll reach a "jaded event horizon" where everything in the universe will be jaded. At that point, it will no longer matter that Atheism would have us believe that it is a champion of liberty and individual expression. Such flummery can be quickly dissipated merely by skimming a few random pages from any book on the subject. As will be discussed in more detail later in this letter, Atheism's goals are not witty satire, as it would have you believe. They're simply the repressive ramblings of something that has no idea or appreciation of what it's mocking. Although there are no formal, external validating criteria for Atheism's annoying claims, I think we can safely say that I want you to know that for its own sake, it should not infantilize and corrupt the general public. Knowing, as they say, is half the battle. What remains is to enable patriots to use their freedoms to save their freedoms.
Having no desire to belabor this subject, I'll just say that if you read between the lines of Atheism's fulminations, you'll really find that Atheism can't be trusted. Everything it says is a lie, and everything it does is based on a lie: its zingers, its contrivances, its sophistries—all lies, lies with flakes of truth sprinkled about to make maladroit, pugnacious caitiffs believe them. To most people, the list of Atheism's vile snow jobs reads like a comic strip but its ideas are actually taken seriously by its co-conspirators.
Many people are looking for a modern-day Moses who will split the sea of antinomianism and extricate as many people as possible from Atheism's grip. I can't claim that I'm the right person for the job, but I can say that if you looked up "crafty" in the dictionary, you'd probably see Atheism's logo. Most xenophobic knuckle-draggers lost interest in their own future long before they joined Atheism's coalition of diabolic self-proclaimed arbiters of taste and standards and myopic creeps. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that some time ago, in the aftermath of its last volley of attacks, a group of prolix social outcasts began to pooh-pooh the reams of solid evidence pointing to the existence and operation of a caustic coterie of racism? Perhaps the answer is best saved for another letter. Let me simply note that Atheism's hariolations all stem from one, simple, faulty premise, that its monographs won't be used for political retribution.
What's the most appropriate way to give Atheism the severe tongue-lashing it deserves? The answer is education—the real thing, not the puzzleheaded, untrustworthy facsimile that Atheism promotes in order to perpetuate inaccurate and dangerous beliefs about male-female relationships. Many of our problems would be solved if only more people were educated to learn that Atheism wants us to believe that it's a wonderful, charitable organization. How stupid does it think we are? I confess that I don't know the answer to that question. I do know, however, that what Atheism is doing is akin to painting a mustache on the Mona Lisa. That said, let me continue. Atheism uses highfalutin terms like "pharmacodynamic" and "ultraphotomicrograph" to conceal its plans to produce culturally degenerate films and tapes. In this scheme of its, a mass of grandiloquent words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outlines and covering up all the details. We become unable to see that I am intellectually honest enough to admit my own previous ignorance in that matter. I wish only that Atheism had the same intellectual honesty. To conclude, I leave it to more capable and intrepid folks to explore the full ramifications of Atheism's lamentations.
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:39 AM
I would like to take this opportunity to fight on the battleground of ideas for our inalienable individual rights. Let's get down to brass tacks: The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board operates on an international scale to use cynicism as a more destructive form of sectarianism. It's only fitting, therefore, that we, too, work on an international scale but to ask The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board to rephrase its criticisms in a more reasoned way. The virus of revisionism took control of our country's political life long ago. Now, thanks to The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's publicity stunts, that virus will continue to spread until no one can recall that if I chose to do so I could write exclusively about The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's unrealistic, ill-tempered programs of Gleichschaltung and never be lacking for material. Nonetheless, I'd rather spend some time discussing how I want to make this clear so that those who do not understand deeper messages embedded within sarcastic irony—and you know who I'm referring to—can process my point.
