>:
(
I am angry that ignorance have transpired that lead me to write this statement. Here's a quick review: Lt. Anders demands that his pontifications be inoculated from inspection, criticism, and condemnation. 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 from my seemingly daily argy-bargy with Anders's homicidal understrappers about whether Anders is a living bodhisattva of peace and nonviolence, I've come to the conclusion that our country is being destroyed by shrewish swindlers. That represents yet more evidence—as if we needed more—that once people obtain the critical skills that enable them to think and reflect and speculate independently, they'll realize that if you were to unpack and analyze the philosophical assumptions behind Anders's claim that he is a tireless protector of civil rights and civil liberties for all people, you would find that some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with the most blathering spooks I've ever seen on a regular basis at work or in school. We therefore may be able to gain some insight into the way they think, into their values; we may be able to understand why they want to establish tacit boundaries and ground rules for the permissible spectrum of opinion.
Anders has offered to deter his grunts from placing our children at imminent risk of serious harm. Did he follow through with that? No, of course not. This failure may be Anders's most consequential broken promise. It suggests that perhaps what I call self-deceiving louts are born, not made. That dictum is as unimpeachable as the “poeta nascitur, non fit” that it echoes and as irreproachable as the brocard that Anders makes a lot of exaggerated claims. All of these claims need to be scrutinized as carefully as a letter of recommendation from a job applicant's mother. Consider, for example, Anders's claim that those who disagree with him should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. The fact of the matter is that any rational argument must acknowledge this. His maledicent, haughty half-measures, naturally, do not.
Oddly enough, it is past time for us to defenestrate Anders's pranks and deponticate his warnings. Stranger still, Anders promises his representatives that as soon as he's finished making bigotry respectable, they'll all become rich beyond their wildest dreams. There's an obvious analogy here to the way that vultures eat a cadaver and from its rottenness insects and worms suck their food. The point is that if Anders believes that representative government is an outmoded system that should be replaced by a system of overt neopaganism, then it's obvious why he contends that the Universe belongs to him by right. It is more than a purely historical question to ask, “How did his reign of terror start?” or even the more urgent question, “How might it end?”. No, we must ask, “What accounts for his prodigious criminality and dissipation?” The answer may surprise you, especially when you consider that I want to thank him for his campaigns of malice and malignity.
They give me an excellent opportunity to illustrate just how puerile Anders can be.
The following are personal correspondence from my inbox
The following is a transcript of my ban record
Anders holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City—sterile obstacles to progress who twist the teaching of history to suit his negligent purposes. I'm not particularly old, but I do remember a time when honesty, decency, and respect for others were the norm. Nowadays, thanks to Anders's lecherous effusions, people everywhere live in fear that stolid curmudgeons will remake the map of the world into an Anders-friendly checkerboard of puppet regimes and occupation governments. Even worse, many people are being prevented from knowing that Anders is honestly up to something. I don't know exactly what, but he has frequently been spotted making nicey-nice with treasonous barbarians. Is this because he needs their help to abet a resurgence of self-righteous jingoism? That's the question that perplexes me the most because gormless imbeciles rarely question, resist, or protest those events that do not appear to affect them directly. For example, they ignore how Anders has been tinkering about with a lot of halfway prescriptions.
Does Anders remember the hurt and hate in the eyes of the people he made fun of just so others would like him more? Even if he does, I'm sure he doesn't care because no one likes being attacked by short-sighted slugs. Even worse, Anders exploits our fear of those attacks—which he claims will evolve some day into biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks—as a pretext to give lunatics control of the asylum. If you think that's scary, then you should remember that if Anders truly wanted to be helpful, he wouldn't control your bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind. The tone of his principles is eerily reminiscent of that of impulsive skinflints of the late 1940s in the sense that the important point here isn't his double standards. It's that a former member of Anders's sodality of bossy, puzzleheaded tendentious-types has called Anders an insipid poltroon. I admire this person's courage, but I disagree with his use of the term “insipid poltroon”. It's not solely because Anders is an insipid poltroon that he has been utilizing legal, above-ground organizing in combination with illegal, underground tactics to crush the will of all individuals who have expressed political and intellectual opposition to his plaints. Rather, he's been doing this because he says that abandoning the idea of universal principles and focusing illegitimately on the particular is essential for the safety and welfare of the public. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that his crimes are victimless. I conclude this letter with an appropriate quote: “Lt. Anders's claim of fairness is demonstrably false.” I believe we all know who said that, don't we?
More to come..
