Complaint Generator

[Cindy]

https://www.pakin.org/complaint

A number of incidents have taken place in the last several weeks that have troubled many members of our community. If you disagree with my claim that Nebulous Cloud rarely tells its compeers that it plans to drive us into insolvency, then read no further. I have frequently criticized Nebulous Cloud's unspoken plan to manipulate public understanding of larrikinism. It usually addresses my criticisms by accusing me of teetotalism, adversarialism, child molestation, and halitosis. Nebulous Cloud hopes that by delegitimizing me this way, no one will listen to me when I say that none of what Nebulous Cloud says carries any weight. Disguised in this drollery is an important message: Nebulous Cloud believes that genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all entirely justified. That's just wrong. It further believes that the Earth is flat. Wrong again!

Even with the increasing number of reprehensible pauteners, when I claim that Nebulous Cloud is deeply and fundamentally saturnine, this is not a commitment to ahistorical, prelinguistic, transcendent facts but a causal account that has explanatory power in connecting up phenomena in the world with the manner in which Nebulous Cloud has been shaking belief in all existing institutions through the systematic perversion of both contemporary and historical facts. Nebulous Cloud avouches that we should make my stomach turn. The truth is that we are better than that. The truth is that Nebulous Cloud repeats the term “characteristicalness” over and over again in everything it writes. Is this repetition part of some new drinking game, or is Nebulous Cloud merely trying to confuse us into believing that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't? Apparently, even know-it-all Nebulous Cloud doesn't know the answer to that one. It wouldn't even matter much if it did, given that each rung on the ladder of imperialism is a crisis of some kind. Each crisis supplies an excuse for Nebulous Cloud to use terms of opprobrium such as “costive wiseacres” and “stolid warlords” to castigate whomever it opposes. That is the standard process by which perfidious, sanguinolent slangwhangers break up society's solidarity and cohesiveness.

Nebulous Cloud's campaigns have proven to be a complete disaster in both theory and practice. It is also worthy of note that I don't care what others say about Nebulous Cloud. It's still unprincipled, money-grubbing, and it intends to restructure the social, political, and economic relationships that exist throughout our entire society.

While Nebulous Cloud manufactures crises over Marxism, its Praetorian Guard has been plaguing our minds. Although a thorough discussion of ill-tempered, shameless chauvinism is beyond the scope of this letter, Nebulous Cloud says that honor counts for nothing and that therefore the world will end if we wage war on blackguardism. Hello? Is Mr. Logic down at the pub with a dozen pints inside him or what? It's easy to tell if Nebulous Cloud is lying. If its lips are moving, it's lying.

Ideally, our government's actions should set an example for the forms of international cooperation, laws, and institutions that are required to give peace a chance. In reality, however, Nebulous Cloud is right about one thing, namely that fear is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when the worst sorts of insecure, lecherous foppotees there are confuse, disorient, and disunify. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that anyone who dares to present a noble vision of who we were, who we are, and who we can potentially be can expect to suffer hair loss and tooth decay as a result. And fear of evil ex-cons like Nebulous Cloud who turn positions of leadership into positions of complacency. I want to be sure that I am clear: I do not believe that our freedoms should survive on the crumbs that fall from the banquet table of ethnocentrism. Rather, my point is that Nebulous Cloud feels that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments. Perhaps it would be best for it to awaken from its delusional, narcoleptic fantasyland and observe that I don't know if it is consciously and purposely evil or merely insolent. I do know, however, that that's just one side of the coin. The other side is that relative to just a few years ago, liberticidal lie-virtuosi are nearly ten times as likely to believe that Nebulous Cloud is clean and bright and pure inside. This is neither a coincidence nor simply a sign of the times. Rather, it reflects a sophisticated, psychological warfare program designed by Nebulous Cloud to elevate the most besotted rixatrixes you'll ever see to the sublime.

Let's try to understand what handing over our rights to Nebulous Cloud will really mean. It certainly won't mean that we'll be able to freely instill a sense of responsibility and maturity in those who waste our time and money. No, it will mean witchcraft, beastliness, rape, and murder will become omnipresent in our society. It will mean a descent back into the jungle.

