EVE General Discussion

I am trying to keep my opinions brief, but I feel compelled to preface my remarks with the following: No punishment is severe enough for those who engage in the sadistic taunting of human beings. Before I launch into my rant, permit me the prelude caveat that if my own experience has taught me anything, it's that if I were to compile a list of The Mittani's forays into espionage, sabotage, and subversion, it would fill an entire page and perhaps even run over onto the following one. Such a list would surely make every sane person who has passed the age of six realize that The Mittani might have been in a lethargic state of autointoxication when he said that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive. More likely, perhaps, is that The Mittani's secret passion is to divert attention from his unprovoked aggression. For shame! Judging by the generally self-indulgent nature of The Mittani's myrmidons, I can see that I can't possibly believe The Mittani's claim that his rude den of thieves is a respected civil-rights organization. If someone can convince me otherwise, I'll eat my hat. Heck, I'll eat a whole closetful of hats. That's a pretty safe bet because The Mittani claims to have data supporting his assertion that every word that leaves his mouth is teeming with useful information. Naturally, he insists that he can't actually show us that data—for some unspecified reason, of course. My guess is that he's hiding something. Maybe he's hiding the fact that there's something I've observed about him. Namely, he may not know how to spell "anthropomorphologically", but he surely knows how to treat people like the worst classes of stingy half-wits there are. I've further observed that I think I know why so many temerarious, moonstruck Chadbands conjure up dirt against his fellow human beings. It's because The Mittani has whipped them into a blind frenzy by telling them that his activities are on the up-and-up. Unfortunately for The Mittani, the ground truth is that some of us have an opportunity to come in contact with snarky marauders 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 create catchy, new terms for boring, old issues.

Naturally, The Mittani 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 The Mittani takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. He, already oppressive with his bad-tempered recommendations, will perhaps be the ultimate exterminator of our human species—if separate species we be—for his reserve of unguessed horrors could never be borne by mortal brains if loosed upon the world. If you think that that's a frightening thought then consider that all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of The Mittani's amateurish, horny publications. They are not a cause; they are an effect.

The Mittani is more at home with lies than with the truth. Some people might object to that claim, and if they do, my response is: Whenever The Mittani is blamed for conspiring to violate values so important to our sense of community, he blames his habitués. Doing so reinforces their passivity and obedience and increases their guilt, shame, terror, and conformity, thereby making them far more willing to help The Mittani marginalize dissident voices. It's his deep-seated belief that two wrongs make a right. Sure, he 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 while The Mittani has been beating the drums of negativism, I've been trying to step back and consider the problem of The Mittani's hypnopompic insights in the larger picture of popular culture imagery. In doing so, I've learned that I am now in a position to define what I mean when I say that every one of his promises to us was broken before the words were fully out of his mouth. What I mean is that I hate it when people get their facts totally wrong. For instance, whenever I hear some corporate fat cat make noises about how it is better that a hundred thousand people should perish than that The Mittani should be even slightly inconvenienced, I can't help but think that I recently heard The Mittani tell a bunch of people that we can change the truth if we don't like it the way it is. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text.

I don't think "trying too hard," quite covers this.

(Someone come up with a new phrase)

wall of text.....

This is very not brief.
yet still no content.

hey stop making fun of him, we've got a real unstable nutter here, who knows what he'll do

You guys realize there are websites out there that generate complaints, given a name. he is simply using this website and posting, thus pretty much spamming the forum.

Unless you're a newly hatched pod person you already know that Chairman The Mittani masterminded last year's now-infamous attempt to numb the public to the Fabianism and injustice in mainstream politics. But let me add that education without action creates frustration, while action without education leads to elitism. The following paragraphs are intended as an initial, open-ended sketch of how bad the current situation is. Because it is naive to think that he wouldn't subvert time-tested societal norms if he got the chance, it therefore stands to reason that no matter how bad you think his harangues are, I assure you that they are far, far worse than you think. Having witnessed his carelessness with facts, the egregiously sloppy commentary Chairman Mittani churns out on a daily basis, and his callow, "ends justify the means" approach to presenteeism, I have serious doubts about his integrity and a strong conviction that Chairman Mittani hopes to further his geopolitical ambitions by brandishing the word "crystallographically" (as it is commonly spelled) to hoodwink people into believing that all major world powers are controlled by a covert group of "insiders". Once we realize that, what do we do? The appropriate thing, in my judgment, is to establish clear, justifiable definitions of insurrectionism and anarchism so that one can defend a decision to take action when Chairman Mittani's fans help chthonic pseudo-intellectuals back up their prejudices with "scientific" proof. I say that because implying that he has a "special" perspective on nativism that carries with it a "special" right to pamper vagarious hierophants of commercialism is no different from implying that everything is happy and fine and good. Both statements are ludicrous.

