I'm not an activist and I'm not a cynic. I'm just a person who wants to enable patriots to use their freedoms to save their freedoms. When writing this letter, I had originally intended to segregate the pure errors of fact in Derf's comments from the assertions of questionable judgment where there could be room for dispute. I eventually decided against that approach because Derf does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when he says that there is something intellectually provocative in the tired rehashing of ignominious stereotypes, that's where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins. So, sorry for being so long-winded in this post, but militarism advances Derf's long-term goal of plutocratic global dictatorship.
It's one thing to inspire a recrudescence of warped fatuity, but wanting to challenge all I stand for is going too far. Is it any wonder that Barf should know better than to monopolize the press? Who is he to say that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming? Isn't it odd that effrontive, contemptible extremists, whose inconsiderate, iconoclastic lifestyle will irrationalize thinking on every issue by the end of the decade, are immune from censure? Why is that? First, I'll give you a very brief answer, and then I'll go back and explain my answer in detail. As for the brief answer, Barf should stop lying about how freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable. To top that off, to Barf's mind, courtesy and manners don't count for anything. So that means that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do, right? No, not right. The truth is that you don't need to be a rocket scientist to detect the subtext of this letter. But just in case it's too subliminal for some, let me thrust it into your face right here: Barf's sentiments have caused widespread social alienation, and from this alienation a thousand social pathologies have sprung. We need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with Barf. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that I'm not writing this letter for your entertainment. I'm not even writing it for your education. I'm writing it for our very survival. He seems incapable of understanding that if you look back over some of my older letters, you'll see that I predicted that he would lash out at everyone and everything in sight. And, as I predicted, he did. But you know, that was not a difficult prediction to make. Anyone who has bothered to learn even a little about Barf could have made the same prediction.
To restore the traditions that Smoking357 has abandoned, we need to begin with a frank acknowledgment of the basic humanness of each of us. And we must acknowledge that Smoking357 is a scion of filthy agitators. With this letter, I hope to investigate the development of racism as a concept. But first, I would like to make the following introductory remark: When I say that Smoking357's cop-outs are intemperate, I mean it. I don't mean that they remind me of something intemperate or that they have one or two intemperate characteristics. I mean that they are intemperate. In fact, the most intemperate thing about them is the way that they prevent people from seeing that what was morally wrong five years ago is just as wrong today. You may have detected a hint of sarcasm in the way I phrased that last statement but I assure you that I am not exaggerating the situation. Lastly, I can't end this letter without mentioning that one of history's clearest lessons is that Smoking357's concept of team play is sideline sulking.