Believe you me, we can disagree with Nebulous Cloud without being disagreeable. For instance, I would like to politely disagree with some of its hariolations by pointing out that many innocent people are being manipulated into confusing, disorienting, and disunifying by the most sickening display of destructive, malign cant that I have ever witnessed in my entire life. While these incidents may seem minor, Nebulous Cloud's idiotic claim that criminals are merely social rebels is just that, an idiotic claim. I've observed at least one of Nebulous Cloud's gofers playing on people's conscious and unconscious belief structures. This is completely indicative of the unprofessional, ungracious, and unacceptable behavior that is so endemic to Nebulous Cloud's army of unregenerate noddies. None of Nebulous Cloud's ideas are the least bit original. Nebulous Cloud simply stole, rehashed, and re-branded perennial knowledge as its own in an attempt to convince the public that it's okay for it to indulge its every whim and lust without regard for anyone else or for society as a whole. Granted, there may be some originality in being so obtuse, but the point remains that Nebulous Cloud's current aspiration is to reduce us to acute penury. I'd call that the most prudish idea in Nebulous Cloud's long history of prudish ideas. It's the sort of idea that draws attention to how it emphatically denounces all of my evidence that it has lost what little credibility it once had. It does so in a manner strongly reminiscent of the denunciation sessions once held in the Soviet Union and Communist China for those who deviated from the ideological line of those who held power. What's scary about that is that Nebulous Cloud has long wanted to prevent anyone from stating publicly that it is decidedly failing in its legal and moral responsibility not to make human life negligible and cheap. Why do I bring that up? Because by studying its repression of ideas in its extreme, unambiguous form one may more clearly understand why I'm not afraid of Nebulous Cloud. However, I am concerned that it swears that the world's salvation comes from whims, irrationality, and delusions. Despite the emphasis that it places on that asseveration, we all know that it's a willful, malicious, and deliberate lie that serves only to prove that we and Nebulous Cloud definitely need to call a truce on our arguments over exclusionism. Unfortunately, Nebulous Cloud will refuse to accept any such truce, as its whole raison d'être is to promote exclusionism in all its socially inept forms.

Nebulous Cloud focuses on feelings rather than facts. Sure, it attempts to twist and distort facts to justify its feelings, but that just goes to show that the one thing that's central to all of Nebulous Cloud's amateurish comments is a desire to reinforce and police relations of power in the name of maintaining the stakes of the already privileged. I call this the New Chekism. The old Chekism was concerned only with denying citizens the privilege of peaceful assembly and protest. Although that was bad enough, I think I know why so many hubristic agitators prosecute, sentence, and label people as mordacious vigilantes without the benefit of any evidence whatsoever. It's because Nebulous Cloud has whipped them into a blind frenzy by telling them that free speech is wonderful as long as you're not bashing it and the unsavory thugs in its flock. Unfortunately for Nebulous Cloud, the ground truth is that sometimes I think that it is simply a willing pawn of those vexatious prima donnas who sully a profession that's already held in low esteem. I typically drop that willing-pawn notion, however, whenever I remember that Nebulous Cloud has been using all sorts of jiggery-pokery to convince people that it can ignore rules, laws, and protocol without repercussion. That worldview may be appealing, at least to insidious, bilious bigamists, but it severely limits our national conversation on critical policy issues. Perhaps more painfully, Nebulous Cloud proclaims that principles don't matter. In the long run, however, it's only fooling itself. Nebulous Cloud would be better off if it just admitted to itself that its helpmeets all look like it, think like it, act like it, and prop up corrupt despots around the world, just like Nebulous Cloud does. And all this in the name of—let me see if I can get their propaganda straight—brotherhood and service. Ha!

Many years ago I reported that the biggest threat to our society was the number of crude, vindictive twits whom Nebulous Cloud had convinced to make conditions far worse than could ever have been the case without its obtrusive efforts. I wish that I could say to you that the situation has improved. To the contrary, over these intervening years the nature of the problem has, if anything, gotten worse. In particular, Nebulous Cloud doesn't use words for communication or for exchanging information. It uses them to disarm, to hypnotize, to mislead, and to deceive. All the same, I have no set opinion as to whether or not we must continue to monitor Nebulous Cloud's subalterns and expose them as the ugly, illaudable bloodsuckers they are. I do, however, unmistakably believe that it professes that there is something intellectually provocative in the tired rehashing of squalid stereotypes. As you can no doubt determine from comments like that, facts and Nebulous Cloud are like oil and water.

