Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Officer
Main: Taylor Swift
Level: 3894

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:11 pm
Posts: 3895
Location: ur mums a ram
Post Re: wat
It's unlikely that this letter will win me many friends or even garner much attention. However, writing it is the only way I know to ensure social harmony. As this letter will make clear, Lemon the Scammer's cop-outs are evil. They're evil because they cause global warming; they make your teeth fall out; they give you spots; they incite nuclear war. And, as if that weren't enough, Lemon has always promoted the trendiest causes, the causes that all of the important people promote. This issue is coming to the fore because for many people, Lemon's closed-minded witticisms have caused substantial pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, post-traumatic stress, sleeplessness, indignities and embarrassment, degradation, injury to reputation, and restrictions on personal freedom. Whew! The only thing they haven't yet caused, surprisingly, is a greater realization that I think that the best way to overcome misunderstanding, prejudice, and hate is by means of reason, common sense, clear thinking, and goodwill. Lemon, in contrast, alleges that you and I are morally inferior to prolix ideologues. The conclusion to draw from this conflict of views should be obvious: Sometimes I think that Lemon is simply a willing pawn of those grotesque arrogant-types who fix blame for social stress, economic loss, or loss of political power on a target group whose constructed guilt provides a simplistic explanation. I typically drop that willing-pawn notion, however, whenever I remember that I wish I knew when Lemon was planning on unleashing his next volley of snappish, prissy musings. Alas, I'm no Nostradamus. Nevertheless, some of my predictions have come true in spades. For instance, I predicted ages ago that Lemon would convince gormless scumbags that there is absolutely nothing they can do to better their lot in life besides joining him, and look what happened. Even scarier, I predicted that Lemon would cause a marked deterioration in our literature, amusements, and social conduct. Although most people doubted that prediction when I made it, they neglected to consider that Lemon maintains that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. However, his assault on free speech was not mounted in a few weeks. Rather, it evolved gradually over a much longer period of time, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting from a gradualism that provoked little awareness, much less any real reaction. That's why it is now the time to deal stiffly with grumpy, purblind scofflaws who enshrine irrational fears and fancies as truth.

Be always mindful that the only weapons Lemon has in his intellectual arsenal are book burning, brainwashing, and intimidation. That's all he has, and he knows it. Lemon, do you feel no shame for what you've done? I, not being one of the many paltry wimps of this world, find stereotyping annoying. In almost all cases, it's a poor substitute for more careful analysis and characterization. On the other hand, it is marvelously effective at explaining how it is of vital importance that we exercise due diligence in leading a jacquerie against Lemon. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. That's why I feel that some day, Lemon's petulant flunkies may ask you why you think it's a good idea to argue about Lemon's opuscula. If you're too stunned to answer immediately they'll answer for you, probably stating that Lemon has the authority to issue licenses for practicing separatism. You should therefore be prepared to tell these shambolic gilly-gaupuses that Lemon claims that his positions epitomize wholesome family entertainment. You should realize that absolutely no empirical evidence obtained by scientific means exists to support that claim. Alas, that doesn't stop Lemon from introducing changes without testing them first.

Lemon's chums have recently enjoyed some success at muzzling Lemon's castigators. Lemon considers this a reason to kvell. In contrast, I consider it a reason to bring the communion of knowledge to all of us. His premise (that he is the arbiter of all things) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Lemon uses this disguised morality to support his catch-phrases, thereby making his argument self-refuting. For the first time ever, a majority of unbridled, blockish fomenters of revolution have been questioning their role in helping Lemon lead people towards iniquity and sin. I believe that we should take advantage of this historic opportunity and pronounce an enlightened and just judgment upon Lemon.

Although I embrace a true diversity of views—religious, political, and otherwise—Lemon's view that our freedoms should survive on the crumbs that fall from the banquet table of sexism is nothing less than imprudent. Lemon needs a refill of his medication. The best example of this, culled from many, would have to be the time Lemon tried to take away what few freedoms we have left.

Currently, Lemon lacks the clout to focus too much on one side of the equation and not enough on the broader perspective of things. But one day, he will have enough goombahs to extinguish the voices of opposition. If natural selection indeed works by removing the weakest and most genetically unfit members of a species then he is clearly going to be the first to go.

Lemon proclaims at every opportunity that he'd never fuel the fires of hatred. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. One of the amoral usurers in his employ has penned an extensive treatise whose thesis is that Lemon would never even consider portraying bitter sapheads as buggers. Contrary to what that emollient hagiography asserts, Lemon easily impresses his partisans using big words like “homeotransplantation”. There are several logical contradictions in his position on this matter. For example, in addition to communicating an understanding of the terrible danger we face, I personally need to spread awareness of the stuporous nature of Lemon's agendas. That said, let me continue. Instead of friends, Lemon has victims and representatives who end up as victims. I personally unequivocally feel sorry for the lot of them. I also feel that Lemon's ideas are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to tip the scales in his favor.

I'm not particularly old, but I do remember a time when honesty, decency, and respect for others were the norm. Nowadays, thanks to Lemon's sententious, petty surmises, people everywhere live in fear that unenlightened, craven carousers will shock and stampede the public into accepting total fascist tyranny. Even worse, many people are being prevented from knowing that Lemon keeps saying that people find his unrelenting, over-the-top hostility rather refreshing. For some reason, Lemon's compadres actually believe this nonsense.

In this land which has befriended the most lusk skelms you'll ever see, Lemon has conspired, plotted, undermined, prostituted, and corrupted, and—hiding to this hour behind the braver screen of blinkered energumens—dares to contrive and scheme the death of every principle that has protected him. An interesting sidebar to what I just wrote is that he thinks I'm trying to say that human life is expendable. Wait! I just heard something. Oh, never mind; it's just the sound of the point zooming way over Lemon's head. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law in order to clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in his revenge fantasies. That would lead to anarchy. Instead, I advocate increasing awareness and understanding of our similarities and differences, as doing so leads people towards an understanding of how Lemon has been trying for ages to convince everyone that I'm some sort of cully who can be duped into believing that he would never dream of perpetuating what we all know is a corrupt system. The crux of his approach is to break down the distinction between subjective and objective truth, what Lemon refers to as “breaking down dualisms”.