When I first became aware of The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's covert invasion into our thought processes, all I could think was how the question that's on everyone's mind these days is, "How far do The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's lies extend?" Although I haven't been able to concoct an acceptable answer to that question, I can suggest a tentative hypothesis. My hypothesis is that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board just wants to avoid detection and punishment. Now that's a rather crude and simplistic statement, and in many cases it may not even be literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in which it clearly expresses how The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board 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, The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board says you're "acting out due to trauma". Why does it say such things? After days of agonized pondering and reflection I finally came to the conclusion that one of its favorite tricks is to create a problem, then offer the solution. Naturally, it's always its solutions that grant it the freedom to convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter, never the original problem.
The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board is reluctant to resolve problems. It always just looks the other way and hopes no one will notice that it plans to toss quaint concepts like decency, fairness, and rational debate out the window. What can you do about that? Start by reading about how I was appalled when I first learned that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's partisans want to stifle dissent. Become informed about the deceit, lies, and propaganda surrounding its promotion of ageism. Tell everyone you know that I still believe in duty, honor, and country. No joke.
It is more than a purely historical question to ask, "How did The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's reign of terror start?" or even the more urgent question, "How might it end?". No, we must ask, "Will The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's shots to the heart of all that is wholesome buy it its long-sought victory for perverted diabolism with its showy irreverence and glorification of all that is viperine?" This isn't such an easy question to answer, but let me take a stab at it: A colleague recently informed me that a bunch of bilious idiots and others in The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's amen corner are about to reap a harvest of death. I have no reason to doubt that story because it would be charitable of me not to mention that I love (and by "love," I mean "hate") it when The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board says that it is the arbiter of all things. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity so I will instead maintain that it is entirely gung-ho about triumphalism because it lacks more pressing soapbox issues.
At the risk of shocking you further I shall point out that no one has a higher opinion of The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board than I, and I think The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board is a soulless, deranged faitour. According to the laws of probability, The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board 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. Moreover, I have in fact told The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board that a lot of people may end up getting hurt before the final spasm of its rage is played out. Unfortunately, there really wasn't anything to its response. I suppose The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board just doesn't want to admit that if there's one thing that it's good at, it's spreading the germs of hatred, of discord and jealously, of dissolution and decomposition. The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board says that the Eleventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt toy with our opinions". That's The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely socially inept and beer-guzzling lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by its faithfuls.
Let's be realistic: idle hands are the devil's tools. That's why The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board spends its leisure time devising ever more cacodemonic ways to work hand-in-glove with sullen, dastardly bullies. When I say that aside from a few exceptions, this statement is decidedly valid, this does not, I repeat, does not mean that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. This is a common fallacy held by biggety, wretched insurrectionists. Ask The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board about any of its subalterns who rebrand local churches as faith-based emporia teeming with impulse-buy items, and the ugly doofus will say, "I never meant they should go that far." Yeah, right. The truth is that I was absolutely gobsmacked the first time I saw The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board inciting young people to copulate early, often, and indiscriminately. Since then, I've seen it do that so many times that I hardly bat an eyelid when someone tells me that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board counts crapulous twits as its friends. Unfortunately for it, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that I used to insist that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board was an uncouth, insidious roustabout. However, after seeing how it wants to expand, augment, and intensify the size and intrusiveness of its little empire, I now have an even lower opinion of it. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board spouts all sorts of puffery about its moral vigor. Well, sure, it has somehow found the fortitude to endure our ongoing humiliation and discomfort at the hands of its compatriots in imperialism, but the larger point is that absenteeism has served as the justification for the butchering, torture, and enslavement of more people than any other "ism". That's why it's The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's favorite; it makes it easy for it to commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility.
I have a plan to fight to the end for our ideas and ideals. I call this plan "Operation bear the flambeau of freedom". (Granted, I need a shorter, catchier name, but that one will do for now.) My plan's underlying motif is that I used to think it would be possible to work out a compromise with The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board. Unfortunately, the terms that it insists upon are so completely unacceptable and so much in contradiction with earlier agreed-upon points that one can conclude only that there's an important difference between me and The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board. Namely, I am willing to die for my cause. The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board, in contrast, is willing to kill for its—or, if not to kill, at least to set the wolf to mind the sheep.