However much Nebulous Cloud may deny it, it's a mumpish, revolting skite. Consequently, attempting to respond to its communiqués with logic is futile. A more productive response is to observe that Nebulous Cloud's diatribes have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. You should be sure to let me know your ideas about how to deal with Nebulous Cloud. I am eager to listen to your ideas and I hope that I can grasp their essentials, evaluate their potential, look for flaws, provide suggestions, absorb feedback, suggest improvements, and then put the ideas into effect. Only then can we teach even duplicitous swaggerers about our nation's core values and ideals, including courage, honor, honesty, religious freedom, and individual rights. The final thing I want to bring up in this letter is that I'll do what I can to establish relations anchored on mutual respect, mutual benefit, and shared commitment to democratic ideals and the rule of law, and each of you reading this letter should do the same. Let's be there for each other. Let's help each other. And let's challenge Nebulous Cloud to defend its treatises or else to change them.

 

[Postal]

big gay

 

[Cindy]

big gay

My entire life I have been taught to stand up for my beliefs, to be a person of high morals and ethics. That's why I feel obligated to work beyond the predatory plasticity of Postal's campaigns of malice and malignity. Consider this letter not as a monologue but rather as a joint effort between writer and reader. Together we shall build bridges where in the past all that existed were moats and drawbridges. Together we shall fight the warped, distorted, misshapen, unwholesome monstrosity that Postal's monographs have become. And together we shall set the record straight. If one dares to criticize even a single tenet of Postal's allocutions, one is promptly condemned as quixotic, gin-swilling, cuckoo, or whatever epithet Postal deems most appropriate, usually without much explanation.

Postal isn't just attacking me. He's attacking all of the decent people of all backgrounds who profess that he says that all scientific and technological progress would come to a halt were it not for his demands. That's like a rooster taking credit for the sunrise. I mean, it's not like Postal doesn't know that it is not news that the mistaken claim that honor counts for nothing is not only incorrect but is somewhat telling of his core sentiments. What speaks volumes, though, is that mass anxiety is the equivalent of steroids for Postal. If we feel helpless, Postal is energized and ramps up his efforts to create a Frankenstein's monster.

We must worry about two sorts of irritating scamps: bloodthirsty and ungrateful. Postal is among the former. He's the type of person who will trump up any lie for the occasion, and the more of a thumper it is, the better Postal likes it. He insists that gangsterism is indispensable for the formation of citizens and for the preservation of our free institutions. Although I've already discussed the abject fallaciousness of that argument, the fact remains that his primary goal is to lead people towards iniquity and sin. All of his other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose. That's why you must always remember that Postal certainly doesn't lack gall. For that reason, we're going to have to hunker down for a protracted war against him and his little empire. This will unquestionably be a conflict of a type that, given the external backing on which our opponents rely, is unlikely to end in a rout by either side. Even if the fighting ends at the negotiation table, Postal can't attack my ideas, so he attacks me. It could be worse, I suppose. He could poke someone's eyes out.

The appropriate response to Postal's self-seeking vaporings is not suppression but more speech, leading to a full airing of views. Still, this is all light opera amid the shrill insanity of his egotistical witticisms. One of Postal's most trusted legmen is an untoward voluptuary. If you're an untoward voluptuary, you force people to act in ways far removed from the natural patterns of human behavior. That's all there is to it. Well, there is one more thing: I don't just want to make a point. I don't just want to criticize Postal's complicity in the widespread establishment of sadism. I'm here to give an alternate solution, a better one. I don't just ask rhetorical questions; I have answers. That's why I'm telling you that Postal's metanarratives are becoming increasingly sordid. They have already begun to censor any incomplicitous philosophies. Now fast-forward a few years to a time in which they have enabled Postal to pander to volage-brained fogeys. If you don't want such a time to come then help me establish a supportive—rather than an intimidating—atmosphere for offering public comment. Help me go placidly amid the noise and haste.

Postal is the type of person that turns up his nose at people like you and me. I guess that's because we haven't the faintest notion about the things that really matter such as why it would be good for him to rub salt into our wounds. If my own experience has taught me anything, it's that we must give the needy a helping hand as opposed to an elbow in the face. If we don't, future generations will not know freedom. Instead, they will know fear; they will know sadness; they will know injustice, poverty, and grinding despair. Most of all, they will realize, albeit far too late, that Postal attracts warped bezonians (especially the snotty type) to his imperium by telling them that he's imbued with a sacred mission to blow the whole situation way out of proportion. I suppose the people to whom he tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, Postal once tried to promote violence in all its forms—physical, sexual, psychological, economical, and social. If you consider this an exception to the rule then you indisputably don't understand how Postal operates. I hope, however, that you at least understand that some of the facts I'm about to present may seem shocking. This they certainly are. However, if he is going to make an emotional appeal then he should also include a rational argument.

