next »

[qrypt]

People generally have strong views about the Search Committee. Let me start by stressing that I am not attempting to suppress anyone's opinions, nor do I intend to demean the Search Committee personally for its beliefs or worldviews. But I personally do feel that I must reveal some shocking facts about the Search Committee's bruta fulmina. The Search Committee will adopt or abandon any principle to obtain power, by which I mean that the Search Committee has somehow made up its mind that it's merely trying to make this world a better place in which to live. It seems to me that what it is doing is jumping to a hasty conclusion in the absence of adequate data. A more reasoned analysis would reveal that much of the Search Committee's behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the heartless, stupid anarchists whom the Search Committee claims to be trying to help. But what, you may ask, does any of that have to do with the theme of this letter, viz., that its insinuations have no redeeming value? Well, we all know the answer to that question, don't we? In case you don't, you should note that its maudlin preoccupation with collectivism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "pseudoparenchymatous", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to open the gates of Hell. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that it extricates itself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice.

Some people think it's a bit extreme of me to oppose the Search Committee and all it stands for—a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that the Search Committee and its legates are a bunch of fanatics. As you know, fanatics are gossipmongers; gossipmongers are talebearers; talebearers are kooks; and kooks all want to move increasingly towards the establishment of a totalitarian Earth. The point is that only by taking risks and pushing boundaries with this letter can I make the Search Committee answer for its wrongdoings. But the problems with the Search Committee's excuses don't end there. While reading this letter, you may have occasionally asked yourself, "Where is all of this leading?" and, "What is the point exactly?" I deliberately wrote in the style I did so that you may come up with your own conclusions. Therefore, I leave you with only the following: Many of us do not wish to live within the Search Committee's walls of rowdyism.

Create your own version here.

[scion]

I conclude that you need a shot of vodka.

[qrypt]

I conclude that you need a shot of vodka.

That's often true. 

But I wonder if you clicked on the link. 

[scion]

I just clicked on the link. Very funny!

[larryc]

Seldom does an event take place which is such an outrage that the silent majority stands up and demands action. But the silent majority is currently demanding that something be done about Dr. LarryC. The first thing I want to bring up is that someone once said to me, "LarryC's expostulations are complete drivel." This phrase struck me so forcefully that I have often used it since.

Strange, isn't it, how the worst sorts of cheeky carpetbaggers I've ever seen are always the first to threaten our core values, allegiances, and beliefs? LarryC has been known to say that anyone who dares to deliver him from his appalling ignorance can expect to suffer hair loss and tooth decay as a result. That notion is so peccable, I hardly know where to begin refuting it. He recently made the astonishing claim that big emotions come from big words. Stripped of all its hyperbole, this statement is really just saying that LarryC thinks that he's the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. I may be opening a Pandora's box by writing this, but when it comes to his précis, I honestly aver that we have drifted along for too long in a state of blissful denial and outright complacency. It's time to knock some sense into LarryC. The sooner we do that the better because one of his favorite dirty tricks is to forge letters from his critics. These forgeries are laced with scandalous "revelations" about everyone LarryC hates. Such trickery deflects attention from the fact that LarryC's intrusive musings leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children his enemies? I'll tell you the answer in a moment. But first, let me just say that he hates it when you say that he is against everything and for nothing. He really hates it when you say that. Try saying it to him sometime if you have a thick skin and don't mind having him shriek insults at you.

Now there will, no doubt, be rotten renegades out there who will ask, "So what if LarryC's advocates cause this country to flounder on the shoals of self-interest, corruption, and chaos? That won't affect me." Such crippled thinking is the best example there is as to why the question that's on everyone's mind these days is, "Isn't LarryC the stroppy hellion who recently wanted to shame my name?" I would venture the answer has something to do with emotionalism. To elaborate, his eccentricity is surpassed only by his vanity and his vanity is surpassed only by his empty theorizing. (Remember his theory that the government (and perhaps he himself) should have sweeping powers to arrest and hold people indefinitely on flimsy grounds?) To borrow the immortal words of a certain, well-known authority figure, "LarryC's presence makes people nervous, anxious, fearful, and angry." LarryC's writings are an icon for the deterioration of the city, for its slow slide into crime, malaise, and filth. Honest people will admit that if a new Dark Age is about to descend upon us—as many believe it will—it will be the result of LarryC's snow jobs. Concerned people are not afraid to challenge the present and enrich the future. And sensible people know that I enjoy the great diversity of humankind, in our food, our dress, our music, our literature, and our forms of spiritual expression. What I don't enjoy are LarryC's hideous, judgmental recommendations, which create an atmosphere that may temporarily energize or exhilarate but which, at the same time, will pose the gravest of human threats. As this letter draws to a close, I want to challenge you, the reader, to shatter the adage that education should teach the precepts of defeatism and the duties of man towards piteous fomenters of revolution. That's what I intend to do until my last breath.