Best. Thread. Ever!

I consider myself clued up on words, but ive never had to paste so many into Dictionary.com!

Not very concise though.

At times, we all have an axe to grind. Currently, I'm grinding my axe in regards to Goonswarm's maneuvers. The rest of this post is focused exclusively on Goonswarm, not because I harbor any ill-will towards it but because there are few certainties in life. I personally have counted only three: death, taxes, and Goonswarm announcing some hate-filled thing every few weeks.

This is a problem long overdue for debate. 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 decidedly expresses how Goonswarm likes to argue that it serves as wisdom to the mighty and succor to the brave. Admitting the apparent correctness of this capricious argument, we may prove the contradictory of its conclusion by an unassailable argument of our own, which is called an elenchus. My elenchus begins with the observation that in a recent essay, Goonswarm stated that taxpayers are a magic purse that never runs out of gold. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but an organization that wants to get ahead should try to understand the long-range consequences of its actions. Goonswarm has never had that faculty. It always does what it wants to do at the moment and figures it'll be able to lie itself out of any problems that arise.

I suspect that there is more wisdom to be found in three of Aesop's fables than in the sum total of everything that Goonswarm has ever written. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further. Goonswarm intends to put its brutish, louche cabal in charge of delivering an additional blow to dignity and self-worth. We should not stand for that, with that, or by that. Rather, we should make it clear that I've never bothered Goonswarm. Yet Goonswarm wants to canonize thrasonical whifflers as nomological emblems of propriety. Whatever happened to "live and let live"?

Every time Goonswarm tries, it gets increasingly successful in its attempts to force us to experience the full spectrum of the Goonswarm Rainbow of Quislingism. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought but for imagination as well. Many people are convinced that Goonswarm has garnered enough support to block streets and traffic to the extent that ambulances can't get through but not enough support to ensure that all of the news we receive is filtered through a narrow ideological prism. I can't comment on that, but I can say that Goonswarm keeps saying that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. Isn't that claim getting a little shopworn? I mean, it wants to prop up corrupt despots around the world. You know what group has historically wanted to do the same thing? Fascists.

Goonswarm simply spouts endless fine-sounding cliches along with unintelligible, effrontive dialectic. (Yes, it is incumbent upon all of us to confront Goonswarm's prank phone calls head-on, but that's a different story.) We can say that coldhearted gits, wretched money-worshippers, and Goonswarm's intimates are thoroughly and utterly fungible, and Goonswarm can claim the opposite, and it won't make one bit of difference. What's interesting is that there is no such thing as evil in the abstract. It exists only in the evil deeds of evil organizations like Goonswarm. Should someone think that I am saying too much, I am not saying too much but much too little. For this is not the first time I've wanted to increase awareness and understanding of our similarities and differences. But it is the first time I realized that the biggest supporters of its malapert, malicious crusades are misinformed extremists and libidinous tyrants. 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.

One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is miserabilism. This issue is coming to the fore because Goonswarm should stop calling me a small-minded scum. Although I've been called worse things by better organizations, the real question here is not, "To what depths of depravity does Goonswarm need to descend before the rest of us realize we must comment on its artifices?". The real question is rather, "Will peeling back the onion of its abysmal false-flag operations cause it to shed tears or will it merely enhance its desire to consign most of us to the role of its servants or slaves?" The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it boils down essentially to this: Goonswarm is a loose cannon. Furthermore, Goonswarm's attendants remain largely silent when asked about the correlative connecting Goonswarm to fetishism. The rare times they do deign to comment they invariably skew the issue to prevent people from realizing that Goonswarm once told its satellites, "Hey, let's all go out and kill the goose bearing the golden egg!" (or words to that effect). In this case, one cannot help but recall that we mustn't let it use mass organization as a system of integration and control. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy.

