@EPIC ESSAY If we look beyond Bwog’s delusions of grandeur, we see that it fervently believes that larrikinism is a viable and vital objective for our nation’s educational institutions. This shows that it is not merely mistaken about one little fact among millions of facts but that there isn’t so much as a molecule of evidence that “the truth”, “the whole truth”, and “nothing but the truth” are three different things. The only reason that Bwog claims otherwise is that I can say one thing about it. It understands better than any of us that psychological impact is paramount—not facts, not anybody’s principles, not right and wrong. I’m not suggesting that we behave likewise. I’m suggesting only that 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 aver, there’s a time to get people to see through the hollowness, the sham, the silliness of Bwog’s lazy invectives. Or, to put it less poetically, Bwog’s view is that it can walk on water. If Bwog’s oppressive buddies had any moral or intellectual training, such a position would unequivocally be rendered revolting to their better feelings. Now that this letter has come to an end, let me remind you that it was intended to provide an accurate, even-handed, and balanced discussion of Bwog and its prank phone calls. Please do not contact me with insults, death threats, or the like because I will ignore them. If you disagree with my arguments or can provide further information about Bwog, please contact me and I will endeavor to make any necessary corrections to this letter.
I would be grateful if Bwog would take a little time from its rigorous schedule to develop a rational-empirical base for dialogue about its protests. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. What Bwog apparently fails to realize is that it insists that it has no choice but to twist my words six ways for Sunday. Its reasoning is that power, politics, and privilege should prevail over the rule of law. Yes, I realize that that argument makes no sense, but Bwog drops the names of famous people whenever possible. That makes it sound smarter than it really is and obscures the fact that Bwog shouldn’t throw us into a “heads I win, tails you lose” situation. That’s just plain common sense. Of course, the people who appreciate its adages are those who eagerly root up common sense, prominently hold it out, and decry it as poison with astonishing alacrity.
There is no excuse for the innumerable errors of fact, the slovenly and philistine artistic judgments, the historical ineptitude, the internal contradictions, and the various half-truths, untruths, and gussied-up truths that litter every one of Bwog’s essays from the first word to the last. This brings me to my point. Bwog has been deluding people into believing that its mingy crime syndicate is a respected civil-rights organization. Don’t let it delude you, too.It’s not that I have anything against buggers in general. It’s just that Bwog says that its way of life is correct and everyone else’s isn’t. You know, I don’t think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life.
Bwog counts chauvinistic, imprudent hopeless-types as its friends. Unfortunately for it, these are hired friends, false friends, friends incapable of realizing for a moment that only the impartial and unimpassioned mind will even consider that I stand by what I’ve written before, that if Bwog is going to scorn and abjure reason, then it should at least have the self-respect to remind itself of a few things: First, I myself could decidedly do without its throat-cutting rampages. And second, its precepts are merely a stalking horse. They mask Bwog’s secret intention to cause neo-brutish subversion to gather momentum on college campuses. I guess that my take on this is that if I thought that Bwog’s nostrums had even a snowball’s chance in Hell of doing anything good for anyone, then I wouldn’t be so critical. As they stand, however, I can conclude only that I have no idea why Bwog makes such a big fuss over militarism. There are far more pressing issues that present themselves and that should be discussed, debated, and solved—issues such as war, famine, poverty, and homelessness. There is also the lesser issue that Bwog indeed believes that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is it living in? Here’s the answer, albeit in a somewhat circuitous and roundabout style: Its attendants claim to have no choice but to pamper the most stubborn ignoramuses you’ll ever see. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, scurrilous inane-types. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn’t make and don’t understand.
I would like to insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward clericalism. Before I say anything else, I’d like to state the following disclaimer for Bwog’s benefit: Warning! This letter may contain sarcasm. Okay, now that that’s taken care of, let me posit the hypothesis that if we submit to Bwog’s definition of “unexceptionableness” and become audacious, we have lost the war for self-preservation. That’s probably obvious to a blind man on a galloping horse. Nevertheless, I suspect that few people reading this letter are aware that Bwog has arrived at the highest degree of imposture. That should serve as the final, ultimate, irrefutable proof that its behavior might be different if it were told that it is unable to deal with a world populated by human beings. Of course, as far as Bwog is concerned, this fact will fall into the category of, “My mind is made up; don’t confuse me with the facts.” That’s why I’m telling you that I, hardheaded cynic that I am, cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for its subterfuge. I’m totally stunned.

Sadly, in once sense, Bwog is correct. If we let it foment bumptious forms of political tyranny, then I will really be forced to choke to death. Technically, Bwog’s simplistic reasoning follows the same fallacies as so many other treatises on similar issues. Once we realize that, what do we do? The appropriate thing, in my judgment, is to wake people out of their stupor and call on them to stand by our principles and be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost. I say that because it is interpersonally exploitative. That is, it takes advantage of others to achieve its own pudibund ends. Why does it do that? After days of agonized pondering and reflection I finally came to the conclusion that by forcing me to turn pale and run for cover, Bwog is telegraphing its intentions to hold annual private conferences in which unenlightened, smarmy gutter-dwellers are invited to present their “research”.

At the very least, Bwog’s comments are often appallingly craven, sometimes illaudable, frequently off-point, and occasionally acrimonious. Nevertheless, they do tell us something important about Bwog. They tell us that Bwog intends to create anomie. I have never been in favor of being gratuitously disgusting. I have also never been in favor of sticking my head in the sand or of refusing to complain about nugatory adolescents. Bwog pompously claims 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. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately.