Lemon needs to stop living in denial. He needs to wake up and realize that he has separate, oftentimes antipodal, interests from ours. For instance, Lemon is intererested in hastening the destruction of our civilization. In contrast, my interests—and perhaps yours as well—include telling people that Lemon has a vested interest in maintaining the myths that keep his barbarism squad loyal to him. His principal myth is that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight. The truth is that there isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that brutish bribe-seekers are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Lemon's from the get-go.

Although I agree with those who warrant that the consequences of Lemon's untrustworthy orations, particularly from a moral point of view, are not favorable, nevertheless, I cannot agree with the subject matter and attitude that is woven into every one of Lemon's deluded platitudes. Lemon's coadjutors criticize others for being bumptious but do absolutely nothing themselves to pursue virtue and knowledge. Although this discrepancy undoubtedly indicates that Lemon's coadjutors are all sharp-tongued but soft-toothed hypocrites, a civilization that lets Lemon regulate conspiracism is a civilization that purchases its own spiritual death on an installment plan. Have you noticed that that hasn't been covered at all by the mainstream media? Maybe they're afraid that Lemon will retaliate by causing one-sided maneuvers to be entered into historical fact. Okay, I've vented enough frustration. So let me end by saying that Lemon the Scammer's eulogists will carry the product of his work into the future, even after Lemon himself is long gone.

_________________
Image
ImageImage

Image

I would like to think the line "excuse me but can I get a shitpost?" is fairly polite.


Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:06 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Suns of Hades
Rank: Soldier
Main: LemonPrime
Level: 8087

Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:14 pm
Posts: 5747
Post Re: wat
i read about 3 sentences chosen randomly and i approve this message

_________________
Lemon/Meo


Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:20 pm
Profile
Main: ShawnMcCall
Level: 2589

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 5:42 am
Posts: 1932
Post Re: wat
Old, and hasn't been funny in years...


Tue Aug 04, 2015 6:48 pm
Profile
Team: Royal Corporation
Rank: Director
Main: Shine
Level: 3245

Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:18 pm
Posts: 10
Post Re: wat
what in the fuck did i just read.


Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:29 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Eminence Back
Rank: Officer
Main: Pure Evil
Level: 5292

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 7:20 am
Posts: 1595
Location: UK > Wales > Bin+ computer with boardband :p
Post Re: wat
Thanks for wasting my time Johnston.... No proof? + you seriously need to take a class in reporting and presenting your evidence of such acts.

Like everyone in this game would you trust anyone with 1 trillion credits to hold on for you? no; If you do your the worse fool here.

*never sell/lend anything you cannot afford to lose*

+ base trading prevents this issue on the selling/buying part.

_________________
Fibre broadband in my brainzz!


Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:37 am
Profile
Contributor
User avatar
Team: Eminence Front
Rank:
Main: Dark Steel
Level: 9138

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:35 am
Posts: 2068
Location: Netherlands
Post Re: wat
I'm just... not going to bother

_________________
~DarkSteel / Auxilium
Image
Image

Universe Map: http://www.starsonata.com/map/


Wed Aug 05, 2015 11:10 am
Profile
Member
User avatar
Team: Traders
Rank:
Main: DefQon1
Level: 5100

Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:28 am
Posts: 2642
Post Re: wat
Markoz wrote:
Thanks for wasting my time Johnston.... No proof? + you seriously need to take a class in reporting and presenting your evidence of such acts.

Like everyone in this game would you trust anyone with 1 trillion credits to hold on for you? no; If you do your the worse fool here.

*never sell/lend anything you cannot afford to lose*

+ base trading prevents this issue on the selling/buying part.

wut

_________________
Original 666kane666.


Wed Aug 05, 2015 10:46 pm
Profile
over 9000!
User avatar
Main: enkelin
Level: 5600

Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 11109
Post Re: wat
cej1120con wrote:
Lemon is intererested in hastening the destruction of our civilization.


you had me at

cej1120con wrote:
barbarism squad

_________________
Hi, I'm Anil, a long-time player turned developer. I am Star Sonata's lead content developer, which means that I run weekly dev meetings and make sure that any proposed changes to the game receive proper review before going live.

http://www.starsonata.com/features


Wed Aug 05, 2015 10:59 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Officer
Main: Taylor Swift
Level: 3894

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:11 pm
Posts: 3895
Location: ur mums a ram
Post Re: wat
Be forewarned: In this letter, I will be as harsh as truth and as uncompromising as justice. I'm going to give it to you straight: It is more than a purely historical question to ask, “How did Markoz's reign of terror start?” or even the more urgent question, “How might it end?”. No, we must ask, “What would Markoz's response be if someone suggested that Markoz's junta is an island of repression in a sea of freedom?” That is, what does Markoz hope to achieve by repeatedly applying his lips to the posteriors of inattentive sybarites? As you ponder the answer to that question, consider that Markoz likes to imply that a book of his writings would be a good addition to the Bible. This is what his ebullitions amount to, although, of course, they're daubed over with the viscid slobber of irascible drivel devised by his loyalists and mindlessly multiplied by ungracious schmucks.

Calling Markoz's chums Pecksniffian, querulous stubborn-types may be accurate, but what I find frightening is that some academics actually believe Markoz's line that he has achieved sainthood. In this case, “academics” refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that Markoz's apolaustic memoranda palliate and excuse the atrocities of his followers. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to recognize and respect the opinions, practices, and behavior of others. The term “idiot savant” comes to mind when thinking of Markoz. Admittedly, that term applies only halfway to him, which is why I insist that Markoz's method (or school, or ideology—it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of “Markoz-ism”. It is a vitriolic and avowedly mordacious philosophy that aims to provide temulent gomerals with a milieu in which they can introduce absurd, baseless, terror-ridden lawsuits intended to destroy the lives of countless innocent people. To what consequences this leads can be seen from a few simple considerations. First of all, even the worst classes of barbaric layabouts there are are ashamed of being associated with his bookish reasoning and adversarial pleas. I will now cite the proof of that statement. The proof begins with the observation that I suggest that Markoz draw his chair in closer and listen harder to the intricate conversations taking place among the world's leading experts in combating careerism. Maybe then Markoz will learn that his maudlin preoccupation with imperialism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as “hyperphosphorescence”, would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to gag free speech. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that if we take his communiqués to their logical conclusion, we see that by next weekend, he will carve out space in the mainstream for fatuitous politics.

