It's a good cause; don't you think?
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TRAVEL/NEWS/07/24/australia.pattingsharks.ap/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TRAVEL/NEWS/07/24/australia.pattingsharks.ap/index.html
Friends don't let friends pat sharks on the head
- Thread starter Huge
- Start date
S
s4
Guest
That is really sick. I can't believe these people.
You guys are way too fast; I just posted that 5 mins ago. 
Meanwhile you can read my complaint letter to a banker at my job named Chuckles:
I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Mr. Chuckles twisting my words in an loathsome attempt to assail all that is holy. Although not without overlap and simplification, I plan to identify three primary positions on his zingers. I acknowledge that I have not accounted for all possible viewpoints within the parameters of these three positions. Nevertheless, he has stated that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. That's just pure neocolonialism. Well, in Chuckles's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that Chuckles says that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the closet and, when the cops come in, standing in front of the closet door and exclaiming, "They're not in here!"?
All this aside, if he continues to misdirect our efforts into fighting each other rather than into understanding the nature and endurance of hideous alcoholism, I will definitely be obliged to do something about him. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations. It is hard to decide what is stronger in Chuckles: his incredible stupidity as far as any real knowledge or ability is concerned, or the high-handed insolence of his behavior.
I indisputably hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Chuckles does any real damage. Or is it already too late? The answer is not obvious, because all Chuckles really wants is to hang onto the perks he's getting from the system. That's all he really cares about. Now the surprising news: I, for one, don't believe that dodgy twerps have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. So when Chuckles says that that's what I believe, I see how little he understands my position. When he tells us that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them, he somehow fails to mention that I am not particularly fond of him. He fails to mention that to my mind, his press releases show a degree of materialistic sickness that even I didn't expect. And he fails to mention that you should not ask, "Why can't he live among us in peace?", but rather, "How long shall there continue egocentric stool pigeons to vend and arrogant scumbags to gulp so low a piece of mandarinism as his writings?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because his eccentricity is surpassed only by his vanity. And Chuckles's vanity is surpassed only by his empty theorizing. (Remember his theory that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not?)
Just think: We must do away with the misconception that Chuckles would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform an incomprehensible act. To cap that off, it's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. Chuckles distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain his current opinions. All in all, far too many people tolerate his demands as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that when you tell Chuckles's expositors that frotteurism represents a closed-minded, besotted form of divide-and-conquer, they begin to get fidgety, and their eyes begin to wander. They really don't care. They have no interest in hearing that his victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Chuckles's legates, who loudly proclaim that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. Regardless of those neo-deplorable proclamations, the truth is that his premise (that he is known for his sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Chuckles uses this disguised morality to support his viewpoints, thereby making his argument self-refuting. Viewing all this from a higher vantage point, we can see that I see how important Chuckles's twisted, scary ethics are to his minions and I laugh. I laugh because I recently heard him tell a bunch of people that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. Listen carefully: Chuckles's ebullitions are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? I mean, Chuckles likes insinuations that keep essential documents hidden from the public until they become politically moot. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that there is a problem here. A large, scurrilous, confused problem.
If Chuckles is going to talk about higher standards, then he needs to live by those higher standards. In order to understand the motivation behind his put-downs, it is important first to restore the traditions that he has abandoned. If we let him raise extortionate demands, then greed, corruption, and authoritarianism will characterize the government. Oppressive measures will be directed against citizens. And lies and deceit will be the stock and trade of the media and educational institutions.
What a cunning coup on the part of Chuckles's hired goons, who set out to commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility and got as far as they did without anyone raising an eyebrow. While most people know this like a schoolchild knows that 2+2=4, if I try really, really hard, I can almost see why Chuckles would want to impose backwards new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of sexist drive for power. It's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of offensive sociopaths like him can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that any one believes them. True, it is no exaggeration to say that as Chuckles feels less and less need to conceal his accusations, he makes increasingly open moves towards execrable, self-righteous exclusionism, but he lives and breathes jingoism -- and Chuckles knows it. The objection may still be raised that society is screaming for his contrivances. At first glance, this sounds almost believable. Yet the following must be borne in mind: The space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which he has tried to support those for whom hatred has become a way of life.
Chuckles's musings are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. All the same, to Chuckles's mind, the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. So that means that there is something intellectually provocative in the tired rehashing of belligerent stereotypes, right? No, not right. The truth is that this is a free country, and I suspect we ought to keep it that way. Chuckles refuses to come to terms with reality. He prefers instead to live in a fantasy world of rationalization and hallucination. I myself don't want to build castles in the air. I don't want to plan things that I can't yet implement. But I do want to seek some structure in which the cacophony introduced by Chuckles's methods of interpretation might be systematized, reconciled, and made rational, because doing so clearly demonstrates how many people are shocked when I tell them that to ignore this issue is to infantilize and corrupt the general public. And I'm shocked that so many people are shocked. You see, I had thought everybody already knew that his janissaries have the power to destroy the lives of good, honest people whenever they feel like it. If, after hearing facts like that, you still believe that everyone with a different set of beliefs from his is going to get a one-way ticket to Hell, then there is decidedly no hope for you. If you wonder why I take the stance that I do, it's because I can no longer get very excited about any revelation of Chuckles's hypocrisy or crookedness. It's what I've come to expect by now.
What conclusion should we draw from Chuckles's maneuvers? How about that there's more to this letter than inflammatory rhetoric? The essential point, however, is the following: Chuckles's "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude is peevish, because it leaves no room for compromise.
The largest problem, however, is that Chuckles's habitués argue that people are pawns to be used and manipulated. These are the same crude practitioners of clericalism who take control of a nation and suck it dry. This is no coincidence; if you think that cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior, then you're suffering from very serious nearsightedness. You're focusing too much on what he wants you to see and failing to observe many other things of much greater importance. As a parenthetical note, my current plan is to end Chuckles's control over the minds and souls of countless people. Yes, he will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but I want to bring fresh leadership and even-handed tolerance to the present controversy. That may seem simple enough, but I am intellectually honest enough to admit my own previous ignorance in that matter. I only wish that he had the same intellectual honesty.
Chuckles's jokes share a number of characteristics. They organize a whispering campaign against me. They ridicule the accomplishments of generations of great men and women. And they foster suspicion -- if not hatred -- of "outsiders". Put together, these characteristics imply that Chuckles thinks that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. Lastly, for those who read this letter, I indeed hope you take it to heart and pass this message on to others.
Meanwhile you can read my complaint letter to a banker at my job named Chuckles:
I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Mr. Chuckles twisting my words in an loathsome attempt to assail all that is holy. Although not without overlap and simplification, I plan to identify three primary positions on his zingers. I acknowledge that I have not accounted for all possible viewpoints within the parameters of these three positions. Nevertheless, he has stated that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming. That's just pure neocolonialism. Well, in Chuckles's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that Chuckles says that he has mystical powers of divination and prophecy. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the closet and, when the cops come in, standing in front of the closet door and exclaiming, "They're not in here!"?
All this aside, if he continues to misdirect our efforts into fighting each other rather than into understanding the nature and endurance of hideous alcoholism, I will definitely be obliged to do something about him. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations. It is hard to decide what is stronger in Chuckles: his incredible stupidity as far as any real knowledge or ability is concerned, or the high-handed insolence of his behavior.
I indisputably hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Chuckles does any real damage. Or is it already too late? The answer is not obvious, because all Chuckles really wants is to hang onto the perks he's getting from the system. That's all he really cares about. Now the surprising news: I, for one, don't believe that dodgy twerps have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. So when Chuckles says that that's what I believe, I see how little he understands my position. When he tells us that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them, he somehow fails to mention that I am not particularly fond of him. He fails to mention that to my mind, his press releases show a degree of materialistic sickness that even I didn't expect. And he fails to mention that you should not ask, "Why can't he live among us in peace?", but rather, "How long shall there continue egocentric stool pigeons to vend and arrogant scumbags to gulp so low a piece of mandarinism as his writings?". The latter question is the better one to ask, because his eccentricity is surpassed only by his vanity. And Chuckles's vanity is surpassed only by his empty theorizing. (Remember his theory that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not?)
Just think: We must do away with the misconception that Chuckles would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform an incomprehensible act. To cap that off, it's irrelevant that my allegations are 100% true. Chuckles distrusts my information and arguments and will forever maintain his current opinions. All in all, far too many people tolerate his demands as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that when you tell Chuckles's expositors that frotteurism represents a closed-minded, besotted form of divide-and-conquer, they begin to get fidgety, and their eyes begin to wander. They really don't care. They have no interest in hearing that his victims have been speaking out for years. Unfortunately, their voices have long been silenced by the roar and thunder of Chuckles's legates, who loudly proclaim that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. Regardless of those neo-deplorable proclamations, the truth is that his premise (that he is known for his sound judgment, unerring foresight, and sagacious adaptation of means to ends) is his morality disguised as pretended neutrality. Chuckles uses this disguised morality to support his viewpoints, thereby making his argument self-refuting. Viewing all this from a higher vantage point, we can see that I see how important Chuckles's twisted, scary ethics are to his minions and I laugh. I laugh because I recently heard him tell a bunch of people that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli. I can't adequately describe my first reaction to this notion; I simply don't know how to represent uncontrollable laughter in text. Listen carefully: Chuckles's ebullitions are a house of mirrors. How are we to find the opening that leads to freedom? I mean, Chuckles likes insinuations that keep essential documents hidden from the public until they become politically moot. Could there be a conflict of interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that there is a problem here. A large, scurrilous, confused problem.
If Chuckles is going to talk about higher standards, then he needs to live by those higher standards. In order to understand the motivation behind his put-downs, it is important first to restore the traditions that he has abandoned. If we let him raise extortionate demands, then greed, corruption, and authoritarianism will characterize the government. Oppressive measures will be directed against citizens. And lies and deceit will be the stock and trade of the media and educational institutions.
What a cunning coup on the part of Chuckles's hired goons, who set out to commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility and got as far as they did without anyone raising an eyebrow. While most people know this like a schoolchild knows that 2+2=4, if I try really, really hard, I can almost see why Chuckles would want to impose backwards new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of sexist drive for power. It's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of offensive sociopaths like him can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that any one believes them. True, it is no exaggeration to say that as Chuckles feels less and less need to conceal his accusations, he makes increasingly open moves towards execrable, self-righteous exclusionism, but he lives and breathes jingoism -- and Chuckles knows it. The objection may still be raised that society is screaming for his contrivances. At first glance, this sounds almost believable. Yet the following must be borne in mind: The space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which he has tried to support those for whom hatred has become a way of life.
Chuckles's musings are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. All the same, to Chuckles's mind, the federal government should take more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights. So that means that there is something intellectually provocative in the tired rehashing of belligerent stereotypes, right? No, not right. The truth is that this is a free country, and I suspect we ought to keep it that way. Chuckles refuses to come to terms with reality. He prefers instead to live in a fantasy world of rationalization and hallucination. I myself don't want to build castles in the air. I don't want to plan things that I can't yet implement. But I do want to seek some structure in which the cacophony introduced by Chuckles's methods of interpretation might be systematized, reconciled, and made rational, because doing so clearly demonstrates how many people are shocked when I tell them that to ignore this issue is to infantilize and corrupt the general public. And I'm shocked that so many people are shocked. You see, I had thought everybody already knew that his janissaries have the power to destroy the lives of good, honest people whenever they feel like it. If, after hearing facts like that, you still believe that everyone with a different set of beliefs from his is going to get a one-way ticket to Hell, then there is decidedly no hope for you. If you wonder why I take the stance that I do, it's because I can no longer get very excited about any revelation of Chuckles's hypocrisy or crookedness. It's what I've come to expect by now.
What conclusion should we draw from Chuckles's maneuvers? How about that there's more to this letter than inflammatory rhetoric? The essential point, however, is the following: Chuckles's "I'm right and you're wrong" attitude is peevish, because it leaves no room for compromise.
The largest problem, however, is that Chuckles's habitués argue that people are pawns to be used and manipulated. These are the same crude practitioners of clericalism who take control of a nation and suck it dry. This is no coincidence; if you think that cannibalism, wife-swapping, and the murder of infants and the elderly are acceptable behavior, then you're suffering from very serious nearsightedness. You're focusing too much on what he wants you to see and failing to observe many other things of much greater importance. As a parenthetical note, my current plan is to end Chuckles's control over the minds and souls of countless people. Yes, he will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but I want to bring fresh leadership and even-handed tolerance to the present controversy. That may seem simple enough, but I am intellectually honest enough to admit my own previous ignorance in that matter. I only wish that he had the same intellectual honesty.
Chuckles's jokes share a number of characteristics. They organize a whispering campaign against me. They ridicule the accomplishments of generations of great men and women. And they foster suspicion -- if not hatred -- of "outsiders". Put together, these characteristics imply that Chuckles thinks that a totalitarian dictatorship is the best form of government we could possibly have. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so. Lastly, for those who read this letter, I indeed hope you take it to heart and pass this message on to others.
Damn thats long. I'll read it when I'm work tomorrow.
DarkPrincess
One of a Kind
*shakes her head8 --RIGHT--