_______________________________________________________________

Actually, if you throw in some random spelling and grammatical errors and a menacing tone, the above is almost exactly the kind of emails about me that my scary students often sends to the president of my institution.

[atalanta]

I have a few points of contention with Chronicle forum. The full truth of my conclusion I shall develop in the course of this letter but the conclusion's general outline is that some people have said that Chronicle forum is a waste product of biological evolution. Maybe. But I'm more inclined to believe that even Chronicle forum's hired goons are afraid that Chronicle forum will operate on a criminal—as opposed to a civil disobedience—basis eventually. I have seen their fear manifested over and over again, and it is further evidence that if Chronicle forum's plan to leave behind a legacy of perpetual indebtedness in developing countries is to be discouraged then the wisest course of action is to unveil the semiotic patterns that Chronicle forum utilizes to fuel the fires of hatred. Before we start down that road I ought to remind you that Chronicle forum wants us to believe that quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "eulamellibranchiate" it will be considered cool to influence the attitudes of dominant culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly hypersensitive. Yes, things will be that way if we choose to believe that. I choose not to believe that. I choose to believe that Chronicle forum insists that it has no choice but to seize control over where we eat, sleep, socialize, and associate with others. Its reasoning is that skin color means more than skill, and gender is more impressive than genius. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but Chronicle forum pompously claims that it never engages in unbalanced, putrid, or linguacious politics. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. There is one final irony to my story. Chronicle forum's communiqués are a perfect example of overgeneralization and blatant triumphalism. And it just goes to show that one should read ALL the way to the end of a post, and click on the link, before posting a reaction.

[atalanta]

______________

Actually, if you throw in some random spelling and grammatical errors and a menacing tone, the above is almost exactly the kind of emails about me that my scary students often sends to the president of my institution.

Scary, indeed!

[bookishone]

I can only hope the readers of this letter are as outraged as I am at My 11 am Class. For those of you who like to eat dessert before soup, my conclusion at the end of this letter is going to be that the justification My 11 am Class gave for insulting my intelligence was one of the most patronizing justifications I've ever heard. It was so patronizing, in fact, that I will not repeat it here. Even without hearing the details you can still see my point quite clearly: We must remove our chains and move towards the light. (In case you didn't understand that analogy, the chains symbolize My 11 am Class's carnaptious, quisquilious communications, and the light represents the goal of restoring the temple of our civilization to the ancient truths.) My 11 am Class keeps missing my point. More specifically, it keeps getting hung up on my words without seeing the underlying meaning. For example, when I say that what really gets my goat is knowing that there are many illustrations of this, My 11 am Class seems incapable of realizing that what I'm really getting at is that for some odd reason, it believes that 75 million years ago, a galactic tyrant named Xenu solved the overpopulation problem of his 76-planet federation by transporting the excess people to Earth, chaining them to volcanoes, and dropping H-bombs on them. Its unasinous helots, who believe likewise, also fail to see that you may be worried that My 11 am Class will twist the teaching of history to suit its besotted purposes by the next full moon. If so, then I share your misgivings. But let's not worry about that now. Instead, let's discuss my observation that My 11 am Class claims to be fighting for equality. What it's really fighting for, however, is equality in degradation, by which I mean that I feel no more personal hatred for My 11 am Class than I might feel for a herd of wild animals or a cluster of poisonous reptiles. One does not hate those whose souls can exude no spiritual warmth; one pities them.

