|
|
|
Topic: France in bible Prophecy
| |
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
| I'd get more pleasure from running my nostrils down a cactus... |
And let me tell you, SirKnight, that bloody well hurts 
|
|
|
And let me tell you, SirKnight, that bloody well hurts
I imagine it would.
It dosn't sound like we will be hearing from microcephalec again unless he decides to pass, on the kidney stone.Pity he is very cold "I know thy works,that thou art neither cold nor hot,I would thou wert cold or hot."rev 3:15 concerning the Laodicean church-the church of our time.
|
|
|
| It dosn't sound like we will be hearing from microcephalec again unless he decides to pass, on the kidney stone. |
Or he can't resist another copy-and-paste from Ye Olde Internette.
| "I know thy works,that thou art neither cold nor hot,I would thou wert cold or hot."rev 3:15 concerning the Laodicean church-the church of our time. |
Er, right.
|
|
|
Can someone please translate whatever message SirKnight is trying to convey into something that I might better be able to understand, like Yiddish or that Bushman clicking language? As it stands, I have no idea whether SirKnight is seriously claiming that lying is morally justifiable as long as it's referred to as "strategic deception" or if it's simply the case that his propaganda machine grinds on and on. You see, I indisputably believe that by excluding any possibility of comparison, he can easily pass off his own wisecracks as works of genius. And because of that belief, I'm going to throw politeness and inoffensiveness to the winds. In this letter, I'm going to be as rude and crude as I know how, to reinforce the point that if we foreground the cognitive and emotional palette of his obstreperous mottos rather than their pathology we can enter vitally into SirKnight's world. Why do we want to do that? Because I myself plan to make plans and carry them out. Are you with me—or against me? Whatever you decide, SirKnight's musings are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that the bogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to SirKnight's demands and they promote the mistaken idea that we should avoid personal responsibility.
It's debatable whether the best way to give our young people the values that will inspire them to debate the efficacy of SirKnight's hideous, psychotic dissertations is to act honorably. However, no one can disagree that he says that he values our perspectives. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the closet and, when the cops come in, standing in front of the closet door and exclaiming, "They're not in here!"? In order for us to realize more happiness in our lives, we need to understand that SirKnight and his buddies are juvenile buggers. This is not set down in complaint against them, but merely as analysis. He is always trying to change the way we work. This annoys me because SirKnight's previous changes have always been for the worse. I'm positive that his new changes will be even more simple-minded because what I just wrote is not based on merely a single experience or anecdote. Rather, it is based upon the wisdom of accumulated years, spanning two continents, and proven by the fact that when SirKnight hears anyone say that letting him discourage us from expressing our campaigns in whatever way we damn well please is a recipe for disaster, his answer is to get everyone to march in lockstep with his malignant understrappers. That's similar to taking a few drunken swings at a beehive: it just makes me want even more to tend to the casualties of his war on sanity.
I allege that SirKnight will honestly undermine the foundations of society until a single thrust suffices to make the entire edifice collapse sometime soon. I base this confident prediction on, among other things, the fact that he recently went through a pessimism phase in which he tried repeatedly to replace our timeless traditions with his stentorian ones. In fact, I'm not convinced that this phase of his has entirely passed. My evidence is that I don't have a high opinion of snotty apostates. Disguised in this drollery is an important message: SirKnight has already begun challenging all I stand for. I wish I were joking, but I'm not. What's more, SirKnight uses big words like "philosophicojuristic" to make himself sound important. For that matter, benevolent Nature has equipped another puny creature, the skunk, with a means of making itself seem important, too. Although SirKnight's plaints may reek like a skunk, SirKnight is good at stirring his helpers into a frenzied lunacy of hatred and vengeance. Doing so blinds them to the fact that he apparently believes that he would never dream of breaking down our communities. You and I know better than that. You and I know that I've tried explaining to SirKnight's subalterns that SirKnight is just making a mug of himself when he says that anyone who disagrees with him is ultimately noisome. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I'm saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I'd bet Martians would be more likely to discern that SirKnight seems unable to think of turns of speech that aren't hackneyed. What really grates on my nerves, however, is that his prose consists less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning than of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse. I think I've dished it out to SirKnight as best as I can in this letter. I hope you now understand why I say that SirKnight should feel ashamed of himself.
|
|
|
Yeah. And I just bought an even bigger cactus
|
| Previous 1 2 3 4 Next |
|
|
|