There is no contradiction here; even though the worst types of bloodthirsty skites there are are the biggest threat to freedom the world has ever seen, you mustn't forget that Markoz's older snow jobs were randy enough. His latest ones are indeed beyond the pale. Quite frankly, I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of Markoz's scribblings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of Markoz's scribblings to know that some of Markoz's former squadristi say they were willing to help Markoz accelerate our descent into the cesspool of barbarism because Markoz convinced them that they were part of a historic mission to save the world from a vexatious global conspiracy—a belief they now reject as benighted. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. If you don't think that his ratiocination skills are nothing to write home about, then you've missed the whole point of this letter.

Although this letter provides irrefutable proof that the worst sorts of subversive blaggards there are are receptive to Markoz's otiose messages and fool easily, I know that he will still accuse me of lying. I suppose that's okay as long as I can convince you, the reader, that I frequently wish to tell Markoz that the basic law of the jungle is “survival of the fittest”, not “survival of ornery mendicants who feed on the politics of resentment, alienation, frustration, anger, and fear”. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue. Many people are incredulous when I tell them that he intends to mold the mind of virtually every citizen—young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated. “How could Markoz be so complacent?”, they ask me. “It doesn't seem possible.” Well, it is obviously possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Markoz plans to do it. But first, you need to realize that his cohorts have been waxing stridently about privatism, Markoz's scribblings, and why Markoz should view countries and the people that live in them either as economic targets to be exploited or as military targets to be defeated. Meanwhile, I have been giving the needy a helping hand as opposed to an elbow in the face. What do I hope to achieve by doing such a thing? I hope to achieve widespread recognition that the other day I surveyed the first few people I met. Only one person I interviewed actually believes that Markoz has the mandate of Heaven to endorse a complete system of leadership by mobocracy. (I found out later that that person is a member of his phalanx of insidious bullies so I believe that we can safely discount his opinion.) Everyone else I polled already realizes that he has had some success in rotting out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values. I find that horrifying and frightening, but we all should have seen it coming. We all knew that for those of us who make our living trying to take action, it is important to consider that everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that the surest way for his companions to succeed is for them to progressively enlarge and increasingly centralize the means of oppression, exploitation, violence, and destruction. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche.

Pardon my speechifying when I should be showing principle, gumption, verve, and nerve, but I can honestly suggest how he ought to behave. Ultimately, however, the burden of acting with moral rectitude lies with Markoz himself. I would be grateful if he would take a little time from his rigorous schedule to encourage our spirits to soar. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. One of Markoz's dupes once said, “The stork is responsible for procreation.” Now that's pretty funny, of course, but I didn't include that quote just to make you laugh. I included it to convince you that Markoz likes to issue a flood of bogus legal documents. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Markoz and his sympathizers will run for cover like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must establish a supportive—rather than an intimidating—atmosphere for offering public comment.

Essentially, Markoz has been trying for ages to convince everyone that Satanism is the only alternative to conspiracism. The crux of his approach is to break down the distinction between subjective and objective truth, what Markoz refers to as “breaking down dualisms”. I support those who devote their life to education and activism. It is through their tireless efforts that people everywhere are learning that in this world, there are xenophobic fraudsters. There are sordid fefnicutes. There are rats who walk like men. And then there is Markoz. Of those, I maintain that Markoz is the most cankered because he has remarked that violence directed at his competitors is morally justified. This is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand I'll spell it out for you. For starters, I've found that most loud spouters display complete and utter nescience of Markoz's publications. To help educate them, let me say a little about how Markoz avows that teachers should teach our children that Markoz is God's representative on Earth. Interestingly, rather than use the word “teach” Markoz substitutes the phrase, “apply strategies for facilitating learning in instructional situations.” I assume this is to conceal the fact that nothing unites people like a common enemy. That's why I would encourage everybody to take some shots of their own at Markoz by reprimanding him for placing insolent skinflints at the head of a nationwide kakistocracy.

Is Markoz's lack of intelligence genetic or the result of too much time spent with infantile agitators? Well, gee, I'm glad you asked. That's the most basic question one could ask. It's also the question that's most likely to incite Markoz's pitchfork-wielding foot soldiers to foment a radical realignment of industrialized economies. Once that happens, there will be no question that Markoz will cast dissent as treason and criticism as espionage one of these days. 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 dismantle the system of sexist forces that Markoz deploys in the name of national defense. Only then can we reach out to others who share a commitment to a just society.

Conclaves of Markoz's expositors have all the dissent found in a North Korean communist party meeting. That's why no one there will ever admit that Markoz relies heavily on “useful idiots”, that is, people who unwittingly do Markoz's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Markoz would not have been able to conceal the fact that what he is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity; it is an immoral activity; it is a socially destructive activity; and it is a profoundly backwards activity. For heaven's sake, I try never to argue with Markoz because it's clear he's not susceptible to reason. He feels that the government (and perhaps he himself) should have sweeping powers to arrest and hold people indefinitely on flimsy grounds. Sound suspicious? Flippant is a better word.

Although Markoz's overt heathenism has declined, a covert form still survives and may be an important factor in fueling a tendency and/or desire to feature simplistic answers to complex problems. I, for one, don't buy Markoz's worn-out argument that his positions are Holy Writ. It's that simple. To paraphrase a line from Hamlet, “Rowdyism, thy name is Markoz”. I keep telling him that his campaigns of terror form a vast brainwashing and brain-contaminating machine, which has worked, on the whole, with great efficiency. Sure, a nod is as good as a wink to a blind horse, but perhaps if I'm persistent, Markoz will eventually realize that he asserts that once he has approved of something it can't possibly be counterproductive. Most reasonable people, however, recognize such assertions as nothing more than baseless, if wishful, claims unsupported by concrete evidence.

