Posted April 7, 200619 yr I am writing to express my concerns about Mr. Myg0t Chubr0ck and, more specifically, his prevarications regarding effrontive fussbudgets. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I evaluate the tactics Mr. Chubr0ck has used against me. This may be a foregone conclusion, but his catch-phrases are a spiritually destructive propaganda instrument aimed at our children. I could write pages on the subject, but the following should suffice. I have one itsy-bitsy problem with Mr. Chubr0ck's dissertations. Videlicet, they abandon me on a desert island. And that's saying nothing about how he wants us to emulate the White Queen from Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass, who strives to believe "as many as six impossible things before breakfast". Then again, even the White Queen would have trouble believing that those who disagree with Mr. Chubr0ck should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. I prefer to believe things that my experience tells me are true, such as that Mr. Chubr0ck's wheelings and dealings are not pedantic treatises expressing theories or extravaganzas dealing in fables or fancies. They are substantial, sober outpourings from the very soul of sexism. Just because I understand Mr. Chubr0ck's plaints doesn't mean I agree with them. Mr. Chubr0ck is becoming ever more audacious in his unappeasable hatred of us. So please permit me to appropriate and paraphrase something I once heard: "Giving Mr. Chubr0ck the means to elevate his principles to prominence as epistemological principles is like supplying the gun to your own robber." Here's some news for you: He has a near-legendary lack of common sense, decency, and manners. Interesting, isn't it? What you may find even more interesting is that his op-ed pieces are based on a technique I'm sure you've heard of. It's called "lying". There is no doubt that Mr. Chubr0ck will treat anyone who doesn't agree with him to a torrent of vitriol and vilification some day. Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that if Mr. Chubr0ck believes that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully, then it's obvious why he thinks that might makes right. I would never take a job working for him. Given his flighty, naive quips, who would want to? Our battle with Mr. Chubr0ck is a battle between spiritualism and irrationalism, 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 Mr. Chubr0ck considers "honesty" to be a dirty word. But the problems with Mr. Chubr0ck's conjectures don't end there. As will be discussed in more detail later in this letter, he operates on an international scale to usher in the rule of the Antichrist and the apocalyptic end times. It's only fitting, therefore, that we, too, work on an international scale, but to criticize the obvious incongruities presented by Mr. Chubr0ck and his helpers. Perhaps one day we will live in a world where good people are not troubled by fear of duplicitous hermits. Until that day arrives, however, we must spread the word that Mr. Chubr0ck's sinful attempt to construct a creative response to my previous letter was absolutely pitiful. Really, Mr. Chubr0ck, stringing together a bunch of solecistic insults and seemingly random babble is hardly effective. It simply proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that we were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to study the problem and recommend corrective action. We were not put here to cause wicked subversion to gather momentum on college campuses, as Mr. Chubr0ck might think. Notice the nugatory tendency of Mr. Chubr0ck's circulars. Sure, Mr. Chubr0ck can fabulize about how society is screaming for his holier-than-thou attitudes. That doesn't change the fact that he should not muzzle his critics. Not now, not ever. He wants us to feel sorry for the incorrigible clodpolls who slow scientific progress. I insist we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well 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 I truly contend that shooting one's mouth off in a public forum on the basis of flimsy facts is neither prudent nor smart. My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that he wants to play fast and loose with the truth. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background. Clearly, it has been said that Mr. Chubr0ck's beliefs are incompatible with the proclivities of instrumental reason. I believe that to be true. I also believe that one can predict on empirical grounds that eventually he will force people to act in ways far removed from the natural patterns of human behavior. I submit that everyone should stop and mull that assertion. Then, you'll understand why by brainwashing his apparatchiks with Fabianism, Mr. Chubr0ck makes them easy to lead, easy to program, and easy to enslave. Isn't it interesting which questions Mr. Chubr0ck dodges and what tangents he goes off on? Those dodges and tangents make me think that it strikes me as amusing that Mr. Chubr0ck complains about people who do nothing but complain. Well, news flash! He does nothing but complain. Mr. Chubr0ck labels anyone he doesn't like as "coprophagous". That might well be a better description of him. We find among narrow and uneducated minds the belief that everything is happy and fine and good. This belief is due to a basic confusion, which can be cleared up simply by stating that Mr. Chubr0ck's claim that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says unrealistic things is not only an attack on the concept of objectivity, but an assault on the human mind. Mr. Chubr0ck's intimates consider his cop-outs a breath of fresh air. I, however, find them more like the fetid odor of classism. So who's crazy? I, or all the foul-mouthed manipulators of the public mind who claim that atrabilious, cold-blooded purveyors of malice and hatred are easily housebroken? Before you answer, let me point out that someone has to be willing to bring meaning, direction, and purpose into our lives. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that Mr. Chubr0ck is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. Mr. Chubr0ck's occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are his promises. In fact, Mr. Chubr0ck has been trying to convince us that everyone and everything discriminates against him -- including the writing on the bathroom stalls. This pathetic attempt to reduce religion to a consumer item in a spiritual supermarket deserves no comment other than to say that only through education can individuals gain the independent tools they need to insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward nonrepresentationalism. But the first step is to acknowledge that if everyone does his own, small part, together we can address a number of important issues. Mr. Chubr0ck recently went through a Lysenkoism phase in which he tried repeatedly to destroy that which is the envy of -- and model for -- the entire civilized world. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that I can say one thing about Mr. Chubr0ck. He understands better than any of us that psychological impact is paramount -- not facts, not anybody's principles, not right and wrong. I'm not suggesting that we behave likewise. I'm suggesting only that it is not uncommon for Mr. Chubr0ck to victimize the innocent, penalize the victim for making any effort to defend himself, and then paint the whole two-faced affair as some great benefit to humanity. As you can see, contrary to my personal preferences, I'm thinking about what's best for all of us. My conclusion is that what's best for all of us is for me to fight for our freedom of speech. Admittedly, I will dedicate the rest of my life to my efforts to hold Mr. Chubr0ck responsible for the hatred he so furtively expresses. But that's because Mr. Chubr0ck wants to get me thrown in jail. He can't cite a specific statute that I've violated, but he does believe that there must be some statute. This tells me that Mr. Chubr0ck's hired goons are tools. Like a hammer or an axe, they are not inherently evil or destructive. The evil is in the force that manipulates them and uses them for destructive purposes. That evil is Myg0t Chubr0ck, who wants nothing less than to pamper offensive self-proclaimed arbiters of taste and standards. Mr. Chubr0ck is right about one thing, namely that fear is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when the worst sorts of sick peddlers of snake-oil remedies there are force women to live by restrictive standards not applicable to men. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that children should belong to the state. And fear of deluded dossers like Mr. Chubr0ck who defend stoicism, expansionism, and notions of racial superiority. He argues that I am nutty for wanting to acknowledge that he is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others. I should point out that this is almost the same argument that was made against Copernicus and Galileo almost half a millennium ago. Some would say that this is a platitude. Would that it were! Rather, I'm at loggerheads with Mr. Chubr0ck on at least one important issue. Namely, he argues that he is beyond reproach. I take the opposite position, that Mr. Chubr0ck insists that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not. Sorry, Mr. Chubr0ck, but, with apologies to Gershwin, "it ain't necessarily so." Does anybody else feel the way I do, or am I alone in my disgust with Mr. Myg0t Chubr0ck?
April 7, 200619 yr Geesus']http://forum.eagames.co.uk/viewtopic.php?p=216716 I think that was the joke :dunno:
