My complaint about GFY
 

There are three talking points that no reasonable letter about GFY can possibly ignore:
GFY's canards defy common sense and abandon logical principles for the singular purpose of promoting the misguided notion that clever one-liners are a valid substitute for actual thinking.
Only by taking risks and pushing boundaries with this letter can I debate the efficacy of GFY's semi-intelligible précis.
I shall make every effort, especially in this limited space, to deal summarily with craven ogres.

For complete details, I refer you to my forthcoming book on the subject. I shall here mention only a few random items that may be new or especially interesting to you. For instance, if GFY wants to encourage a deadly acceptance of intolerance, let it wear the opprobrium of that decision.

Maybe GFY is being manipulated by stentorian publishers of hate literature, but even so, some day, in the far, far future, it will realize that it rather grandiloquently refers to me and everyone else it dislikes as a batty, presumptuous lounge lizard. This realization will sink in slowly but surely and will be accompanied by a comprehension of how GFY demands obeisance from its compeers. Then, once they prove their loyalty, GFY forces them to tip the scales in its favor. If a cogent, logical argument entered GFY's brain, no doubt a concussion would result. GFY is absolutely determined to believe that the sky is falling, and it's not about to let facts or reason get in its way. I am not fooled by GFY's scary and eristic rhetoric. I therefore gladly accept the responsibility of notifying others that GFY periodically puts up a facade of reform. However, underneath the pretty surface, it's always business as usual.

What can I do to prove to you that GFY's self-ordination as a god has caused people like me to proclaim that unravelling the Gordian Knot that is GFY is not difficult when you realize the multifaceted nature of GFY and its backers? Show you evidence that it is an actuarial certainty that it will create new (and reinforce existing) prejudices and misconceptions before the year is over? While that would honestly help, I am not predicting anything specific. I just have a feeling, an intuition, based on several things that are happening now that GFY will fortify a social correctness that restricts experience and defines success with narrow boundaries quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "philosophicotheological". GFY doesn't want us to know about its plans to send the wrong message to children. Otherwise, we might do something about that. At first, you might be unsure as to whether GFY's sole aspiration is apparently to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. But on deeper inspection, you'll indisputably conclude that I recently informed it that its adherents caricature and stereotype people from other cultures. GFY said it'd "look further into the matter." Well, not too much further. After all, it contends that it can override nature and that, therefore, ethical responsibility is merely a trammel of earthbound mortals and should not be required of a demigod like it. This bizarre pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. For example, it convinces inaniloquent, insolent simpletons (as distinct from the garrulous, viperine perjurers who prefer to chirrup while hopping from cloud to cloud in Nephelococcygia) that you and I are objects for GFY to use then casually throw away and forget like old newsprint that's performed its duty catching bird droppings. In reality, contrariwise, GFY's a pretty good liar most of the time. However, it tells so many lies, it's bound to trip itself up someday.

To Hell with GFY! Elitism is dangerous. GFY's imprudent version of it is doubly so. While this country still has far to go before people are truly judged on the content of their character, if I seem a bit incorrigible, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with GFY on its own level. Some people have compared jaded misfits to irresponsible schmucks. I would like to take the comparison one step further: There's a time to keep silent and a time to speak. There's a time to love and a time to hate. There's a time for war and a time for peace. And, I avouch, there's a time to navigate a safe path between the Scylla of GFY's oligophrenic tracts and the Charybdis of boosterism. Or, to put it less poetically, if GFY gets its way, we will soon be engulfed in a Dark Age of expansionism and indescribable horror. That's why I'm telling you that its sophistries are a load of bunk. I use this delightfully pejorative term, "bunk" -- an alternative from the same page of my criminal-slang lexicon would serve just as well -- because 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. However, if GFY were to trick them into fixing their compass on the wrong star they'd soon be so off-course that they'd actually be willing to help it make a fetish of the virtues of repulsive exclusivism.

The whole of GFY's obnoxious worldview may perhaps be expressed in one simple word. That word is "recidivism". Let me explain: GFY has found a way to avoid compliance with government regulations, circumvent any further litigation, and deprive people of dignity and autonomy -- all by trumping up a phony emergency. All I'm trying to do here is indicate in a rough and approximate way the inerudite tendencies that make GFY want to malign and traduce me. GFY will probably throw another hissy fit if we don't let it create an ideological climate that will enable it to form the association in the public's mind between any cop-outs it disagrees with and the ideas of hate and violence and illegality. At least putting up with another GFY hissy fit is easier than convincing GFY's allies that one could truthfully say that GFY's intimations are a threat to the freedoms enjoyed by all free citizens of the world. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that it has been trying to convince us that the Eleventh Commandment is, "Thou shalt put our liberties at risk by a stuck-up and conceited rush to jump on everything that is written, said, or even implied and label it as either supercilious or ignorant". This pathetic attempt to bombard us with an endless array of hate literature deserves no comment other than to say that GFY has announced its intentions to break down our communities. While doing so may earn GFY a gold star from the mush-for-brains statism crowd, I have some of its writings in front of me right now. In one of them, GFY maintains that improvident ratbags have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. If you don't find that shocking then consider that perhaps one day we will live in a world where good people are not troubled by fear of dictatorial blatherskites. Until that day arrives, however, we must spread the word that I should note that an armed revolt against GFY is morally justified. However, I aver that it is not yet strategically justified.

I can only clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in GFY's policies if GFY's illiberal, insipid 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 might add: The impact of GFY's humorless principles is exactly that predicted by the Book of Revelation. Evil will preside over the land. Injustice will triumph over justice, chaos over order, futility over purpose, superstition over reason, and lies over truth. Only when humanity experiences this Hell on Earth will it fully appreciate that GFY's attempts to impugn the patriotism of its opponents are much worse than mere particularism. They are hurtful, malicious, criminal behavior and deserve nothing less than our collective condemnation. GFY claims that it is a spokesman for God. Perhaps it has some sound arguments on its side but if so it's keeping them hidden. I'd say it's far more likely that if I withheld my feelings on this matter, I'd be no less temperamental than GFY.

It has been said that GFY makes so many laughably salacious statements, it boggles the mind to think about them. I believe that to be true. I also believe that a central fault line runs through each of its criticisms. Specifically, it's planning to exploit issues such as the global economic crisis and the increase in world terrorism in order to instigate planet-wide chaos. Planet-wide chaos is GFY's gateway to global tyranny, which will in turn enable it to abridge our basic civil liberties. Some critics have called GFY sick. A handful insist it's grungy. Its apparatchiks, on the other hand, consider it to be one of the great minds of this century.

If I could ask GFY one thing, I'd ask it why it thinks its activities are on the up-and-up. The problem is that GFY shrinks from such questions like a vampire shrinks from a crucifix. You'd be more likely to get GFY to admit that the next time it decides to destroy our moral fiber, it should think to itself, cui bono? -- who benefits? I suspect I am not alone when I say that GFY has been trying for some time to sell the public on a solecism-based government. Its sales pitch proceeds both pragmatically and emotionally. The pragmatic argument: The only way to expand one's mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate. The emotional argument: The worst types of reckless bludgers there are make the best scout leaders and schoolteachers.

LOL, old but still good, if anyone have read that, lemme know what it says :1orglaugh

cliffnotes?

I'll wait for the musical.

Sorry I gave up after the fifth word I ain't never heard of and I had a good edumacation. :thumbsup

Cliff notes?

No kidding. :1orglaugh

GFY's canards defy common sense.

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c2...daffy_duck.jpg

You sir are dispicable.

same here.. Can you please summarized it,, for me...please :Oh crap

LOL, check http://www.pakin.org/complaint/

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

ehhh wtf?

:1orglaugh

While no statement I'm about to make should be construed as suggesting or recommending that any person commit an illegal act of any kind, you should realize that GFY is unable to use the English language effectively or correctly. You see, I unquestionably believe that this is a truth that GFY's factotums are told by GFY that they cannot acknowledge, lest they give aid and comfort to the rest of us. And because of that belief, I'm going to throw politeness and inoffensiveness to the winds. In this letter, I'm going to be as rude and crude as I know how, to reinforce the point that GFY personifies our nation's short attention span and penchant for apathy. The facts are indisputable, the arguments are impeccable, and the consequences are undeniable. So why does GFY feel that it's perfectly safe to drink and drive? I can give you only my best estimate, made after long and anxious consideration, but I do not pose as an expert in these matters. I can say only that in the Old Testament, the Book of Kings relates how the priests of Baal were slain for deceiving the people. I'm not suggesting that there be any contemporary parallel involving GFY, but our problem -- and make no mistake about it, it is a severe predicament -- is that we currently lack the resources needed to take a proactive, rather than a reactive, stance. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly.

You've never heard GFY announce that he plans to set the wolf to mind the sheep? Well, GFY has repeatedly enunciated such a plan but in his typically convoluted way. We must also assert with all the sincerity of informed experience and the desperate desire to see our beloved country survive that he has been trying for some time to convince people that space aliens are out to lay eggs in our innards or ooze their alien hell-slime all over us. Don't believe his hype! GFY has just been offering that line as a means to make empty promises.

While GFY has a right to his opinion, for the nonce, he is content to emphasize the negative in our lives instead of accentuating the positive. But in the near future, he will lead to the destruction of the human race. As pouty as his fans may be, they are also choleric, filthy franions.

Sure, we could just sit back and let GFY censor any incomplicitous ideologies, but that prospect really grates on people who have any kind of common sense. The more I think about invidious ranters, the more troubled I become by his personal attacks. Need I point out that his recent attempt to do exactly the things he accuses morbid devotees of conspiracy theories of doing may prove to be a watershed event for those of us who want to shine a light on his efforts to subordinate all spheres of society to an ideological vision of organic community? We mustn't be content to patch and darn, to piece and cobble at the worn and rotten fabric of his obdurate lamentations. Instead we must open students' eyes, minds, hearts, and souls to the world around them.

Of course, we have to consider all of our options. I say "of course" because GFY yields to the mammalian desire to assert individuality by attracting attention. Unfortunately, for GFY, "attract attention" usually implies "concoct a version of reality that fully contradicts real life". Each rung on the ladder of fogyism is a crisis of some kind. Each crisis supplies an excuse for GFY to burn his opponents at the stake. That is the standard process by which infantile miscreants use cheap, intemperate propaganda to arouse the passions of tasteless goof-offs. Some unstable renegades are hopelessly sex-crazed. If you find that fact distressing then you should help me deal with his thrasonical histrionics on a case-by-case basis. Either that, or you can crawl into a corner and lament that you got yourself born in the wrong universe. Don't expect your sobbing to do much good, however, because if GFY had lived the short, sickly, miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages "before technocracy" he wouldn't be so keen to promote an insolent lexiphanicism. Maybe he'd even begin to realize that if he were to use more accessible language then a larger number of people would be able to understand what he's saying. The downside for GFY, of course, is that a larger number of people would also understand that I find it necessary, if I am to meet my reader on something like a common ground of understanding, to point out that I should note that he seems unable to think of turns of speech that aren't hackneyed. What really grates on my nerves, however, is that GFY's prose consists less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning than of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse. Let me end by saying that I know that what I have written in this letter will send many readers (especially any who are big fans of GFY) into a tizzy or a tantrum. I am sorry, but I remind them that GFY sees chauvinism as his benevolent guardian angel.

Gee .. Pretty Fast to generate SEO text :winkwink:

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Someone should post fucking cliffnotes finally or didnt anyone read it yet lol?

:Oh crap

http://www.pakin.org/complaint/ :winkwink:

:thumbsup

I think mikey wrote them

too long; didn't read

first paragraph showed great application of the thesaurus though.

who has time to read all that?!?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

lmao :1orglaugh

I really don't agree

No shit man!! That site is gonna get so abused by my scripts now that.. :winkwink:

I agree up to sentence #3873, but the rest is just plain wrong

Life is way to short to read all that crap:321GFY:321GFY:321GFY:321GFY

if you read the responses youll understand..

sorry too long, I will never read that

This one is still going on? LOL

Disagree

attention span of the average webmaster is 20 secs

postcount +1

I won't sugarcoat this letter. This is a very bitter letter. Small children and the faint of heart should stop reading and leave the room. Let us note first of all that in the Old Testament, the Book of Kings relates how the priests of Baal were slain for deceiving the people. I'm not suggesting that there be any contemporary parallel involving GFY, but GFY is squarely in favor of McCarthyism and its propensity to introduce a zeitgeist of fanaticism to our society. This is so typical of GFY: he condemns bigotry and injustice except when it benefits him personally.

GFY's personal interest in seeing his platitudes shoved down people's throats is asinine but that's to be expected of him. If five years ago I had described a person like GFY to you and told you that in five years he'd sidetrack us, so we can't raise issues, as opposed to guns or knives, , you'd have thought me disaffected. You'd have laughed at me and told me it couldn't happen. So it is useful now to note that, first, it has happened and, second, to try to understand how it happened and how the first response to this from his allies is perhaps that we have too much freedom. Wrong. Just glance at the facts: By his 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 uncongenial ignorant-type. My standards -- and I suspect yours as well -- are quite different from GFY's. For instance, I believe that I don't care what others say about him. GFY's still rude, incoherent, and he intends to twist the history, sociology, and anthropology disseminated by our mass media and in our children's textbooks.

I have not forgotten that GFY is perfectly willing to show his embarrassingly poor reasoning and warped ethics in print. I have not forgotten that GFY's propaganda machine grinds on and on. And I cannot forget that GFY has been trying to raise funds for scientific studies that "prove" that he is as innocent as a newborn lamb. This is what's called "advocacy research" or "junk science" because it's funded by immature wackos who have already decided that GFY has the linguistic prowess to produce a masterwork of meritorious literature.

Yes, Virginia, I'm sure GFY wouldn't want me to eavesdrop on his secret conversations. So why does he want to flout all of society's rules? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems but it boils down essentially to this: GFY's editorials are a vehicle for the expression of prejudice, ignorance, and enmity about people who are different from GFY. Furthermore, if it were true, as GFY claims, that the Universe belongs to him by right, then I wouldn't be saying that we must reach out to people with the message that thanks to GFY's public-opinion molders, more people than ever now believe that GFY is a man of peace. We must alert people of that. We must educate them. We must inspire them. And we must encourage them to make plans and carry them out.

Think about that for a minute. Let it sink in. It should soon become clear that if they could speak, the birds, snakes, and other creatures who are our Earth brothers and Earth sisters would obviously say that it has long been obvious to attentive observers that when a gormless ne'er-do-well has been beaten down with the successive hammer blows of terrorism, obstructionism, and pessimism, he becomes quite receptive to GFY's propaganda and quite likely to join his polity. But did you know that he often tries to prove his points by quoting "authorities" who are in fact nothing more than lousy, acrimonious racketeers? He doesn't want you to know that because I challenge him to point out any text in this letter that proposes that individual worth is defined by race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. It isn't there. There's neither a hint nor a suggestion of such a thing.

What do we owe GFY? Nothing, absolutely nothing. If he claims otherwise, we have to stand firm and point out that it's GFY's deep-seated belief that he is the way, the truth, and the light. Sure, he might be able to justify conclusions like that -- using biased or one-sided information, of course -- but I prefer to know the whole story. In this case, the whole story is that GFY's theatrics are based on a technique I'm sure you've heard of. It's called "lying".

There is no place in this country where we are safe from GFY's lieutenants, no place where we are not targeted for hatred and attack. If you want to hide something from GFY, you just have to put it in a book. I am not mistaken when I say that there's an important difference between me and GFY. Namely, I am willing to die for my cause. GFY, in contrast, is willing to kill for his -- or, if not to kill, at least to marginalize me based on my gender, race, or religion. Technically, this is a free country, and I maintain we ought to keep it that way. As a matter of fact, GFY claims to have turned over a new leaf shortly after getting caught trying to create profound emotional distress for people on both sides of the issue. This claim is an outright lie that is still being circulated by GFY's lapdogs. The truth is that GFY's statements such as "Every word that leaves GFY's mouth is teeming with useful information" indicate that we're not all looking at the same set of facts. Fortunately, these facts are easily verifiable with a trip to the library by any open and honest individual.

GFY says that it's okay if his perorations initially cause our quality of life to degrade because "sometime", "someone" will do "something" "somehow" to counteract that trend. Should we care that large numbers of refractory, aberrant know-nothings actually believe such judgmental things? Should we try to convince them otherwise? I don't think so. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I have nothing in common with him. As long as I live, I will be shouting this truth from rooftops and doing everything I can to lay out some ideas and interpretations that hold the potential for insight.

That reminds me: GFY's goal is to allow federally funded research to mushroom into a pompous, grossly inefficient system, hampered by uncompanionable, cranky snollygosters and avaricious misers. How selfish is that? How foul-mouthed? How amoral?

If you don't think that GFY's cringers are cut from the same mold as the worst types of sniffish ignoramuses there are, then you've missed the whole point of this letter. At one point, I actually believed that GFY would stop being so hectoring. Silly me. The fact is, he frequently avers his support of democracy and his love of freedom. But one need only look at what he is doing -- as opposed to what he is saying -- to understand his true aims. All of this once again proves the old saying that bloody-minded usurers conform their opinions about what is right and what is wrong to their perception of GFY's opinions and behavior.

I have some very startling, very radical -- some might say licentious -- insights into GFY's latest commentaries. For most of the facts I'm about to present, I have provided documentation and urge you to confirm these facts for yourself if you're skeptical. History has once again proved me right. Disguised in this drollery is an important message: Responsibility is an alien concept to GFY, so to speak. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. Admittedly, that's about as likely as Elvis materializing in my room tonight and singing Heartbreak Hotel. Still, the possibility does help one realize that my goal is to get GFY to realize that it loves the truth only as long as it doesn't conflict with its plaints. Of course, if it insists on remaining an ignorant, uninformed, and ill-informed snollygoster, that's its prerogative.

That fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence. Admittedly, GFY wants its cowardice and irresponsibility to be regarded as prudence. But that's because while GFY has been beating the drums of Pyrrhonism, I've been trying to ratchet up our level of understanding. In doing so, I've learned that some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of its faction quite adamantly feel that GFY's modes of thought are Holy Writ. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could maintain such a thing but then again, GFY somehow manages to maintain a straight face when saying that we're supposed to shut up and smile when it says discourteous things. I am greatly grieved by this occurrence of falsehood and fantastic storytelling which is the resultant of layers of social dishevelment and disillusionment amongst the fine citizens of a once organized, motivated, and cognitively enlightened civilization.

GFY obviously didn't have to pass an intelligence test to get to where it is today because its knowledge of how things work is completely off the mark. First of all, anyone who was sober for more than an hour or two during the last five years knows that it is incumbent upon all of us to confront its fairy tales head-on. But there's the rub; it is willing to promote truth and justice when it's convenient. But when it threatens its creature comforts, it throws principle to the wind.

Just like dirty clothes on the floor and cluttered closets, GFY's mess won't go away if we simply look the other way. Use lethal violence as a source of humor if you like, GFY, because I simply don't care. To restate the obvious: GFY has been trying for some time to sell the public on an officialism-based government. Its sales pitch proceeds both pragmatically and emotionally. The pragmatic argument: GFY is omnipotent. The emotional argument: Solipsism is absolutely essential to the well-being of society. As you can see, neither argument is valid, which should indicate to you that GFY believes that it is a model organization. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one.

I'm willing to accept that GFY's apologues epitomize all that is vapid in the world. I'm even willing to accept that it's so accustomed to lying about everything that it doesn't even stop to consider the consequences of its lies. But it tries to make us think the way it wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us, but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. I, for one, suspect that the choice we face as a nation is whether to run our country ourselves or let irascible individuals run it for us. My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that it likes to seem smarter than it really is. It therefore always amuses me whenever GFY cracks open a thesaurus, aims for intellectualism, misses, and lands squarely in a puddle of abhorrent frippery. One of the enduring effects of GFY's cop-outs is the way they will destabilize society.

Some day, in the far, far future, GFY will realize that it, in its hubris, has decided that it has the right to create profound emotional distress for people on both sides of the issue. This realization will sink in slowly but surely and will be accompanied by a comprehension of how GFY counts paltry criminal masterminds as its friends. Unfortunately for it, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that the pressures and stresses that GFY's hatchet men undergo lead them to canonize the most stultiloquent autism enthusiasts I've ever seen as nomological emblems of propriety. For that reason, it should stop calling me a vitriolic, mingy slimeball. Although I've been called worse things by better organizations, there are some hopeless lackluster-types who are caustic. There are also some who are censorious. Which category does GFY fall into? If the question overwhelms you, I suggest you check "both".

Quite simply, for GFY, antipluralism is doubtlessly the name of the game. And I can say that with a clear conscience because GFY always looks the other way when one of its operatives gets it in his head to welsh on all classes of agreements. Apparently, the principle laid down by Jean-Marie Collot d'Herbois during the French Reign of Terror still holds true today: Tout est permis à quiconque agit dans le sens de la révolution. Guess what? GFY's trucklers insist that GFY acts in the public interest. I say to them, "Prove it" -- not that they'll be able to, of course, but because GFY has allowed itself to become a spokesman for the same point of view shared by counter-productive polemics, self-pitying layabouts, and amateurish rakes while masquerading as an outspoken radical bucking the system.

Any meaningful analysis of the situation must allow for the fact that I act based on what I think is right, not who I think is right. That's why I try always to set the stage so that my next letter will begin from a new and much higher level of influence. It's also why I say that many overweening flag burners are taken in by its attestation that it has a "special" perspective on opportunism that carries with it a "special" right to use terms of opprobrium such as "ornery, mad freeloaders" and "unreasonable power brokers" to castigate whomever it opposes. The destruction of the Tower of Babel, be it a literal truth, an allegory, or a mere story based upon cultural archetypes, illustrates this truth plainly. I have no problem with the manifestly obvious statement that I find much to disagree with in GFY's traducements. I have no problem with the idea that GFY's expostulations are characterized by a preachy arrogance unbefitting to something that knows so little. And I have no problem with the special privileges occasionally granted to the worst kinds of longiloquent freaks I've ever seen. What I do have a problem with are GFY's stentorian, lecherous values.

Okay, that was a facetious statement. This one is not: GFY insists that laws are meant to be broken. Sorry, GFY, but, with apologies to Gershwin, "it ain't necessarily so." However deep one delves into the citations and footnotes of GFY's strictures, and however poised and "mainstream" its co-conspirators appear once challenged, there is no way to forget that it has been trying to convince us that everyone who doesn't share its beliefs is a dastardly, homophobic headcase deserving of death and damnation. This pathetic attempt to foster and intensify its drug-drenched drama of immorality deserves no comment other than to say that you may be worried that GFY will project a stream of self-indulgent images of death, sex, disaster, material goods, celebrities, and other fixtures in a mock-Olympian firmament before you know it. If so, then I share your misgivings. But let's not worry about that now. Instead, let's discuss my observation that I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I assert that there is because GFY's backers are tools. Like a hammer or an axe, they are not inherently evil or destructive. The evil is in the force that manipulates them and uses them for destructive purposes. That evil is GFY, who wants nothing less than to advertise "magical" diets and bogus weight-loss pills.

GFY is not the only one who needs to reassess its assumptions. Think about stuck-up simpletons. They too should realize that by allowing GFY to resort to underhanded tactics, we are allowing it to play puppet master. It is imperative that all of us in this community insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward ethnocentrism. This cannot occur unless there is a true spirit of respect and an appreciation of differences. To end on a more positive note: GFY's writings carry multiple connotations, ranging from the quasi-nerdy (they confuse, befuddle, and neutralize public opposition) to the indelicate (they utilize legal, above-ground organizing in combination with illegal, underground tactics to promote mediocrity over merit).

LOL nice find.:thumbsup