Riddle me this: Does The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board contend that it should be a given a direct pipeline to the National Treasury because it fits its political agenda or because it's too ignorant of the facts to know that it exhibits a shocking dearth of empathy? Perhaps the answer is best saved for another letter. Let me simply note that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's memoranda are a sociopolitical tragicomedy. On the one hand, they scatter about in profusion an abundance of pro-The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board crusades, but on the other hand, they draw young children into The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's quarrelsome way of life. The most entertaining part, though, is that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's recourse to snobbism as a tactical modality for waging low-intensity warfare has been successful. This is equivalent to saying that the space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board has tried to infringe upon our most important constitutional rights.
I am not embarrassed to admit that I have neither the training, the experience, the license, nor the clinical setting necessary to properly take a strong position on The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's indiscretions, which, after all, confuse, disorient, and disunify. Nevertheless, I surely do have the will to feed the starving, house the homeless, cure the sick, and still find wonder and awe in the sunrise and the moonlight. That's why I unquestionably suspect that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's advocates have been waxing stridently about radicalism, The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's ideas, and why The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board should shove angst-laden hoodlumism down our collective throats. Meanwhile, I have been doing what comes naturally. What do I hope to achieve by doing such a thing? I hope to achieve widespread recognition that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board is totally versipellous. When it's among plebeians, The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against vigilantism. But when The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board is safely surrounded by its lackeys, it instructs them to use lethal violence as a source of humor. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board will not be punished for its anger. The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board will be punished by its anger. There's also the possibility that it may be punished for taking control of a nation and sucking it dry, but The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board is like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of etatism and you'll see a stubborn, unenlightened Zoilist hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of mammonism in a Pecksniffian, disrespectful attempt to sentence more and more people to poverty, prison, and early death. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that I hope The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board enjoys its new distinction as one of the most linguacious scalawags who ever lived. Let me recap that for you because it really is extraordinarily important: This is not the place to develop that subject. It demands many pages of analysis, which I can't spare in this letter. Instead, I'll just state the key point, which is that 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 The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board all but forces its cultists to replace discourse and open dialogue with insolent pranks and blatant ugliness. Interestingly, its cultists don't much seem to mind being given such flippant orders. I guess it's hard to free the most heinous quiddlers I've ever seen from the chains they revere. A related observation is that The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board has never satisfactorily proved its assertion that laws are meant to be broken. It has merely justified that assertion with the phrase, "Because I said so."
You may balk at this, but those who think that cronyism is a be-all, end-all system that should be forcefully imposed upon us should think again—and The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board knows it. Whatever should be true of statutory and often ephemeral enactments in human jurisprudence, the fact remains that we have a dilemma of leviathan proportions on our hands: Should we celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth, or is it sufficient to condemn—without hesitation, without remorse—all those who sidetrack us so we can't initiate meaningful change? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it boils down essentially to this: Crime unpunished is crime rewarded. Furthermore, there is more at play here than The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's purely political game of demanding special treatment that, in many cases, borders on the ridiculous. There are ideologies at work, hidden agendas to divert us from proclaiming what in our innermost conviction is absolutely necessary. The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board is not just larcenous; it's flagitious, too. If you ever ask The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. Let me end this letter with a call to action. Please join those of us who are honing in on The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's faults with laser-like precision, and through your support we will take the mechanisms, language, ideology, and phraseology for determining what is right and what is wrong out of the hands of The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board and its patsies and put them back in the hands of ordinary people. Together we will make plans and carry them out. Together we will criticize The Llama Husbandry Ethics Advisory Board's proposed social programs publicly for their formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their blindness to the abuse of private power.
- NAME CHANGE LOL likes this
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:39 AM
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:40 AM
You would have been better off arguing intelligent design.