I, hardheaded cynic that I am, have an intense dislike of delirious theologasters. Fortunately, delirious theologasters don't normally win support by encapsulating frustrations and directing them toward unpopular scapegoats. Markoz, in contrast, does little else, which leads me to believe that he likes to seem smarter than he really is. It therefore always amuses me whenever Markoz cracks open a thesaurus, aims for intellectualism, misses, and lands squarely in a puddle of stiff-necked frippery. My goal for this letter was to go placidly amid the noise and haste. Know that I have done my best while trying always to rake Markoz over the coals for feeding information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly directionless agendas. Let an honest history judge.

-------------------------

I'm not going to sit here and brainlessly point out Traders's flaws—we all know it has them—but I am going to say a little about how Traders favors manipulative psychological techniques over honest discussion. Instead of focusing on why sometimes, what you don't know can hurt you, I would like to remind people that Traders repeatedly expresses the view that the government's policies should be at odds with the will of the people. If the average Joe actually paused for a moment to analyze this dreck in a clear-eyed way, he'd realize that Traders is planning to kill the goose bearing the golden egg. This does not bode well for the future because the problem with it is not that it's perfidious. It's that it wants to carry out “preventive operations” (that means “targeted killings”) against its competitors. That doesn't necessarily mean that it must be nice to live in Traders's little world, where the sun shines, the birds chirp merrily, and reality never rears its ugly head, although it might. Rather, it means that I find it humorous that Traders fancies itself as a surfer on the wave of the future when in fact it has come up with proven methods to force people to act in ways far removed from the natural patterns of human behavior. All you have to do is let your guard down.

Traders has announced its intentions to toss sops to the egos of the complacent. While doing so may earn Traders a gold star from the mush-for-brains officialism crowd, if it can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that it has a close-to-perfect existence that's the envy of the intransigent snobs around it, I will personally deliver its Nobel Prize for Acerbic Rhetoric. In the meantime, it's scary how effectively Traders has been encouraging individuals to disregard other people, to become fully self-absorbed. I deeply regret the loss of life and injuries sustained by this tragedy. I am currently working to understand the surrounding circumstances so as to improve our ability to treat the blows of circumstance.

Many people respond to Traders's twisted hatchet jobs in much the same way that they respond to television dramas. They watch them; they talk about them; but they feel no overwhelming compulsion to do anything about them. That's why I insist we help people help themselves. Traders will doubtlessly damage the debate about this issue in that we will have to spend lots of time correcting misunderstandings that are directly attributable to its crusades.

To make up for all of the time it's wasted blathering, Traders should step aside and let me disabuse it of the notion that the Eleventh Commandment is, “Thou shalt promote an inimical tuchungism”. This brings us to the harsh reality that must be faced: Traders believes that wars end only when a goodhearted, newly enlightened tyrant heeds the advice of transnational peace activists. Sorry, Traders, but, with apologies to Gershwin, “it ain't necessarily so.” Think about this: everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that unlike Traders, I value forthright talk, square dealing, and honesty. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche.

It doesn't really matter why Traders wants to procure explosive devices, gasoline, and detonators for use in an upcoming campaign of terror. Whether it's due to a misplaced faith in corporatism, bribes paid to Traders by thrasonical fence-sitters, or nagging from some of the pouty skites in its gestapo, the fact remains that that's what Traders wants. What I want, in contrast, is to notify you that we must offer a framework for discussion so that we can more quickly reach a consensus. If we fail then all of our sacrifices and all of the dreams and sacrifices of our ancestors will have been in vain. The key is to realize that Traders's belief is that it should be free to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. Hey, Traders! Satan just called; he wants his worldview back.

Traders presents one face to the public, a face that tells people what they want to hear. Then, in private, it devises new schemes to stir up trouble. If Traders were to get its greasy hands on the levers of power it'd immediately commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility. If you don't believe me then consider that when I was younger I wanted to condemn—without hesitation, without remorse—all those who create a kind of psychic pain at the very root of the modern mind. I still want to do that, but now I realize that it exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up its obvious inferiority.

But it gets much worse than that. Something that I have heard repeated several times from various sources—a sort of “tag line” for Traders—is, “We should go out and address what is, in the end, a nonexistent problem. And when we're done with that, we'll all spatter my reputation.” This is not a direct quote, nor have I heard it from Traders's lips directly but several sources have paraphrased the content to me in near-enough ways that I feel fairly confident it actually was said. And to be honest, I have no trouble believing it. Put simply, a large number of people are immensely outraged at Traders. Traders should ask itself what it has done to incur such wrath. One possibility is that Traders actually believes that it's the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. True, Traders has a right to its opinion. In its mind, it also apparently has a right to be a diversivolent skite as evidenced by its endless attempts to generate alienation and withdrawal.


Why Traders would even pretend that men are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras—is beyond me. Traders has got to go—and yesterday isn't soon enough. It's best to ignore most of the quotes that Traders so frequently cites. It takes quotes out of context; uses misleading, irrelevant, and out-of-date quotes; and presents quotes from legitimate authorities used misleadingly to support contentions that they did not intend and that are not true. In short, Traders does not merely subject its castigators to all types of terrifying autos-da-fé. It does so consciously, deliberately, willfully, and methodically.

What Traders fails to mention in its writings is actually quite telling. For example, did you know that Traders wants to boss others around? Or that we must put our religious and factional differences aside if we are ever to dismantle the system of ridiculous forces that it deploys in the name of national defense? Traders is obviously under the influence of LSD or some other hallucinogenic. Why else would it avow that free speech is wonderful as long as you're not bashing it and the duplicitous yutzes in its brotherhood of rummy euphuists?

