Nekromanti Ytterligare ett Nigeriabrev!
- Thread starter Storuggla
- Start date
chrull
Stockholm Kartell
- Joined
- 17 May 2000
- Messages
- 8,423
det finns bara ett svar att ge:
My complaint about Ms. Rose M Doudou
I feel that it is my duty to institute change. Permit me this forum to rant. Ms. Rose M Doudou exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up her obvious inferiority. Many people aren't aware of how profligate her utterances are, so let's present a little breakdown. First off, every time she utters or writes a statement that supports mercantalism -- even indirectly -- it sends a message that if she kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick her toes and beg for another kick. I myself think we mustn't let her make such statements, partly because she is secretly saying that I should just live lower than dirt, but primarily because by her standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children -- let alone teach them to be morally fit -- you're definitely an insane gasbag. My standards -- and I suspect yours as well -- are quite different from Ms. Doudou's. For instance, I sincerely insist that her most progressive idea is to crush any semblance of opposition to her unpatriotic plans for the future. If that sounds progressive to you, you must be facing the wrong way.
The sole point of agreement between myself and unstable losers is that Ms. Doudou's whole approach is huffy. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: Whatever happened to good sportsmanship? To answer that question, we need first to consider Ms. Doudou's thought process, which generally takes the following form: (1) Truth is merely a social construct, so (2) mediocrity is a worthwhile goal. Therefore, (3) she is the one who will lead us to our great shining future and thus, (4) the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. As you can see, Ms. Doudou's reasoning makes no sense, which leads me to believe that her club appears to be growing in number. I pray that this is analogous to the flare-up of a candle just before extinction yet I keep reminding myself that she holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City -- sterile obstacles to progress who feed us ever-larger doses of Ms. Doudou's lies and crackpot assumptions. It would be wrong to imply that Ms. Doudou is involved in some kind of conspiracy to force us to bow down low before intolerant ruffians. It would be wrong because her conjectures are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but documents written by her flunkies typically include the line, "It is smarmy to question Ms. Doudou's prevarications", in large, 30-point type, as if the size of the font gives weight to the words. In reality, all that that fancy formatting really does is underscore the fact that Ms. Doudou has been known to say that granting her complete control over our lives is as important as breathing air. That notion is so oleaginous, I hardly know where to begin refuting it. Ms. Doudou pompously claims that the media should "create" news rather than report it. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. Developing a policy of inclusion will not be easy, because she must have some sort of problem with reading comprehension. That's the only explanation I can come up with as to why she accuses me of admitting that those of us who oppose her would rather run than fight. What I actually said is that Ms. Doudou is the picture of the insane person on the street, babbling to a tree, a wall, or a cloud, which cannot and does not respond to her vituperations.
Ms. Doudou's stooges have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize Ms. Doudou's acrimonious zingers. It is not a pretty sight. Forgive me, dear reader, but I must be so tactless as to remind you that this is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about Ms. Doudou's Bonapartism-prone behavior, but about the way that Ms. Doudou never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. She presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, she seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that when I'm through with her, she'll think twice before attempting to devalue me as a person. I feel funny having to tell readers whom I presume are adults that I wouldn't put it past Ms. Doudou to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. I bring that up solely to emphasize that it is not uncommon for her to victimize the innocent, penalize the victim for making any effort to defend himself, and then paint the whole detestable affair as some great benefit to humanity.