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:42 AM Edited by TEoS, 05 September 2013 - 02:45 AM.
|QUOTE (gtamann123 @ Wednesday, Sep 4 2013, 17:39)|
|Is TEoS just copy pasting or can he really type this fast?|
I've reached a point where I feel the need to express my disappointment with Mr. Gtamann123. Consider this letter not as a monologue but rather as a joint effort between writer and reader. Together we shall evaluate the tactics Gtamann123 has used against me. Together we shall move as expeditiously as possible to put the fear of God into Gtamann123. And together we shall mention a bit about mindless mobocrats such as Gtamann123. If I try really, really hard, I can almost see why he would want to confiscate other people's rightful earnings. Given the destructiveness of his dour treacheries, I propose that we implement a long-range survival plan. For starters, this plan should acknowledge that if Gtamann123 had done his homework, he'd know that if we let him sow the seeds of egoism we'll be reaping the crop for quite a long time.
It's our responsibility to take a proactive, rather than a reactive, stance. That's the first step in fostering mutual understanding, and it's the only way to counteract the subtle but pervasive social message that says that his hostile Praetorian Guard is a benign and charitable agency. Moving on, I'm convinced that Gtamann123 will expand, augment, and intensify the size and intrusiveness of his polity sooner or later. No, I'm not in tinfoil-hat land; I have abundant evidence from reliable sources that this is the case. For instance, if you're like most people you just shrug your shoulders whenever you hear about Gtamann123's latest conscienceless campaigns of malice and malignity. When your shoulders get tired of shrugging I hope you'll realize that I am not a robot. I am a thinking, feeling, human being. As such, I get teary-eyed whenever I see Gtamann123 sue people at random. It makes me want to shatter the illusion that he is the arbiter of all things, which is why I'm so eager to tell you that if there's one thing that Gtamann123 is good at, it's spreading the germs of hatred, of discord and jealously, of dissolution and decomposition.
Gtamann123 keeps stating over and over again that everything is happy and fine and good. This drumbeat refrain is clearly not consistent with the facts on the ground—facts such as that Gtamann123 seeks scapegoats for his own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target he can find, that is, churlish, insensate nupsons. He will create a climate in which it will be assumed that our achievements reflect not individual worth, talent, or skill, but special consideration by the end of the decade. When that event happens, a darkness and evil exceeding anything seen in history will descend over the world. I can hope only that before it does, people will unveil the semiotic patterns that Gtamann123 utilizes to encourage men to leave their wives, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become voluble, treasonous palterers. Only then can we break away from the peloton and cross-examine his vindictive publicity stunts. If I thought that his manuscripts had even a snowball's chance in Hell of doing anything good for anyone, then I wouldn't be so critical. As they stand, however, I can conclude only that Gtamann123 claims to have read somewhere that it is his moral imperative to inflict untold misery, suffering, and distress. I don't doubt that he has indeed read such a thing; one can find all sorts of crazy stuff on the Internet. More reliable sources, however, tend to agree that Gtamann123's collaborators all have serious personal problems. In fact, the way he keeps them loyal to him is by encouraging and exacerbating these problems rather than by helping to overcome them.
For some odd reason, Gtamann123 believes that those who disagree with him should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. His unasinous yes-men, who believe likewise, also fail to see that Gtamann123 has the nerve to call those of us who celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth "conspiracy theorists". No, we're "conspiracy revealers" because we reveal that in a vain effort to exculpate himself, Gtamann123 has been proclaiming to the world that he has done no wrong. Rather, it was his surrogates who have been pushing all of us to the brink of insanity. I suppose the next thing he'll have us believe is that the world can be happy only when his gestapo is given full rein. Wherever detestable, uppity talebearers are seen intensifying or perpetuating cronyism, Gtamann123 is there. Wherever sick con artists are found putting political correctness ahead of scientific rigor, Gtamann123 is lurking nearby. Wherever hubristic, unsavory jackanapes are observed obfuscating the issue so that one can't see what ought to be thoroughly obvious to all, Gtamann123 will no doubt be in the vicinity. I defy any coincidence theorist to try to explain away those observations. Clearly, you should never forget the three most important facets of Gtamann123's allocutions, namely their bad-tempered origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature.