My 11 am Class will rob Peter to pay Paul long before it can convert me into one of its hirelings. I use such language purposefully—and somewhat sardonically—to illustrate how when you tell My 11 am Class's worshippers that every concert that My 11 am Class attends rapidly degenerates into a free-for-all of slam dancing and scattered fistfights, they begin to get fidgety and their eyes begin to wander. They really don't care. They have no interest in hearing that the point is that if everyone spent just five minutes a day thinking about ways to defend with dedication and ferocity the very rights that it so desperately wants to abolish, we'd all be a lot better off. Is five minutes a day too much to ask for the promise of a better tomorrow? I hope not, but then again, I know some lamebrained scamps who actually believe that the best way to serve one's country is to stultify art and retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful. Incredible? Those same people have told me that truth is merely a social construct. With such people roaming about, it should come as no surprise to you that I have a New Year's resolution for My 11 am Class: It should pick up a book before it jumps to the irritating conclusion that undiscoverable, unmeasurable, magical forces from another plane of existence have given it superhuman wisdom.

The very genesis of My 11 am Class's nettlesome credos is in presenteeism.* And it seems to me to be a neat bit of historic justice that it will eventually itself be destroyed by presenteeism.** By this, I mean that I, for one, am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset My 11 am Class. Here's what I have to say to them: The virus of Jacobinism took control of our country's political life long ago. Now, thanks to My 11 am Class's artifices, that virus will continue to spread until no one can recall that an organization is judged by the company it keeps. That's why I urge you to consider the Chaucerian panorama of Luddites in My 11 am Class's polity: loopy racketeers, termagant, contemptuous boneheads, and obstreperous, cold-blooded vandals, just to name a few. It's almost as if My 11 am Class wants us to think that it evinces a bulldog-like instinct for going after the jugular of its intended victims. And here, I insist, lies a clue to the intellectual vacuum so gapingly apparent in its indiscretions. Lastly, My 11 am Class's strictures are a cesspool of onanism.***

* That should read: absenteeism.
** absenteeism
*** Either that, or obsessive texting-in-the-lap

[spectacle]

Mine is glorious:

I need to breathe out my soul against Search Committee for bossing others around. Let's start with my claim that it wants us to think of it as a do-gooder. Keep in mind, though, that Search Committee wants to "do good" with other people's money and often with other people's lives. If it really wanted to be a do-gooder, it could start by admitting that it really struck a nerve with me when it said that once it has approved of something it can't possibly be insipid. That lie is a painful reminder that the first thing we need to do is to get Search Committee to admit that it has a problem. It should be counseled to recite the following:

    * I, Search Committee, am an uppity potlicker.
    * I have been a participant in a giant scheme to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations.
    * I hereby admit my addiction to jingoism. I ask for the strength and wisdom to fight this addiction.

Once Search Committee realizes that it has a problem, maybe then it'll see that there's an important difference between me and Search Committee. Namely, I am willing to die for my cause. Search Committee, in contrast, is willing to kill for its—or, if not to kill, at least to make us dependent on flagitious loons for political representation, economic support, social position, and psychological approval. Summa summarum, Search Committee's conclusions should be recorded and studied for as long as human life exists on Earth as an example of what happens when a society lets one of its members blend together pauperism and nativism in a train wreck of monumental proportions.

[larix]

As you will soon discover, this letter does not fixate on a single topic or subject. To be perfectly frank and honest, it started out rather focused but I soon found, as I worked on my primary hypothesis and sought corroboration from other sources, that I have quite a number of different things to say about The weather. Let's get down to brass tacks: The weather indubitably believes that it should be a given a direct pipeline to the National Treasury. It has apparently constructed a large superstructure of justifications for this a priori conclusion. I guess that shouldn't be too surprising given that it's unfortunate that The weather has no real morals. It's impossible to debate important topics with organizations that are so ethically handicapped. The weather has yet to acknowledge the preternatural wickedness of the blood flowing through its veins. Excuse me; that's not entirely correct. What I meant to say is that we are a nation of prostitutes. By this I mean that as long as we are fat, warm, and dry we don't care what The weather does. It is precisely that lack of caring that explains why The weather has no discernible talents. The only things it has truly mastered are biological functions. Well, I suppose The weather is also good at convincing people that everyone who doesn't share its beliefs is a childish rabble-rouser deserving of death and damnation, but my point is that The weather's campaigns of malice and malignity were never about tolerance and equality. That was just window dressing for the "innocents". Rather, The weather's analects manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence. Phase two: compose paeans to militarism.

Though many people agree that we must work together against exclusionism, tribalism, lexiphanicism, etc., The weather might cement the foundation of our currently metastasizing police state into the law of the land sometime soon. What are we to do then? Place blinders over our eyes and hope we don't see the horrible outcome?

Once, just once, I'd like to see The weather's protégés provide some balance to The weather's one-sided rantings. But until they do that (if they ever do that), we must realize that if I didn't think The weather would biologically or psychologically engineer parasitic pikers to make them even more ill-tempered than they already are, I wouldn't say that it has hatched all sorts of directionless plans. Remember The weather's attempt to cripple its opponents politically, economically, socially, morally, and psychologically? No? That's because The weather is so good at concealing its wayward activities. I have now said everything there is to say. So, to summarize it all, our pain is The weather's ecstasy.

__________________

I must say I do agree with the summary that "our pain is the weather's ecstacy"

[prof_smartypants]

OH!!!

Mine is awesome (and pretty accurate!)

It is with extreme disgust that I write this letter and say what will indubitably be considered blathering by some of my peers. Nonetheless, it must be stated that Dr. Professor S. Pants, Ph.D.'s grandiose promises of plenty for each have yielded grinding poverty for all. There are a number of reasons Dr. Pants isn't telling us as to why she wants to force us to adopt rigid social roles that compromise our inner code of ethics. In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that she should have been placed long ago in a locked psychiatric unit. I would have committed Dr. Pants to such a facility under the justification that she says that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not. That's her unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely politically incorrect and meretricious lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by Dr. Pants's expositors.

More concretely, Dr. Pants has, at times, called me "snappish" or "namby-pamby". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to promote mediocrity over merit. We must all face the storm and stress of hunting down not only the perpetrators of revanchism but also all of the proponents of that hideous philosophy. This exercise will, at the very least, demonstrate to the world that if Dr. Pants thinks that she can make me waver between the alluring promises of an insensate "new morality" and the sound dictation of my own conscience then she's barking up the wrong tree. One of her loyalists once said, "Dr. Pants would never dream of permitting disorderly, cranky big-mouths to rise to positions of leadership and authority." Now that's pretty funny, of course, but I didn't include that quote just to make you laugh. I included it to convince you that he who pays the piper calls the tune. With that in mind, I did a little research to find where she gets her money. It turns out that it comes primarily from crude self-proclaimed arbiters of taste and standards, confused, obstinate exhibitionists, and—you guessed it—dour blood-stained criminals (also known as Dr. Pants's famuli). This explains why I've found that most obdurate, lusk savages display complete and utter nescience of Dr. Pants's homilies. To help educate them, let me say a little about how ever since Dr. Pants decided to prey on people's emotions of fear, envy, and resentment, her consistent, unvarying line has been that freedom must be abolished in order for people to be more secure and comfortable. Before you read this letter, you might have thought that the more paperasserie and bureaucracy we have to endure, the better. Now you know that by working together, we can cast a gimlet eye on Dr. Professor S. Pants, Ph.D.'s orations.

[totoro]

My duty to you, dear reader, constrains me to the disagreeable and almost painful task of giving you a significant amount of information that you may be unwilling to accept. Let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and what the focus of this letter will be: I'm willing to accept that Elsevier's jobations are a disgrace and an outrage. I'm even willing to accept that people who believe that it knows 100% of everything 100% of the time need to be worked over with an oak table leg and then sentenced to 20 years of hard labor in order to straighten out their thinking. But it's doing some pretty dotty things. Or, to restate that without meiosis, Elsevier does not tolerate any view that differs from its own. Rather, it discredits and discards those people who contradict it along with the ideas that they represent.

We all need to be aware of each other's existence as intelligent, feeling, human beings, even if some of us are grumpy luftmenschen. As far back as I can remember, Elsevier has pitted traitors against crybabies and slubberdegullions against politicos. Elsevier suffers from a pathology of delusion. That conclusion is not based on some sort of disgraceful, obstinate philosophy or on Elsevier-style mental masturbation, but on widely known and proven principles of science. These principles explain that this is a free country, and I believe we ought to keep it that way. If Elsevier manages to treat people's bona fide personal devastation as bathos, civilization will crumble almost immediately. Investigators from a future era will need to sift through the charred wreckage of our society looking for the black box to figure out what happened. Maybe they'll even discover that some people apparently believe that if we don't bother Elsevier, Elsevier won't bother us. The fallacy of that belief is that our desires and its are not merely different; they are opposed in mortal enmity. Elsevier wants to impose tremendous hardships on tens of thousands of decent, hard-working individuals. We, in contrast, want to alert people that I find that I am embarrassed. I am embarrassed that some people don't realize that it doesn't simply want people to believe that it answers to no one. It wants this belief drummed into people's heads from birth. It wants it to be accepted as an axiom, an assumed part of the nature of reality. Only then will Elsevier truly be able to get away with skewering me over a pit barbecue.

Like a lion after tasting the blood of human victims, Elsevier will produce a large number of utterly bitter extravagancies, most smarmy indecencies, and, above all, the most impractical blasphemies against everything that I hold most sacred and most dear. I have seen and heard enough. Now it is time to express our concerns about Elsevier's cacodemonic orations. I heard through the grapevine that Elsevier's barbs are as troubling as its insistence that we should all bear the brunt of its actions. Whether or not this rumor is true, in my observations upon masochism, I have expressed no opinion thus far of the mode of its extinguishment or melioration. I will note, however, though I still have nothing to propose, that Elsevier plans to impose a "glass ceiling" that limits our opportunities for promotions in most jobs. What can you do about that? Start by reading about how Elsevier believes that national-security interests can and should be sidestepped whenever its institutional interests are at stake only because it has a need to believe that. Become informed about the deceit, lies, and propaganda surrounding Elsevier's promotion of stoicism. Tell everyone you know that we've all heard it yammer and whine about how it's being scapegoated again, the poor dear. Finally, whatever your thoughts or feelings about Elsevier are, I urge you to help me tell it like it is.

[scion]

Oh my! Here mine goes:

If you've been following the news recently, you know that Dissertation's rapacious homilies are an affront to every concept of freedom that our men and women in uniform have sacrificed so much to protect. However, you might not know that Dissertation is so intolerantly devoted to his own prejudices that his perception of reality is totally warped. First and foremost, Dissertation makes it sound like everyone who doesn't share his beliefs is a rebarbative politico deserving of death and damnation. The evidence against that concept is so overwhelming, even an eight-year-old child can recognize it. Even so, Dissertation is more than merely muddleheaded. He's über-muddleheaded. In fact, Dissertation is so muddleheaded that I have never read anything he has written that I would consider wise, logical, pertinent, reasonable, or scientific. Dissertation's statement that skin color means more than skill, and gender is more impressive than genius is no exception. What's more, one of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which he is willing to peddle fake fears to the public, especially given that he himself would be affected by such actions.

The largest problem, however, is that Dissertation should learn to appreciate what he has instead of feeling so oppressed because he can't do everything he wants every time he wants to. I am not up on the latest gossip. Still, I have heard people say that if he wants to be taken seriously, he should counter the arguments in this letter with facts, not illogical panaceas, personal anecdotes, or insults. Dissertation's methods of interpretation have led to date rape, domestic violence, pornography, and other social ills. Okay, that was a facetious statement. This one is not: We could opt to sit back and let Dissertation turn drongos loose against us good citizens. Most people, however, would argue that the cost in people's lives and self-esteem is an extremely high price to pay for such inaction on our part. I have just enough stomach left to address one last instance of Dissertation's vindictive imbecility: He sincerely believes that 75 million years ago, a galactic tyrant named Xenu solved the overpopulation problem of his 76-planet federation by transporting the excess people to Earth, chaining them to volcanoes, and dropping H-bombs on them.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[whynotevolve]

I love it!

I was so pleased by the response to my last letter that I decided to write another one. Don't worry; I have plenty of new stuff to say about My Research and his cheerleaders. The points I plan to make in this letter will sound tediously familiar to everyone who wants to call people to their highest and best, not accommodate them at their lowest and least. Nevertheless, he uses big words like "formaldehydesulphoxylic" 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 Research's mind games may reek like a skunk, Research's serfs don't want us to strike at the heart of Research's efforts to truck away our freedoms for safekeeping. That'd be too much of a threat to propagandism, alarmism, and all of the other postmodernist things they worship. Clearly, they prefer fanning the flames of totalitarianism into a planet-spanning inferno.

Let's try to understand what handing over our rights to Research will really mean. It certainly won't mean that we'll be able to freely tear down his fortress of feudalism. No, it will mean witchcraft, beastliness, rape, and murder will become omnipresent in our society. It will mean a descent back into the jungle. Let's consider for a moment, though, that maybe we should treat his pestilential camorra for what it is, a delusional group of the worst kinds of humorless skites there are. Then doesn't it follow that it shocks my conscience to see him depressurize the frail vessel of human hopes? In a nutshell, the confusion that My Research creates is desirable and convenient to our national enemies.

[oldfullprof]

How far do GySgt. Director Teaching and Learning's lies extend? Is it really GySgt. Teaching and Learning's impression that her perorations are all sweetness and light? And what sort of severe tunnel vision has led her to maintain that she is a refined lady with the soundest education and morals you can imagine? This letter is not the place to explore the answers to those questions. Its purpose is instead to increase awareness and understanding of our similarities and differences. Before I begin, let me point out that GySgt. Teaching and Learning maintains that power, politics, and privilege should prevail over the rule of law. While that happens to be pure fantasy from the world of make-believe, one important fact to consider is that I am not fooled by her surly and eristic rhetoric. I therefore gladly accept the responsibility of notifying others that GySgt. Teaching and Learning is astonishingly evil. However, as the Buddha remarked, there has to be evil so that good can prove its purity above it. I'm sure that if the Buddha lived in modern times, though, he'd also comment on how the basal lie that underlies all of GySgt. Teaching and Learning's dour rantings is that she is known for her sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends. Translation: Crafty scamsters should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers. I doubt you need any help from me to identify the supreme idiocy of those views, but you should nevertheless be aware that GySgt. Teaching and Learning has long wanted to prevent anyone from stating publicly that her commentaries make many mainstream lowbrows nervous. Why do I bring that up? Because by studying her repression of ideas in its extreme, unambiguous form one may more clearly understand why GySgt. Teaching and Learning's grand plan is to pull the levers of vandalism and oil the gears of pharisaism. I'm sure Mao Tse Tung would approve. In any case, GySgt. Teaching and Learning commonly appoints ineffective people to important positions. She then ensures that these people stay in those positions because that makes it easy for GySgt. Teaching and Learning to waste everyone else's time.

Although ordinary men and women want to ensure that we survive and emerge triumphant out of the coming chaos and destruction, GySgt. Teaching and Learning wants to endorse a complete system of leadership by mobocracy. This incongruity reveals that she knows that performing an occasional act of charity will make some people forgive—or at least overlook—all of her cheeky excesses. My take on the matter is that GySgt. Teaching and Learning has called people like me inarticulate showboaters, bumptious agitators, and simple-minded luftmenschen so many times that these accusations no longer have any sting. GySgt. Teaching and Learning doubtlessly continues to employ such insults because she's run out of logical arguments. I suppose an alternate explanation is that GySgt. Teaching and Learning's reportages should be labeled like a pack of cigarettes. I'm thinking of something along the lines of, "Warning: It has been determined that GySgt. Teaching and Learning's apologues are intended to stifle the voices of those who are simply seeking to be heard." Although GySgt. Director Teaching and Learning's artifices will instill distrust and thereby create a need for her sinister views quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "scientificogeographical", when you look back over the text of this letter, it should be clear that I have defeated this pestiferous, cocky smellfungus with my words. Just imagine what I could have done with my fire-breathing fists.