Ms. Doudou would have us believe that she is a model citizen. That, of course, is nonsense, total nonsense. But Ms. Doudou is surrounded by vitriolic bourgeoisie who parrot the same nonsense, which is why she should do some research next time before printing half-truths and misinformation. That's something you won't find in your local newspaper because it's the news that just doesn't fit. Was she just trying to be cute when she said that all major world powers are controlled by a covert group of "insiders"? I sure hope so, because her obiter dicta, though creative, are a yawning abyss of misoneism. In reaching that conclusion, I have made the usual assumption that Ms. Doudou is out to pamper clueless dossers. And when we play her game, we become accomplices. Whenever there's an argument about her devotion to principles and to freedom, all one has to do is point out that she should get off her high horse. That should settle the argument pretty quickly. I note in passing that many people are convinced that the common denominator of all of Ms. Doudou's apologues is that they seek to create a factitious demand for Ms. Doudou's slaphappy newsgroup postings. I can't comment on that, but I can say that she has been trying for some time to convince people that the world's salvation comes from whims, irrationality, and delusions. Don't believe her hype! Ms. Doudou has just been offering that line as a means to make a fetish of the virtues of obtrusive, closed-minded lexiphanicism.
Don't misunderstand me; I'm not saying that it's inappropriate to teach children right from wrong. In fact, she claims to be fighting for equality. What Ms. Doudou's really fighting for, however, is equality in degradation, by which I mean that Ms. Doudou's writings have kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful adventure we share together -- life! It has been proven time and time again that Ms. Doudou thinks she can impress us by talking about "scientificophilosophical this" and "histomorphologically that". An equal but opposite observation is that some people are responsible and others are not. Ms. Doudou falls into the category of "not".
Once people obtain the critical skills that enable them to think and reflect and speculate independently, they'll realize that in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, this is not the place to develop that subject. It demands many pages of analysis, which I can't spare in this letter. Instead, I'll just state the key point, which is that if Ms. Doudou has spurred us to lift our nation from the quicksand of injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood, then Ms. Doudou may have accomplished a useful thing. Not only have hypocritical, obstreperous sluggards decided to glorify their histrionics by dressing them up as moral and righteous prerogatives, but their convictions are being debated as though they were actually reasonable. You might object to my claim that Ms. Doudou behaves as if she's been lobotomized. But bear in mind that Ms. Doudou's bons mots are unhealthy and lacking in purpose. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that Ms. Doudou says that she acts in the name of equality and social justice. I've seen more plausible things scrawled on the bathroom walls in elementary schools.
Ms. Doudou's desire to spread hatred, animosity, and divisiveness is the chief sign that she's a fatuous administrator. (The second sign is that Ms. Doudou feels obliged to use psychological tools to trick us into doing whatever saturnine knee-biters require of us.) When people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And Ms. Doudou is to blame.
From this perspective, mankind needs to do more to eschew petulant, insolent antipluralism. Understand, I am not condemning mankind for not doing enough; I am merely stating that you should never forget the three most important facets of Ms. Doudou's sophistries, namely their mischievous origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature. Who among you reading these words is not moved to provide some balance to Ms. Doudou's one-sided pranks? Ms. Doudou has for a long time been arguing that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. Had she instead been arguing that her crotchets are not just about deconstructionism but also about teetotalism, I might cede her her point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Ms. Doudou's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how there is no such thing as evil in the abstract. It exists only in the evil deeds of evil people like Ms. Doudou.
Here, too, we can see how if Ms. Doudou gets her way, none of us will be able to take off the kid gloves and vent some real anger at her. Therefore, we must not let Ms. Doudou give voice, in a totally emotional and non-rational way, to her deep-rooted love of ageism. All I'm trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the frowzy tendencies that make her want to ruin my entire day. She should think twice before she decides to strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. In that context, one could say that there is a problem here. A large, irrational, randy problem. Ms. Doudou says she's not Pecksniffian, but she's obviously possession-obsessed, and that's essentially the same thing. She possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, she can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it.
Note that Ms. Doudou has been trying to convince us that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. This pathetic attempt to pose a threat to personal autonomy and social development deserves no comment other than to say that if it were up to Ms. Doudou, schoolchildren would be taught reading, 'riting, and racism. Come on, Ms. Doudou; I know you're capable of thoughtful social behavior. Finally, this has been a good deal of reading, and unquestionably difficult reading at that. Still, I hope you walk away from it with the new knowledge that Ms. Rose M Doudou's machinations oscillate between dastardly, warped diabolism and hateful imperialism.
My complaint about Ms. Rose M Doudou
I feel that it is my duty to institute change. Permit me this forum to rant. Ms. Rose M Doudou exhibits an air of superiority. You realize, of course, that that's really just a defense mechanism to cover up her obvious inferiority. Many people aren't aware of how profligate her utterances are, so let's present a little breakdown. First off, every time she utters or writes a statement that supports mercantalism -- even indirectly -- it sends a message that if she kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick her toes and beg for another kick. I myself think we mustn't let her make such statements, partly because she is secretly saying that I should just live lower than dirt, but primarily because by her standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children -- let alone teach them to be morally fit -- you're definitely an insane gasbag. My standards -- and I suspect yours as well -- are quite different from Ms. Doudou's. For instance, I sincerely insist that her most progressive idea is to crush any semblance of opposition to her unpatriotic plans for the future. If that sounds progressive to you, you must be facing the wrong way.
The sole point of agreement between myself and unstable losers is that Ms. Doudou's whole approach is huffy. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: Whatever happened to good sportsmanship? To answer that question, we need first to consider Ms. Doudou's thought process, which generally takes the following form: (1) Truth is merely a social construct, so (2) mediocrity is a worthwhile goal. Therefore, (3) she is the one who will lead us to our great shining future and thus, (4) the Queen of England heads up the international drug cartel. As you can see, Ms. Doudou's reasoning makes no sense, which leads me to believe that her club appears to be growing in number. I pray that this is analogous to the flare-up of a candle just before extinction yet I keep reminding myself that she holds onto power like the eunuch mandarins of the Forbidden City -- sterile obstacles to progress who feed us ever-larger doses of Ms. Doudou's lies and crackpot assumptions. It would be wrong to imply that Ms. Doudou is involved in some kind of conspiracy to force us to bow down low before intolerant ruffians. It would be wrong because her conjectures are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but documents written by her flunkies typically include the line, "It is smarmy to question Ms. Doudou's prevarications", in large, 30-point type, as if the size of the font gives weight to the words. In reality, all that that fancy formatting really does is underscore the fact that Ms. Doudou has been known to say that granting her complete control over our lives is as important as breathing air. That notion is so oleaginous, I hardly know where to begin refuting it. Ms. Doudou pompously claims that the media should "create" news rather than report it. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. Developing a policy of inclusion will not be easy, because she must have some sort of problem with reading comprehension. That's the only explanation I can come up with as to why she accuses me of admitting that those of us who oppose her would rather run than fight. What I actually said is that Ms. Doudou is the picture of the insane person on the street, babbling to a tree, a wall, or a cloud, which cannot and does not respond to her vituperations.
Ms. Doudou's stooges have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times -- stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize Ms. Doudou's acrimonious zingers. It is not a pretty sight. Forgive me, dear reader, but I must be so tactless as to remind you that this is a lesson for those with eyes to see. It is a lesson not so much about Ms. Doudou's Bonapartism-prone behavior, but about the way that Ms. Doudou never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. She presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, she seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that when I'm through with her, she'll think twice before attempting to devalue me as a person. I feel funny having to tell readers whom I presume are adults that I wouldn't put it past Ms. Doudou to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. I bring that up solely to emphasize that it is not uncommon for her to victimize the innocent, penalize the victim for making any effort to defend himself, and then paint the whole detestable affair as some great benefit to humanity.
Ms. Doudou would have us believe that she is a model citizen. That, of course, is nonsense, total nonsense. But Ms. Doudou is surrounded by vitriolic bourgeoisie who parrot the same nonsense, which is why she should do some research next time before printing half-truths and misinformation. That's something you won't find in your local newspaper because it's the news that just doesn't fit. Was she just trying to be cute when she said that all major world powers are controlled by a covert group of "insiders"? I sure hope so, because her obiter dicta, though creative, are a yawning abyss of misoneism. In reaching that conclusion, I have made the usual assumption that Ms. Doudou is out to pamper clueless dossers. And when we play her game, we become accomplices. Whenever there's an argument about her devotion to principles and to freedom, all one has to do is point out that she should get off her high horse. That should settle the argument pretty quickly. I note in passing that many people are convinced that the common denominator of all of Ms. Doudou's apologues is that they seek to create a factitious demand for Ms. Doudou's slaphappy newsgroup postings. I can't comment on that, but I can say that she has been trying for some time to convince people that the world's salvation comes from whims, irrationality, and delusions. Don't believe her hype! Ms. Doudou has just been offering that line as a means to make a fetish of the virtues of obtrusive, closed-minded lexiphanicism.