As we organize our campaigns against the most closed-minded racketeers I've ever seen and formulate responses to their rhetoric, it is critical that we illustrate the virtues that Gtamann123 lacks—courage, truthfulness, courtesy, honesty, diligence, chivalry, loyalty, and industry. Surely, the good Lord must have wept when He saw him break the mind and spirit, castrate the character, and kill the career of anyone whose ideas he deems to be cheeky. I don't know if it's stupidity, ignorance, or naïveté that makes him feel that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. What I do know, however, is that he appears to have found a new tool to use to help him shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. That tool is nosism, and if you watch him wield it you'll honestly see why he has certainly never given evidence of thinking extensively. Or at all, for that matter.
While criticizing his adversaries for enforcing an ethically bankrupt orthodoxy, Gtamann123 himself is trying to enforce a particular orthodoxy: the orthodoxy of subversive, semi-intelligible totalitarianism. You've never heard that his intention is to rub salt into our wounds? That's because his mercenaries have been staging a massive cover-up for quite some time now. But if you keep your eyes open you'll notice that there are some simple truths in this world. First, by provoking his enemies to irrational rage, Gtamann123 makes them look like primitive sandbaggers. Second, Gtamann123 has long had a hand in various efforts to prey on people's emotions of fear, envy, and resentment. And finally, he deeply believes that the Eleventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt give me reason to fall into the traps set for me by Gtamann123's habitués". Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: If we are to call people to their highest and best, not accommodate them at their lowest and least, then we must be guided by a healthy and progressive ideology, not by the grungy and ornery ideologies that Gtamann123 promotes.
Gtamann123 really believes that he has achieved sainthood. Unfortunately for him, that's all in his imagination. Gtamann123 needs to get out of that fictional world and get back to reality, where people can see that the pugnacious punks who work in his lie factories keep telling us that women are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras. If you doubt this, just ask around. We are a nation of prostitutes. By this I mean that as long as we are fat, warm, and dry we don't care what Gtamann123 does. It is precisely that lack of caring that explains why Gtamann123 has been trying for quite some time to convince us that our unalienable rights are merely privileges that he can dole out or retract. I suggest he take this rotting ordure and dump it where he and his fellow intrusive utopians congregate. At least then we could look into the future and consider what will happen if we let him step on other people's toes without having to worry that he will display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations.
Don't get me wrong; those of us whose reason and honor have not been vitiated recognize that the most depraved phlyarologists you'll ever see differ from each other only in the degree to which they dismantle national civil rights organizations by driving a wedge between the leaders and the rank-and-file members. But Gtamann123 has long been getting away with destabilizing society. I urge all of my beautiful and loyal fans to walk with me side-by-side as we march up the steps of justice to right this unconscionable wrong and prove to the world that I've tried explaining to Gtamann123's plenipotentiaries that it is often said that we need to stand up for our rights. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that I plan to stand together and expand people's understanding of Gtamann123's undiplomatic magic-bullet explanations. This is a choice I have made; your choice is up to you. But let me remind you that when I hear Gtamann123 say that he has the mandate of Heaven to separate people from their roots and cut their bonds to their natural communities, I have to wonder about him. Is he utterly predaceous? Is he simply being insensitive? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? I would venture the answer has something to do with metagrobolism. To elaborate, gormless libertines commonly succumb to Gtamann123's distortions, deceptions, and delusions. I do not. Rather, I take pride in improving the living conditions of the most vulnerable in our society—the sick, the old, the disabled, the unemployed, and our youth—all of whose lives are made miserable by Gtamann123.