There's a distinction to be made here. That's something you won't find in your local newspaper because it's the news that just doesn't fit. It's scary how effectively Postal has been gagging the innocent accused from protesting collaborationism-motivated prosecutions. 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 challenge Postal's outlandish premises and dubious motives.

I would like to comment on Postal's attempt to associate elitism with serfism. There is no association. Worst of all, our children's children would never forgive us for letting Postal fragment the nation into politically disharmonious units. When we reverse the devolutionary course that he has set for us, we are not only threading our way through a maze of competing interests; we are weaving the very pattern of our social fabric. What is his current objective? As usual, there are multiple objectives:

• to cause pain and injury to those who don't deserve it,
• to kill people and blow people up and attack governments, and
• to persuade many of his nemeses to enter into a one-way "dialogue" with him.

Postal has for a long time been arguing that scapegoatism is a viable and vital objective for our nation's educational institutions. Had he instead been arguing that a substantial fraction of his flacks and—if the polls are to be believed—a large number of adversarial ivory-tower academics actually believe that he's the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Postal's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how I am hurt, furious, and embarrassed. Why am I hurt? Because anyone—you or I or a Martian who just arrived in a flying saucer—who wants to pave the way for people of every sex, race, and socioeconomic status to fulfill their own spiritual destiny should realize that Postal doesn't simply want people to believe that there is an international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids. He wants this belief drummed into people's heads from birth. He wants it to be accepted as an axiom, an assumed part of the nature of reality. Only then will Postal truly be able to get away with spreading hatred, animosity, and divisiveness. Why am I furious? Because he undoubtedly gives me the heebie-jeebies. You don't need to be the smartest guy on the planet to figure that out. Heck, even the lowliest Joe Six-Pack knows that Postal goes ballistic every time I so much as hint that the pressures and stresses that his operatives undergo lead them to make daft dead-enders out to be something they're not. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. Postal does, and that's why he demands absolute and blind obedience from his spinmeisters. If he didn't, they might question his orders to corral his castigators into mini-Bantustans to prevent them from reaching out to the poor, the marginalized, and those unfortunate enough to have been labeled as repressive by Postal's propaganda machine. This unrelenting demand of obedience also implies that Postal is absolutely, definitely, indisputably gloomy. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that one of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that we are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light of a bright, shining future in which brown-nosing, raving dodos like Postal are thoroughly absent. The other road leads into the darkness of propagandism. The question, therefore, is who's driving the bus? There's only one realistic answer to that question, and I believe you know what it is. I claim you also know that Postal says that he is the arbiter of all things. At least we can't accuse him of hiding his prejudices, I suppose. Of course, it would nice if Postal were also to confess that his prevarications promote a redistribution of wealth. This is always an appealing proposition for Postal's provocateurs because much of the redistributed wealth will undoubtedly end up in the hands of the redistributors as a condign reward for their loyalty to Postal. And why am I embarrassed? Because the justification Postal gave for undermining the intellectual purpose of higher education was one of the most stuporous justifications I've ever heard. It was so stuporous, in fact, that I will not repeat it here. Even without hearing the details you can still see my point quite clearly: One can consecrate one's life to the service of a noble idea or a glorious ideology. Postal, however, is more likely to fuel the fires of hatred.

Postal should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. He thinks that he is clean and bright and pure inside. That is not the case. The reality is that to believe that anyone who resists him deserves to be crushed is to deceive ourselves.

Postal's behavior might be different if he were told that I don't think it would be unfair to say that he is known for fabricating evidence. Of course, as far as Postal is concerned, this fact will fall into the category of, “My mind is made up; don't confuse me with the facts.” That's why I'm telling you that his asseverations are a logical absurdity, a series of deductions from a premise that has been denied. Speaking of absurdities, in this world, there are pompous poltroons. There are verbally incontinent, unctuous scofflaws. There are rats who walk like men. And then there is Postal. Of those, I warrant that Postal is the most filthy because I once had a nightmare in which he was free to ensure that there can never in the future be accord, unity, or a common, agreed-upon destiny among the citizens of this once-great nation. When I awoke, I realized that this nightmare was frighteningly close to reality. For instance, it is the case both in my nightmare and in reality that the next time Postal decides to promote a culture of dependency and failure, he should think to himself, cui bono?—who benefits? Lastly, I can't end this letter without mentioning that “unreasonable” is the least offensive adjective that accurately describes Postal.

 

[Postal]

ok