There is definitely a longiloquent dimension to Bwog’s propositions. Or, if “longiloquent” is too narrow of a term, perhaps you’d prefer “worthless”. In any case, I’ve tried explaining to Bwog’s encomiasts that a great many decent people are just as distressed as I am about Bwog’s imprecations. Unfortunately, it is clear to me in talking to them that they have no comprehension of what I’m saying. I might as well be talking to creatures from Mars. In fact, I’d bet Martians would be more likely to discern that I support those who devote their life to education and activism. It is through their tireless efforts that people everywhere are learning that Bwog has repeatedly indicated a desire to use both overt and covert deceptions to lay waste to the environment. Is that the sound of rarefied respectability that Bwog’s worshippers so frequently attribute to Bwog? The fastidious blathering of an uncontrollable spoiled brat is more like it. In fact, what we have been imparting to Bwog—or what it has been eliciting from us—is a half-submerged, barely intended logic, contaminated by wishes and tendencies we prefer not to acknowledge.

Bwog claims that black is white and night is day. I avouch that the absurdities within that claim speak for themselves although I should add that Bwog is extraordinarily brazen. We’ve all known that for a long time. However, its willingness to abrogate some of our most fundamental freedoms sets a new world record for brazenness. There can be no doubt that Bwog is the type of organization that will trump up any lie for the occasion, and the more of a thumper it is, the better it likes it. This may be water under the bridge by now, but I want to clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in Bwog’s ruses. That may seem simple enough, but Bwog coins polysyllabic neologisms to make its hijinks sound like they’re actually important. In fact, its treatises are filled to the brim with words that have yet to appear in any accepted dictionary.
Let’s be clear here: this has nothing to do with my world-renowned prose, the A+ I received in University Writing, nor any personal vendetta against Eliza or Bwog. Rather, I feel it is my duty to bring your attention to this girl’s atrocities. In a previous letter, I stated that Eliza doesn’t let a day pass without showing to the world that she is as little fitted to be trusted with liberty as thieves with keys or children with firearms. That will be my position in this letter, as well. To start, there are some quasi-clumsy aberrant-types who are brutish. There are also some who are treacherous. Which category does Eliza fall into? If the question overwhelms you, I suggest you check “both”.

Now, why all this fuss about a few petty false-flag operations? Simply put, it’s because Eliza is a serial exaggerator. If I were to be less kind, I’d say she’s a liar. Either way, Eliza is more at home with lies than with the truth. For that reason, this is one comment that she doesn’t want you to read. I’ll probably devote a separate comment to that topic alone, but for now I’ll simply summarize by stating that Eliza does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when she says that one can understand the elements of a journalism and academia only by reference to the social condition and personal histories of the students involved, that’s where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins.

What I just said is a very important point but I’m afraid a lot of readers might miss it so I’ll say a few more words on the subject. Eliza somehow manages to maintain a straight face when saying that she is the way, the truth, and the light. I, not being one of the many unambitious propagandists of this world, 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 students of a once organized, motivated, and cognitively enlightened institution. There’s no shortage of sin in the world today. It’s been around since the Garden of Eden and will truly persist as long as Eliza continues to condemn innocent people to death. She intends to create a new social class. Cankered wisenheimers, unstable yobbos, and raffish, raucous popinjays will be given aristocratic status. The rest of us will be forced into serving as their worshippers. I’d like to end this comment with a message for Eliza Shapiro. I’d like to say with emphasis and distinctness—not as a threat, but as a warning—that I will do whatever it takes to halt the destructive process that is carrying our school toward extinction, and I won’t let her stop me from achieving that goal.
Although Eliza Shapiro wants nothing less than to make us less united, less moral, less sensitive, less engaged, and more perversely irascible, I want this letter to speak a language of reconciliation, not retaliation. First off, the nicest thing that can be said about her Bwog editor cronies is that they are froward, namby-pamby killjoys out to defy the rules of logic. I will now cite the proof of that statement. The proof begins with the observation that when one examines the ramifications of letting Eliza promote her censoring hysteria, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that few people realize that her winged monkeys remain a small isolated minority except during times of economic or social stress, when a mass following develops to blame what I call hotheaded fruitcakes for the problems besetting society. The facts are indisputable, the arguments are impeccable, and the consequences are undeniable. So why does she avouch that violence and prejudice are funny? I once asked Eliza that question—I am still waiting for an answer. In the meantime, let me point out that Eliza’s hysteria-producing litanies are sufficient to give pause to the less thoughtful among us. “Oh, oh,” such people think. “We’d better help Eliza create a dodgy world of guilt and shame—just in case.”

Although I can’t say how well I’d do against Eliza in a nationally televised steel-cage death match, I can say that she expects us to behave like passive sheep. The only choice Eliza believes we should be allowed to make for ourselves is whether to head towards her slaughterhouse at a trot or at a gallop. She honestly doesn’t want us choosing to highlight all of the problems with her inattentive wheelings and dealings. I frequently wish to tell her that her toadies coerce children into becoming activists willing to serve, promote, spy, and fight for her remonstrations. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue. As a parting thought, let these sterling words of wisdom be most thoroughly and attentively perused: It’s considerations of this sort that make it worth our while to learn about the effete things Eliza Shapiro is up to.

@disappointed dog You know its kinda creepy to stalk people in Butler and comment on their shoes.