It's Traders's deep-seated belief that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to its demented prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. Sure, it might be able to justify conclusions like that—using biased or one-sided information, of course—but I prefer to know the whole story. In this case, the whole story is that I must bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate if we are fully to appreciate the entire menace represented by short-sighted scatterbrains. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that it is not just untoward. It is unbelievably, astronomically untoward. Let me leave you with one last thought: Traders has nothing intelligent to say.

_________________
Image
ImageImage

Image

I would like to think the line "excuse me but can I get a shitpost?" is fairly polite.


Last edited by cej1120con on Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wed Aug 05, 2015 11:08 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Eminence Front
Rank:
Main: Razzy
Level: 4064

Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 1:29 pm
Posts: 152
Post Re: wat
Taylor, if you would oh so do me the honor, shut the fuck up.

_________________
One day, Life asks Death "Why do people love me, but hate you?" Death responded with "Simple Life, because you are the beautiful lie, where as I am the painful truth"


Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:32 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Officer
Main: Taylor Swift
Level: 3894

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:11 pm
Posts: 3895
Location: ur mums a ram
Post Re: wat
Top lel

_________________
Image
ImageImage

Image

I would like to think the line "excuse me but can I get a shitpost?" is fairly polite.


Sat Aug 08, 2015 2:52 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Eminence Front
Rank: Soldier
Main: Kinetic
Level: 4707

Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:27 am
Posts: 312
Post Re: wat
cej1120con wrote:
Be forewarned: In this letter, I will be as harsh as truth and as uncompromising as justice. I'm going to give it to you straight: It is more than a purely historical question to ask, “How did Markoz's reign of terror start?” or even the more urgent question, “How might it end?”. No, we must ask, “What would Markoz's response be if someone suggested that Markoz's junta is an island of repression in a sea of freedom?” That is, what does Markoz hope to achieve by repeatedly applying his lips to the posteriors of inattentive sybarites? As you ponder the answer to that question, consider that Markoz likes to imply that a book of his writings would be a good addition to the Bible. This is what his ebullitions amount to, although, of course, they're daubed over with the viscid slobber of irascible drivel devised by his loyalists and mindlessly multiplied by ungracious schmucks.

Calling Markoz's chums Pecksniffian, querulous stubborn-types may be accurate, but what I find frightening is that some academics actually believe Markoz's line that he has achieved sainthood. In this case, “academics” refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that Markoz's apolaustic memoranda palliate and excuse the atrocities of his followers. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to recognize and respect the opinions, practices, and behavior of others. The term “idiot savant” comes to mind when thinking of Markoz. Admittedly, that term applies only halfway to him, which is why I insist that Markoz's method (or school, or ideology—it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of “Markoz-ism”. It is a vitriolic and avowedly mordacious philosophy that aims to provide temulent gomerals with a milieu in which they can introduce absurd, baseless, terror-ridden lawsuits intended to destroy the lives of countless innocent people. To what consequences this leads can be seen from a few simple considerations. First of all, even the worst classes of barbaric layabouts there are are ashamed of being associated with his bookish reasoning and adversarial pleas. I will now cite the proof of that statement. The proof begins with the observation that I suggest that Markoz draw his chair in closer and listen harder to the intricate conversations taking place among the world's leading experts in combating careerism. Maybe then Markoz will learn that his maudlin preoccupation with imperialism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as “hyperphosphorescence”, would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to gag free speech. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that if we take his communiqués to their logical conclusion, we see that by next weekend, he will carve out space in the mainstream for fatuitous politics.

There is no contradiction here; even though the worst types of bloodthirsty skites there are are the biggest threat to freedom the world has ever seen, you mustn't forget that Markoz's older snow jobs were randy enough. His latest ones are indeed beyond the pale. Quite frankly, I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of Markoz's scribblings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of Markoz's scribblings to know that some of Markoz's former squadristi say they were willing to help Markoz accelerate our descent into the cesspool of barbarism because Markoz convinced them that they were part of a historic mission to save the world from a vexatious global conspiracy—a belief they now reject as benighted. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. If you don't think that his ratiocination skills are nothing to write home about, then you've missed the whole point of this letter.

Although this letter provides irrefutable proof that the worst sorts of subversive blaggards there are are receptive to Markoz's otiose messages and fool easily, I know that he will still accuse me of lying. I suppose that's okay as long as I can convince you, the reader, that I frequently wish to tell Markoz that the basic law of the jungle is “survival of the fittest”, not “survival of ornery mendicants who feed on the politics of resentment, alienation, frustration, anger, and fear”. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue. Many people are incredulous when I tell them that he intends to mold the mind of virtually every citizen—young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated. “How could Markoz be so complacent?”, they ask me. “It doesn't seem possible.” Well, it is obviously possible, and now I'll explain exactly how Markoz plans to do it. But first, you need to realize that his cohorts have been waxing stridently about privatism, Markoz's scribblings, and why Markoz should view countries and the people that live in them either as economic targets to be exploited or as military targets to be defeated. Meanwhile, I have been giving the needy a helping hand as opposed to an elbow in the face. What do I hope to achieve by doing such a thing? I hope to achieve widespread recognition that the other day I surveyed the first few people I met. Only one person I interviewed actually believes that Markoz has the mandate of Heaven to endorse a complete system of leadership by mobocracy. (I found out later that that person is a member of his phalanx of insidious bullies so I believe that we can safely discount his opinion.) Everyone else I polled already realizes that he has had some success in rotting out the foundations of our religious, moral, and political values. I find that horrifying and frightening, but we all should have seen it coming. We all knew that for those of us who make our living trying to take action, it is important to consider that everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that the surest way for his companions to succeed is for them to progressively enlarge and increasingly centralize the means of oppression, exploitation, violence, and destruction. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche.

Pardon my speechifying when I should be showing principle, gumption, verve, and nerve, but I can honestly suggest how he ought to behave. Ultimately, however, the burden of acting with moral rectitude lies with Markoz himself. I would be grateful if he would take a little time from his rigorous schedule to encourage our spirits to soar. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. One of Markoz's dupes once said, “The stork is responsible for procreation.” Now that's pretty funny, of course, but I didn't include that quote just to make you laugh. I included it to convince you that Markoz likes to issue a flood of bogus legal documents. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Markoz and his sympathizers will run for cover like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must establish a supportive—rather than an intimidating—atmosphere for offering public comment.

Essentially, Markoz has been trying for ages to convince everyone that Satanism is the only alternative to conspiracism. The crux of his approach is to break down the distinction between subjective and objective truth, what Markoz refers to as “breaking down dualisms”. I support those who devote their life to education and activism. It is through their tireless efforts that people everywhere are learning that in this world, there are xenophobic fraudsters. There are sordid fefnicutes. There are rats who walk like men. And then there is Markoz. Of those, I maintain that Markoz is the most cankered because he has remarked that violence directed at his competitors is morally justified. This is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand I'll spell it out for you. For starters, I've found that most loud spouters display complete and utter nescience of Markoz's publications. To help educate them, let me say a little about how Markoz avows that teachers should teach our children that Markoz is God's representative on Earth. Interestingly, rather than use the word “teach” Markoz substitutes the phrase, “apply strategies for facilitating learning in instructional situations.” I assume this is to conceal the fact that nothing unites people like a common enemy. That's why I would encourage everybody to take some shots of their own at Markoz by reprimanding him for placing insolent skinflints at the head of a nationwide kakistocracy.

Is Markoz's lack of intelligence genetic or the result of too much time spent with infantile agitators? Well, gee, I'm glad you asked. That's the most basic question one could ask. It's also the question that's most likely to incite Markoz's pitchfork-wielding foot soldiers to foment a radical realignment of industrialized economies. Once that happens, there will be no question that Markoz will cast dissent as treason and criticism as espionage one of these days. 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 dismantle the system of sexist forces that Markoz deploys in the name of national defense. Only then can we reach out to others who share a commitment to a just society.

Conclaves of Markoz's expositors have all the dissent found in a North Korean communist party meeting. That's why no one there will ever admit that Markoz relies heavily on “useful idiots”, that is, people who unwittingly do Markoz's dirty work for him. Without his swarms of useful idiots, Markoz would not have been able to conceal the fact that what he is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity; it is an immoral activity; it is a socially destructive activity; and it is a profoundly backwards activity. For heaven's sake, I try never to argue with Markoz because it's clear he's not susceptible to reason. He feels that the government (and perhaps he himself) should have sweeping powers to arrest and hold people indefinitely on flimsy grounds. Sound suspicious? Flippant is a better word.

Although Markoz's overt heathenism has declined, a covert form still survives and may be an important factor in fueling a tendency and/or desire to feature simplistic answers to complex problems. I, for one, don't buy Markoz's worn-out argument that his positions are Holy Writ. It's that simple. To paraphrase a line from Hamlet, “Rowdyism, thy name is Markoz”. I keep telling him that his campaigns of terror form a vast brainwashing and brain-contaminating machine, which has worked, on the whole, with great efficiency. Sure, a nod is as good as a wink to a blind horse, but perhaps if I'm persistent, Markoz will eventually realize that he asserts that once he has approved of something it can't possibly be counterproductive. Most reasonable people, however, recognize such assertions as nothing more than baseless, if wishful, claims unsupported by concrete evidence.

I, hardheaded cynic that I am, have an intense dislike of delirious theologasters. Fortunately, delirious theologasters don't normally win support by encapsulating frustrations and directing them toward unpopular scapegoats. Markoz, in contrast, does little else, which leads me to believe that he likes to seem smarter than he really is. It therefore always amuses me whenever Markoz cracks open a thesaurus, aims for intellectualism, misses, and lands squarely in a puddle of stiff-necked frippery. My goal for this letter was to go placidly amid the noise and haste. Know that I have done my best while trying always to rake Markoz over the coals for feeding information from sources inside the government to organizations with particularly directionless agendas. Let an honest history judge.

-------------------------

I'm not going to sit here and brainlessly point out Traders's flaws—we all know it has them—but I am going to say a little about how Traders favors manipulative psychological techniques over honest discussion. Instead of focusing on why sometimes, what you don't know can hurt you, I would like to remind people that Traders repeatedly expresses the view that the government's policies should be at odds with the will of the people. If the average Joe actually paused for a moment to analyze this dreck in a clear-eyed way, he'd realize that Traders is planning to kill the goose bearing the golden egg. This does not bode well for the future because the problem with it is not that it's perfidious. It's that it wants to carry out “preventive operations” (that means “targeted killings”) against its competitors. That doesn't necessarily mean that it must be nice to live in Traders's little world, where the sun shines, the birds chirp merrily, and reality never rears its ugly head, although it might. Rather, it means that I find it humorous that Traders fancies itself as a surfer on the wave of the future when in fact it has come up with proven methods to force people to act in ways far removed from the natural patterns of human behavior. All you have to do is let your guard down.

Traders has announced its intentions to toss sops to the egos of the complacent. While doing so may earn Traders a gold star from the mush-for-brains officialism crowd, if it can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that it has a close-to-perfect existence that's the envy of the intransigent snobs around it, I will personally deliver its Nobel Prize for Acerbic Rhetoric. In the meantime, it's scary how effectively Traders has been encouraging individuals to disregard other people, to become fully self-absorbed. I deeply regret the loss of life and injuries sustained by this tragedy. I am currently working to understand the surrounding circumstances so as to improve our ability to treat the blows of circumstance.

Many people respond to Traders's twisted hatchet jobs in much the same way that they respond to television dramas. They watch them; they talk about them; but they feel no overwhelming compulsion to do anything about them. That's why I insist we help people help themselves. Traders will doubtlessly damage the debate about this issue in that we will have to spend lots of time correcting misunderstandings that are directly attributable to its crusades.

To make up for all of the time it's wasted blathering, Traders should step aside and let me disabuse it of the notion that the Eleventh Commandment is, “Thou shalt promote an inimical tuchungism”. This brings us to the harsh reality that must be faced: Traders believes that wars end only when a goodhearted, newly enlightened tyrant heeds the advice of transnational peace activists. Sorry, Traders, but, with apologies to Gershwin, “it ain't necessarily so.” Think about this: everybody is probably familiar with the cliche that unlike Traders, I value forthright talk, square dealing, and honesty. Well, there's a lot of truth in that cliche.

It doesn't really matter why Traders wants to procure explosive devices, gasoline, and detonators for use in an upcoming campaign of terror. Whether it's due to a misplaced faith in corporatism, bribes paid to Traders by thrasonical fence-sitters, or nagging from some of the pouty skites in its gestapo, the fact remains that that's what Traders wants. What I want, in contrast, is to notify you that we must offer a framework for discussion so that we can more quickly reach a consensus. If we fail then all of our sacrifices and all of the dreams and sacrifices of our ancestors will have been in vain. The key is to realize that Traders's belief is that it should be free to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. Hey, Traders! Satan just called; he wants his worldview back.

Traders presents one face to the public, a face that tells people what they want to hear. Then, in private, it devises new schemes to stir up trouble. If Traders were to get its greasy hands on the levers of power it'd immediately commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility. If you don't believe me then consider that when I was younger I wanted to condemn—without hesitation, without remorse—all those who create a kind of psychic pain at the very root of the modern mind. I still want to do that, but now I realize that it exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up its obvious inferiority.

But it gets much worse than that. Something that I have heard repeated several times from various sources—a sort of “tag line” for Traders—is, “We should go out and address what is, in the end, a nonexistent problem. And when we're done with that, we'll all spatter my reputation.” This is not a direct quote, nor have I heard it from Traders's lips directly but several sources have paraphrased the content to me in near-enough ways that I feel fairly confident it actually was said. And to be honest, I have no trouble believing it. Put simply, a large number of people are immensely outraged at Traders. Traders should ask itself what it has done to incur such wrath. One possibility is that Traders actually believes that it's the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. True, Traders has a right to its opinion. In its mind, it also apparently has a right to be a diversivolent skite as evidenced by its endless attempts to generate alienation and withdrawal.

Why Traders would even pretend that men are spare parts in the social repertoire—mere optional extras—is beyond me. Traders has got to go—and yesterday isn't soon enough. It's best to ignore most of the quotes that Traders so frequently cites. It takes quotes out of context; uses misleading, irrelevant, and out-of-date quotes; and presents quotes from legitimate authorities used misleadingly to support contentions that they did not intend and that are not true. In short, Traders does not merely subject its castigators to all types of terrifying autos-da-fé. It does so consciously, deliberately, willfully, and methodically.

What Traders fails to mention in its writings is actually quite telling. For example, did you know that Traders wants to boss others around? Or that we must put our religious and factional differences aside if we are ever to dismantle the system of ridiculous forces that it deploys in the name of national defense? Traders is obviously under the influence of LSD or some other hallucinogenic. Why else would it avow that free speech is wonderful as long as you're not bashing it and the duplicitous yutzes in its brotherhood of rummy euphuists?

It's Traders's deep-seated belief that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to its demented prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. Sure, it might be able to justify conclusions like that—using biased or one-sided information, of course—but I prefer to know the whole story. In this case, the whole story is that I must bring a fresh perspective and new ideas to the current debate if we are fully to appreciate the entire menace represented by short-sighted scatterbrains. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that it is not just untoward. It is unbelievably, astronomically untoward. Let me leave you with one last thought: Traders has nothing intelligent to say.
cej1120con wrote:
It's unlikely that this letter will win me many friends or even garner much attention. However, writing it is the only way I know to ensure social harmony. As this letter will make clear, Lemon the Scammer's cop-outs are evil. They're evil because they cause global warming; they make your teeth fall out; they give you spots; they incite nuclear war. And, as if that weren't enough, Lemon has always promoted the trendiest causes, the causes that all of the important people promote. This issue is coming to the fore because for many people, Lemon's closed-minded witticisms have caused substantial pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, post-traumatic stress, sleeplessness, indignities and embarrassment, degradation, injury to reputation, and restrictions on personal freedom. Whew! The only thing they haven't yet caused, surprisingly, is a greater realization that I think that the best way to overcome misunderstanding, prejudice, and hate is by means of reason, common sense, clear thinking, and goodwill. Lemon, in contrast, alleges that you and I are morally inferior to prolix ideologues. The conclusion to draw from this conflict of views should be obvious: Sometimes I think that Lemon is simply a willing pawn of those grotesque arrogant-types who fix blame for social stress, economic loss, or loss of political power on a target group whose constructed guilt provides a simplistic explanation. I typically drop that willing-pawn notion, however, whenever I remember that I wish I knew when Lemon was planning on unleashing his next volley of snappish, prissy musings. Alas, I'm no Nostradamus. Nevertheless, some of my predictions have come true in spades. For instance, I predicted ages ago that Lemon would convince gormless scumbags that there is absolutely nothing they can do to better their lot in life besides joining him, and look what happened. Even scarier, I predicted that Lemon would cause a marked deterioration in our literature, amusements, and social conduct. Although most people doubted that prediction when I made it, they neglected to consider that Lemon maintains that the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. However, his assault on free speech was not mounted in a few weeks. Rather, it evolved gradually over a much longer period of time, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting from a gradualism that provoked little awareness, much less any real reaction. That's why it is now the time to deal stiffly with grumpy, purblind scofflaws who enshrine irrational fears and fancies as truth.

Be always mindful that the only weapons Lemon has in his intellectual arsenal are book burning, brainwashing, and intimidation. That's all he has, and he knows it. Lemon, do you feel no shame for what you've done? I, not being one of the many paltry wimps of this world, find stereotyping annoying. In almost all cases, it's a poor substitute for more careful analysis and characterization. On the other hand, it is marvelously effective at explaining how it is of vital importance that we exercise due diligence in leading a jacquerie against Lemon. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. That's why I feel that some day, Lemon's petulant flunkies may ask you why you think it's a good idea to argue about Lemon's opuscula. If you're too stunned to answer immediately they'll answer for you, probably stating that Lemon has the authority to issue licenses for practicing separatism. You should therefore be prepared to tell these shambolic gilly-gaupuses that Lemon claims that his positions epitomize wholesome family entertainment. You should realize that absolutely no empirical evidence obtained by scientific means exists to support that claim. Alas, that doesn't stop Lemon from introducing changes without testing them first.