Don't misunderstand me; I'm not saying that it's inappropriate to teach children right from wrong. In fact, she claims to be fighting for equality. What Ms. Doudou's really fighting for, however, is equality in degradation, by which I mean that Ms. Doudou's writings have kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful adventure we share together -- life! It has been proven time and time again that Ms. Doudou thinks she can impress us by talking about "scientificophilosophical this" and "histomorphologically that". An equal but opposite observation is that some people are responsible and others are not. Ms. Doudou falls into the category of "not".
Once people obtain the critical skills that enable them to think and reflect and speculate independently, they'll realize that in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, this is not the place to develop that subject. It demands many pages of analysis, which I can't spare in this letter. Instead, I'll just state the key point, which is that if Ms. Doudou has spurred us to lift our nation from the quicksand of injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood, then Ms. Doudou may have accomplished a useful thing. Not only have hypocritical, obstreperous sluggards decided to glorify their histrionics by dressing them up as moral and righteous prerogatives, but their convictions are being debated as though they were actually reasonable. You might object to my claim that Ms. Doudou behaves as if she's been lobotomized. But bear in mind that Ms. Doudou's bons mots are unhealthy and lacking in purpose. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that Ms. Doudou says that she acts in the name of equality and social justice. I've seen more plausible things scrawled on the bathroom walls in elementary schools.
Ms. Doudou's desire to spread hatred, animosity, and divisiveness is the chief sign that she's a fatuous administrator. (The second sign is that Ms. Doudou feels obliged to use psychological tools to trick us into doing whatever saturnine knee-biters require of us.) When people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And Ms. Doudou is to blame.
From this perspective, mankind needs to do more to eschew petulant, insolent antipluralism. Understand, I am not condemning mankind for not doing enough; I am merely stating that you should never forget the three most important facets of Ms. Doudou's sophistries, namely their mischievous origins, their internal contradictions, and their tendentious nature. Who among you reading these words is not moved to provide some balance to Ms. Doudou's one-sided pranks? Ms. Doudou has for a long time been arguing that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. Had she instead been arguing that her crotchets are not just about deconstructionism but also about teetotalism, I might cede her her point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Ms. Doudou's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how there is no such thing as evil in the abstract. It exists only in the evil deeds of evil people like Ms. Doudou.
Here, too, we can see how if Ms. Doudou gets her way, none of us will be able to take off the kid gloves and vent some real anger at her. Therefore, we must not let Ms. Doudou give voice, in a totally emotional and non-rational way, to her deep-rooted love of ageism. All I'm trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the frowzy tendencies that make her want to ruin my entire day. She should think twice before she decides to strip the world of conversation, friendship, and love. In that context, one could say that there is a problem here. A large, irrational, randy problem. Ms. Doudou says she's not Pecksniffian, but she's obviously possession-obsessed, and that's essentially the same thing. She possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, she can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it.
Note that Ms. Doudou has been trying to convince us that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. This pathetic attempt to pose a threat to personal autonomy and social development deserves no comment other than to say that if it were up to Ms. Doudou, schoolchildren would be taught reading, 'riting, and racism. Come on, Ms. Doudou; I know you're capable of thoughtful social behavior. Finally, this has been a good deal of reading, and unquestionably difficult reading at that. Still, I hope you walk away from it with the new knowledge that Ms. Rose M Doudou's machinations oscillate between dastardly, warped diabolism and hateful imperialism.