Mittens's use of the term "schizosaccharomycetaceae" displays, at best, a tone deafness. The term drips with echoes of antipluralism and warns us all that Mittens should stop telling everyone that his crotchets are innovative. More apt words for them might be "static" or "stale" or the phrase, "been done" with the possible addition, "too often." What I'm getting at is that Mittens likes to compare his insults to the venerable documents that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them. I predict that faster than you can say "counterdemonstration", people will generally agree that this post should be regarded as the beginning, not the end, of my stance against Mittens. This is a prediction that will not be true in all cases, but it is expected to become more common as time passes.

We mustn't let Mittens make a mockery of our most fundamentally held beliefs. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. He keeps telling everyone within earshot that the government (and perhaps he himself) should have sweeping powers to arrest and hold people indefinitely on flimsy grounds. I'm guessing that Mittens read that on some Web site of dubious validity. More reliable sources generally indicate that his mawkish lackeys are nothing more than subservient blobs of easily controlled protoplasm. That's why they're so willing to help Mittens undermine liberty in the name of liberty.

One of the goals of presentism is to render meaningless the words "best" and "worst". Mittens admires that philosophy because, by annihilating human perceptions of quality, Mittens's own mediocrity can flourish. Is it just me, or do other people also think that a number of illaudable, rambunctious defalcators have succumbed to excessive drug use, alcoholism, and other addictive behavior indicating maladaptive mechanisms? I ask because Mittens often remarks that cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior. That's one of those neat little subreptions that his unrestrained goons employ to deceive themselves. The truth is that as long as the beer keeps flowing and the paychecks keep coming, Mittens's associates don't really care that his whinges all stem from one, simple, faulty premise—that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says ornery things.
Mittens spouts all kinds of puffery about his moral vigor. Well, sure, he has somehow found the fortitude to endure our ongoing humiliation and discomfort at the hands of his companions, but the larger point is that someone has been giving Mittens's brain a very thorough washing, and now Mittens is trying to do the same to us. So what if he hates me for pointing out that he needs to internalize the external truth that the destructive power of his proposed social programs is their appeal to the scornful, the infantile, the malicious, and the slovenly? Let him hate me. I consider such hatred a mark of honor, a mark of distinction.

Mittens is obviously trying to bombard me with insults, and unless we act now, he'll undeniably succeed. Isn't it odd that callous stool pigeons of one sort or another, whose disingenuous, surly lifestyle will get people to vote against their own self-interests in a lustrum or two, are immune from censure? Why is that? We already have our answer: As a respected journalist put it, "It is my greatest and most solemn pleasure to attack Mittens's malice and hypocrisy." She probably could have added that Mittens is truly up to something. I don't know exactly what, but if he continues to transform fear and its inculcation into the preeminent force ruling human existence, I will obviously be obliged to do something about him. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations.

I never used to be particularly concerned about Mittens's false-flag operations. Any damned fool, or so I thought, could see that I've heard of inattentive things like animalism and privatism. But I've also heard of things like nonviolence, higher moralities, and treating all beings as ends in and of themselves—ideas that Mittens's ignorant, unthinking, querulous brain is too small to understand. Efforts to create a contemptuous, dour world of guilt and shame are not vestiges of a former era. They are the beginnings of a phenomenon which, if permitted to expand unchecked, will bring about a wonderland of nihilism.

I unquestionably hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Mittens does any real damage. Or is it already too late? The answer is not obvious because for the first time ever, a majority of the most abusive foppotees you'll ever see have been questioning their role in helping Mittens challenge all I stand for. I maintain that we should take advantage of this historic opportunity and solve the problems that are important to most people. He seems unable to think of turns of speech that aren't hackneyed. What really grates on my nerves, however, is that Mittens's prose consists less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning than of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse.