raskl is black

back* ^_^


Hahaha if that's really him I feel so fucking sorry for him
If that was ment to be funny, you failed.
I feel that there are better ways in which to disseminate the following information, but this letter will have to suffice. To begin with, if Miss Gibson opened her eyes, she'd realize that I got off on a tangent. Put simply, if she can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that we can stop escapism merely by permitting government officials entrée into private homes to search for purblind busybodies, I will personally deliver her Nobel Prize for Pudibund Rhetoric. In the meantime, we should not concern ourselves with Gibson's putative virtue or vice. Rather, we should concern ourselves with our own welfare and with the fact that if Gibson were to use more accessible language, then a larger number of people would be able to understand what she's saying. The downside for Gibson, of course, is that a larger number of people would also understand that her ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, Gibson's core principle has remained the same: to evade responsibility. If you don't believe me, then note that it is a figment of Gibson's runaway imagination that a book of her writings would be a good addition to the Bible. In fact, I have said that to Gibson on many occasions and I will keep on saying it until she stops trying to confuse, befuddle, and neutralize public opposition. How can we expect to empower the oppressed to control their own lives if we walk right into Gibson's trap? We can't, and that's why her vituperations should be labeled like a pack of cigarettes. I'm thinking of something along the lines of, "Warning: It has been determined that Gibson's practices are intended to foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us."

I feel that writing this letter is like celestial navigation. Before directional instruments were invented, sailors navigated the seas by fixing their compass on the North Star. But each rung on the ladder of frotteurism is a crisis of some kind. Each crisis supplies an excuse for Gibson to win support by encapsulating frustrations and directing them toward unpopular scapegoats. That is the standard process by which besotted harijans concoct a version of reality that fully contradicts real life. She truly believes that going through the motions of working is the same as working. It is just such disorganized megalomania, recalcitrant egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs Gibson to cause self-righteous subversion to gather momentum on college campuses. She has stated that divine ichor flows through her veins. One clear inference from that statement -- an inference that is never really disavowed -- is that society is screaming for her wheelings and dealings. Now that's just scummy. You may make the comment, "What does this have to do with craven extremists?" Well, once you begin to see the light, you'll realize that Gibson's analects 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!

I have just one word for Gibson: anatomicochirurgical. According to the latest scientific evidence, her publicity stunts are an icon for the deterioration of the city, for its slow slide into crime, malaise, and filth.

Gibson's a psychologically defective person. She's what the psychiatrists call a constitutional psychopath or a sociopath. Gibson has recently been going around claiming that surly loons are more deserving of honor than our nation's war heroes. You really have to tie your brain in knots to be gullible enough to believe that junk. When she made her puppy-dog companions wag their little tails by promising to let them promote group-think attitudes over individual insights, I realized for the first time that when Gibson says that she has answers to everything, in her mind, that's supposed to end the argument. It's like she believes she has said something very profound. She says that she should be a given a direct pipeline to the National Treasury. That's her unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely ophidian and prolix lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by Gibson's supporters.

I don't get it: Is Gibson a professional simpleton or merely a well-meaning amateur? I mean, it's debatable whether Gibson needs some serious professional help. However, no one can disagree that she is stepping over the line when she attempts to judge people by the color of their skin while ignoring the content of their character -- way over the line. Her faculty for deception is so far above anyone else's, it really must be considered different in kind as well as in degree. There's a lot of talk nowadays about Gibson's polyloquent artifices but not much action. Gibson seems to have no trouble sweet-talking materialistic louts into helping her inject her lethal poison into our children's minds and souls. The denial of this fact only proves the effrontery, and also the stupidity, of worthless paranoiacs.

The pen is a powerful tool. Why don't we use that tool to champion the poor and oppressed against the evil of Gibson? She is planning to divert our attention from serious issues. This does not bode well for the future, because I oppose her paroxysms because they are snippy. I oppose them because they are harebrained-to-the-core. And I oppose them because they will spread villainous, manipulative views before you know it. I, hardheaded cynic that I am, can only reinvigorate our collective commitment to building and maintaining a sensitive, tolerant, and humane community if Gibson's disreputable band is decimated down to those whose inborn lack of character permits them to betray anyone and everyone for the well-known thirty pieces of silver. I can reword my point as follows. We must speak neither of the past nor of the far future but rather focus on the here and now, specifically on the daunting matter of Gibson's poxy personal attacks. Now, why all this fuss about a few homicidal offhand remarks? Simply put, it's because if Gibson believes that you and I are morally inferior to brutish paper-pushers (also known as Gibson's apologists), then it's obvious why Gibson thinks that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't.

Following this line of logic, it would appear that if you look soberly and carefully at the evidence all around you, you will undoubtedly find that I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, Gibson can't fool me. I've met self-serving yahoos before, so I know that it has been brought to my attention that Gibson is chomping at the bit for a chance to trample over the very freedoms and rights that she claims to support. While this is true, she is absolutely determined to believe that treacherous meanies should be fêted at wine-and-cheese fund-raisers, and she's not about to let facts or reason get in her way. Is Gibson's head really buried too deep in the sand to know that her lickspittles are more determined than most venal traitors? My answer is, as always, a model of clarity and the soul of wit: I don't know. However, I do know that if this letter did nothing else but serve as a beacon of truth, it would be worthy of reading by all right-thinking people. However, this letter's role is much greater than just to maximize our individual potential for effectiveness and success in combatting her. It's possible that Gibson doesn't realize this because she has been ingrained with so much of boosterism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we tell her how wrong she is. Again, if we weed out people like Gibson who have deceived, betrayed, and exploited us, then the sea of metagrobolism, on which Gibson so heavily relies, will begin to dry up.

Time has only reinforced that conviction, but I guess nobody ever explained that to Gibson's peons. To oppose quislingism, we must oppose anarchism. To oppose masochism, we must oppose sensationalism. And to oppose Gibson, we must oppose the most impudent junkies you'll ever see. It's my hunch that I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for her subterfuge. I'm entirely stunned. What she doesn't realize is that her hirelings tend to fall into the mistaken belief that her wisecracks are all sweetness and light, mainly because they live inside a Gibson-generated illusion-world and talk only with each other.

You see, if I were to compile a list of Gibson's forays into espionage, sabotage, and subversion, it would fill an entire page and perhaps even run over onto the following one. Such a list would surely make every sane person who has passed the age of six realize that anyone who hasn't been living in a cave with his eyes shut and his ears plugged knows that I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that Gibson wants us to believe that my bitterness at her is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. How stupid does she think we are? Well, we all know the answer to that question, don't we? But in case you don't, then you should note that she seeks scapegoats for her own shortcomings by blaming the easiest target she can find, that is, stinking lackwits. In a tacit concession of defeat, Gibson is now openly calling for the abridgment of various freedoms to accomplish coercively what her bookish, belligerent jokes have failed at. It goes almost without saying that she wants you to believe that it is her moral imperative to tour the country promoting jejune phallocentrism in lectures and radio talk show interviews. You should be wary of such claims. Be aware! Be skeptical! Think! Do not be diverted, deceived, or mesmerized by Gibson's uncompanionable, shambolic squibs.

One of Gibson's grunts keeps throwing "scientific" studies at me, claiming they prove that piteous guttersnipes are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. The studies are full of "if"s, "possible"s, "maybe"s, and various exceptions and admissions of their limitations. This leaves the studies inconclusive at best and works of fiction at worst. The only thing these studies can possibly prove is that if Gibson were as bright as she thinks she is, she'd know that you won't find many of her helots who will openly admit that they favor Gibson's schemes to bombard me with insults. In fact, their bons mots are characterized by a plethora of rhetoric to the contrary. If you listen closely, though, you'll hear how carefully they cover up the fact that in order to solve the big problems with Gibson, we must first understand these problems, and to understand them, we must appeal not to the contented and satisfied, but embrace those tormented by suffering, those without peace, the unhappy and the discontented. We must discuss the advantages of two-parent families, the essential role of individual and family responsibility, the need for uniform standards of civil behavior, and the primacy of the work ethic. We must tell it like it is. And we must embark on a new path towards change. Please join me in incorporating these words into our living credo.
yes, complaint letter generators really provide usefull arguments
I prefer a lorem ipsum: same crap, more generators ;-)
ololol £_£
Welcome back
little retard
the funniest thing in this thread is your stupidness
rofl :D
Back to top