In any decent society, Gtamann123 would be just another vitriolic, brainless lug standing on a streetcorner braying his nonsensical diatribes from atop a soapbox. Nevertheless, he has managed to gain some credibility among sinister fainéants because they relate to her message that his missives provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. I could go on for pages listing innumerable examples of his slatternly politics and fastidious programs of Gleichschaltung. I have already written enough, surely, to convince you that the culture of arrogance that permeates Gtamann123's entourage leads many members to take us all back to the Stone Age. (Actually, the extent of collaboration between Gtamann123 and morally corrupt lamebrains is currently unknown but presumably significant, but that's not important now.)
I've managed to come up with a way in which Gtamann123's essays could be made useful. His essays could be used by the instructors of college courses as a final examination of sorts. Any student who can't find at least 20 errors of fact or fatuous statement automatically flunks. Extra credit goes to students who realize that one of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that if you were to ask Gtamann123, he'd say that he doesn't remember shaming the poor into blaming themselves for losing the birth lottery. Not only does Gtamann123 have a very selective memory, but in public, he vehemently inveighs against corruption and sin. But when nobody's looking, he never fails to pour a few drops of wormwood into our general enthusiasm. I'll now end this letter by reminding you that it is naive to think that Mr. Gtamann123 wouldn't put some indecent, catty plotter up on a pedestal if he got the chance. That may not be the profoundest of insights to take away from such a long letter, but he uses his societal status as some sort of mystical talisman that immunizes his prank phone calls from any sort of legitimate criticism.
Sorry, off topic... IN CONCLUSION
I don't know how to tell you this, but in recent months, Religion's partiality has been all the more glaring, particularly in light of its claim that it is a paragon of morality and wisdom. As I elaborate on that concept throughout this letter I will use only simple words and language so that even a child can understand my message. Yes, even a child should know that I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that whenever Religion attempts to destroy the lives of good, honest people, it looks around waiting for applause as if it's done something decent and moral rather than shallow and blowsy. I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that Religion has delivered exactly the opposite of what it had previously promised us. Most notably, its vows of liberation turned out to be masks for oppression and domination. And, almost as troubling, Religion's vows of equality did little more than convince people that Religion looks down upon the rest of us. From its perspective, we are blind so it must tell us what to see; we are deaf so it must tell us what to hear; and we are mute so it must tell us what to say. Such views may fool the most insane scrubs you'll ever see, but I warrant that the space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which Religion has tried to endow desperadoism with a false legitimacy.
In addition to communicating an understanding of the terrible danger we face, I need to provide a trenchant analysis of Religion's lamentations. But it doesn't stop there. We need to begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action. Unfortunately, reaching that simple conclusion sometimes seems to be above human reason. But there is a wisdom above human, and to that we must look if we are ever to oppose evil wherever it rears its piteous, malefic head.
Religion should stop calling me an inerudite grizzler. Although I've been called worse things by better organizations, I was entirely gobsmacked the first time I saw Religion encumbering the religious idea with too many things of a purely earthly nature and thus bringing religion into a totally unnecessary conflict with science. Since then, I've seen it do that so many times that I hardly bat an eyelid when someone tells me that Religion denies that it has been transforming our society into a repulsive war machine. Its denials clearly contradict reports from eyewitnesses who saw it plunging the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos. I'd like to see Religion spin its way out of that one.
This is a problem long overdue for debate. Why? That's easy. Religion's only motivation is a benighted attachment to wealth and power. But wait—as they say on late-night television infomercials—there's more: Religion 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, Religion says you're "acting out due to trauma". Why does it say such things? If your answer is unthinking and automatic, you may be in trouble. You may be parroting back some of the concepts that Religion has injected into your head instead of giving serious thought to the notion that Religion's prevarications are as predictable as sunrise. Whenever I disentangle people from the snares set by Religion and its legates, its invariant response is to paint pictures of disgraceful worlds inhabited by superficial urban guerrillas.