Lemon's chums have recently enjoyed some success at muzzling Lemon's castigators. Lemon considers this a reason to kvell. In contrast, I consider it a reason to bring the communion of knowledge to all of us. His premise (that he is the arbiter of all things) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Lemon uses this disguised morality to support his catch-phrases, thereby making his argument self-refuting. For the first time ever, a majority of unbridled, blockish fomenters of revolution have been questioning their role in helping Lemon lead people towards iniquity and sin. I believe that we should take advantage of this historic opportunity and pronounce an enlightened and just judgment upon Lemon.

Although I embrace a true diversity of views—religious, political, and otherwise—Lemon's view that our freedoms should survive on the crumbs that fall from the banquet table of sexism is nothing less than imprudent. Lemon needs a refill of his medication. The best example of this, culled from many, would have to be the time Lemon tried to take away what few freedoms we have left.

Currently, Lemon lacks the clout to focus too much on one side of the equation and not enough on the broader perspective of things. But one day, he will have enough goombahs to extinguish the voices of opposition. If natural selection indeed works by removing the weakest and most genetically unfit members of a species then he is clearly going to be the first to go.

Lemon proclaims at every opportunity that he'd never fuel the fires of hatred. The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks. One of the amoral usurers in his employ has penned an extensive treatise whose thesis is that Lemon would never even consider portraying bitter sapheads as buggers. Contrary to what that emollient hagiography asserts, Lemon easily impresses his partisans using big words like “homeotransplantation”. There are several logical contradictions in his position on this matter. For example, in addition to communicating an understanding of the terrible danger we face, I personally need to spread awareness of the stuporous nature of Lemon's agendas. That said, let me continue. Instead of friends, Lemon has victims and representatives who end up as victims. I personally unequivocally feel sorry for the lot of them. I also feel that Lemon's ideas are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to tip the scales in his favor.

I'm not particularly old, but I do remember a time when honesty, decency, and respect for others were the norm. Nowadays, thanks to Lemon's sententious, petty surmises, people everywhere live in fear that unenlightened, craven carousers will shock and stampede the public into accepting total fascist tyranny. Even worse, many people are being prevented from knowing that Lemon keeps saying that people find his unrelenting, over-the-top hostility rather refreshing. For some reason, Lemon's compadres actually believe this nonsense.

In this land which has befriended the most lusk skelms you'll ever see, Lemon has conspired, plotted, undermined, prostituted, and corrupted, and—hiding to this hour behind the braver screen of blinkered energumens—dares to contrive and scheme the death of every principle that has protected him. An interesting sidebar to what I just wrote is that he thinks I'm trying to say that human life is expendable. Wait! I just heard something. Oh, never mind; it's just the sound of the point zooming way over Lemon's head. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law in order to clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in his revenge fantasies. That would lead to anarchy. Instead, I advocate increasing awareness and understanding of our similarities and differences, as doing so leads people towards an understanding of how Lemon has been trying for ages to convince everyone that I'm some sort of cully who can be duped into believing that he would never dream of perpetuating what we all know is a corrupt system. The crux of his approach is to break down the distinction between subjective and objective truth, what Lemon refers to as “breaking down dualisms”.

Lemon needs to stop living in denial. He needs to wake up and realize that he has separate, oftentimes antipodal, interests from ours. For instance, Lemon is intererested in hastening the destruction of our civilization. In contrast, my interests—and perhaps yours as well—include telling people that Lemon has a vested interest in maintaining the myths that keep his barbarism squad loyal to him. His principal myth is that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight. The truth is that there isn't a man, woman, or child alive today who thinks that brutish bribe-seekers are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive, so let's toss out that ridiculous argument of Lemon's from the get-go.

Although I agree with those who warrant that the consequences of Lemon's untrustworthy orations, particularly from a moral point of view, are not favorable, nevertheless, I cannot agree with the subject matter and attitude that is woven into every one of Lemon's deluded platitudes. Lemon's coadjutors criticize others for being bumptious but do absolutely nothing themselves to pursue virtue and knowledge. Although this discrepancy undoubtedly indicates that Lemon's coadjutors are all sharp-tongued but soft-toothed hypocrites, a civilization that lets Lemon regulate conspiracism is a civilization that purchases its own spiritual death on an installment plan. Have you noticed that that hasn't been covered at all by the mainstream media? Maybe they're afraid that Lemon will retaliate by causing one-sided maneuvers to be entered into historical fact. Okay, I've vented enough frustration. So let me end by saying that Lemon the Scammer's eulogists will carry the product of his work into the future, even after Lemon himself is long gone.


is that you Lazerus?


Sat Aug 08, 2015 5:48 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Eminence Front
Rank: Officer
Main: Blizzara
Level: 6660

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:25 pm
Posts: 1974
Location: Finland
Post Re: wat
Clearly not enough rainbow to be laz.


Sat Aug 08, 2015 10:07 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Star Revolution X
Rank: Officer
Main: Taylor Swift
Level: 3894

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:11 pm
Posts: 3895
Location: ur mums a ram
Post Re: wat
Antilzah wrote:
Clearly not enough rainbow to be laz.

fixed, just for you.

_________________
Image
ImageImage

Image

I would like to think the line "excuse me but can I get a shitpost?" is fairly polite.


Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:44 pm
Profile
User avatar
Team: Eminence Front
Rank:
Main: Razzy
Level: 4064

Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 1:29 pm
Posts: 152
Post Re: wat
cej1120con wrote:
Antilzah wrote:
Clearly not enough rainbow to be laz.

fixed, just for you.


Sometimes... Just sometimes... I want to kill you so bad Johnston.

_________________
One day, Life asks Death "Why do people love me, but hate you?" Death responded with "Simple Life, because you are the beautiful lie, where as I am the painful truth"


Sun Aug 09, 2015 1:44 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.