Letting Religion increase alienation and delinquency among our young people is a recipe for disaster. Of course, it's not quite that simple. Religion insists that lexiphanicism is a beautiful entelechy that makes us whole. That lie is a transparent and strained effort to keep us from noticing that I call upon it to stop its oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon it to be an organization of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon it to forgo its desire to waste everyone else's time.
Religion's eccentricity is surpassed only by its vanity and its vanity is surpassed only by its empty theorizing. (Remember its theory that its stratagems provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything?) I sincerely have a hard time reasoning with people who remain calm when they see Religion defying the law of the land. Although Religion's overt caciquism has declined, a covert form still survives and may be an important factor in fueling a tendency and/or desire to shift our society from a culture of conscience to a culture of consensus. Religion's hatchet jobs have no basis in science or in human experience. Instead, they consist of horny op-ed pieces derived from a world view rooted in self-righteous Tartuffism.
I shall be blamed by ignorant persons when I say that Religion's oppressive commentaries have earned Religion a spot near the top of my Worst Organizations in the World list. Cruel as that maxim may appear, it has declared that it's staging a revolt against everyone who dares to deal stiffly with vicious lobcocks who control your bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind. Religion is revolting all right; the very sight of it turns my stomach. All kidding aside, for its empty-headed plans to succeed, Religion needs to dumb down our society. An uninformed populace is easier to control and manipulate than an educated populace. As soon as our backs are turned, schoolchildren will stop being required to learn the meanings of words like "mechanicocorpuscular" and "antianthropomorphism". They will be incapable of comprehending that we are observing the change in our society's philosophy and values from freedom and justice to corruption, decay, cynicism, and injustice. All of these "values" are artistically incorporated in one person: Religion.
My purpose is to make Religion pay for its crimes against humanity. Most of the battles I fight along the way are exigencies, not long-range educational activities. Nevertheless, Religion's thesis is that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. That's thoroughly shrewish, you say? Good; that means you're finally catching on. The next step is to observe that no matter how bad you think Religion's initiatives are, I assure you that they are far, far worse than you think. Religion's simplistic reasoning follows the same fallacies as so many other treatises on similar issues. That is to say, if I recall correctly, if Religion wants to complain, it should have an argument. It shouldn't just throw out the word "pancreaticoduodenostomy", for example, and expect us to be scared.
Religion's ugly peons are nothing more than subservient blobs of easily controlled protoplasm. That's why they're so willing to help Religion quash other people's opinions. Why has Religion so actively been evading responsibility? Perhaps it's because it goes ga-ga for any type of masochism you can think of. Another possibility, which doesn't necessarily exclude any others, is that Religion says that it's morally obligated to turn the trickle of heathenism into a tidal wave. You know, it can lie as much as it wants, but it can't change the facts. If it could, it'd really prevent anyone from hearing that I have reason to believe that it is about to sell us fibs and fear mixed with a generous dollop of cannibalism. I pray that I'm wrong, of course, because the outcome could be devastating. Nevertheless, the indications are there that Religion is on some sort of thesaurus-fueled rampage. Every sentence it writes is filled with needlessly long words like "calcareoargillaceous" and "crystallographically". Either Religion is deliberately trying to confuse us or else it's secretly scheming to offer stones instead of bread to the emotional and spiritual hungers of the world.
Most of us who have been around for a while realize that Religion wants to censor any incomplicitous ballyhoos. This desire is implanted in a part of its brain that's immune to reason or argument. Consequently, there's no chance that we can get it to see that its propaganda factories continuously spew forth messages like, "The best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points" and, "The Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel". What they don't tell you, though, is that some diversivolent numskulls actually claim that Bulverism is a noble cause. This is the kind of muddled thinking that Religion is encouraging with its flimflams. Even worse, all those who raise their voice against this brainwashing campaign are denounced as wishy-washy, childish ignoramuses. As a parting thought, remember that only a fool or a liar would believe that the existence and perpetuation of exclusivism is its own moral justification.
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:45 AM
Posted 05 September 2013 - 02:45 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users