I better not find out that you're going to be ANYWHERE in the state of Texas. Out of all the assholes I've delt with, you're about the only dickhead I actually wanted to beat up in RL. I would beat your f*** ass about as relentlessly as I was killing you in the server. 
Over the past few weeks, I've learned to look past Gnight's foul-mouthed jokes. I've learned to look past some of the heinous things Gnight has said. I've even learned to look past his attempts to jump on everything that is written, said, or even implied and label it as either gormless or vexatious. But I cannot stay silent about Gnight's incomprehensible and unforgivable audacity regarding a specific event that recently occurred. But before I continue, allow me to explain that many people who follow Gnight's fairy tales have come to the erroneous conclusion that courtesy and manners don't count for anything. The stark truth of the matter is that I can honestly suggest how he ought to behave. Ultimately, however, the burden of acting with moral rectitude lies with Gnight himself. I recently received some mail in which the writer stated, "Gnight's coadjutors are united through unilateralism, scapegoatism, and oligarchism." I included that quote not because it is exceptional in any way, but rather, because it is typical of much of the mail I receive. I included it to show you that I'm not the only one who thinks 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 insist, there's a time to convince the government to clamp down hard on Gnight's practices. Or, to put it less poetically, I myself want to give people more information about Gnight, help them digest and assimilate and understand that information, and help them draw responsible conclusions from it. Here's one conclusion I undeniably hope people draw: If Gnight honestly believes that some of my points are not valid, I would love to get some specific feedback from him.
To the best of my knowledge, Gnight's myrmidons have shared the rostrum with what I call unpleasant suborners of perjury at recent symposia. To cap that off, Gnight's antics are totally rancorous, regardless of the way, shape, or form in which he presents them. Sadly, lack of space prevents me from elaborating further. Gnight managed to convince a bunch of disgusting nutters to help him boss others around. What was the quid pro quo there? Well, I asked the question, so I should answer it. Let me start by saying that if I didn't sincerely believe that it is my job -- and your job, too -- to keep our courage up, then I wouldn't be writing this letter. He should not be allowed to operate heavy machinery, specifically, his ego. This implies that his expedients have merged with feudalism in several interesting ways. Both spring from the same kind of reality-denying mentality. Both sacrifice children on the twin altars of expansionism and greed. And both rule with an iron fist. What kind of loser wants to ridicule the accomplishments of generations of great men and women? A loser like Gnight.
Well, let's get our facts straight. Ignorance is bliss. This may be why his toadies are generally all smiles. His memoirs leave me with several unanswered questions: Where do pathological scumbags like him come from, and what are we going to do with them? And has he ever considered what would happen if a small fraction of his time spent trying to make empty promises was instead spent on something productive? These are difficult questions to answer, because if prætorianism were an Olympic sport, he would clinch the gold medal. I want nothing more -- or less -- than to spread awareness of the perfidious nature of Gnight's "compromises". To that task I have consecrated my life, and I invite you to do likewise.
Gnight takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. He also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. I cannot believe how many actual, physical, breathing, thinking people have fallen for his subterfuge. I'm utterly stunned. As I've said in the past, Gnight's plans for the future 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 Gnight has warned us that in the near future, unscrupulous televangelists will pass off all sorts of ugly and obviously brown-nosing stuff on others as a so-called "inner experience". If you think about it, you'll realize that Gnight's warning is a self-fulfilling prophecy in the sense that I do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with Gnight. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I do what needs to be done. It's possible that Gnight doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of metagrobolism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we tell him how wrong he is.
He hates people who have huge supplies of the things he lacks. What Gnight lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that he is not as delirious or haughty as you might think. He's more so. It's my understanding that self-pitying plagiarism is his preferred quick-fix solution to complex cultural problems. Now, that's a strong conclusion to draw just from the evidence I've presented in this letter. So let me corroborate it by saying that I unquestionably wouldn't want to dismantle national civil rights organizations by driving a wedge between the leaders and the rank-and-file members. I would, on the other hand, love to fight the good fight. But, hey, I'm already doing that with this letter. By toning down his harangues, many more people are exposed to Gnight's intolerant message, convinced by his passion, and seduced by his simplistic answers to complex social problems. A number of serious questions need to be asked -- and answered -- before we give Gnight carte blanche to put craven thoughts in our children's minds. But that's not all: Many lives have been lost to cynicism. Sad, but true. And it'll only get worse if he finds a way to go to great lengths to conceal his true aims and mislead the public. The next time he decides to panic irrationally and overreact completely, he should think to himself, cui bono? -- who benefits?
Don't get me wrong; this should not and need not be the case. But if it were up to Gnight, schoolchildren would be taught reading, 'riting, and racism. I would like to digress here. I hate him to my very bone marrow, but I won't linger on that. Anyone who takes even a cursory glance at this letter will quickly discover that Gnight's thralls are brainwashed automatons programmed to spout line after line of pro-Gnight propaganda. Don't make the mistake of thinking otherwise. Gnight does, and that's why he has been known to say that he knows the "right" way to read Plato, Maimonides, and Machiavelli. That notion is so lecherous, I hardly know where to begin refuting it.
He is not just self-serving; he's brainless, too. As I mentioned before, to my mind, Gnight's teachings show a degree of conniving sickness that even I didn't expect. But let me add that my concern and outrage are not directed solely at him, but at all those who seek to make a mockery of the term "interparenthetically". (Actually, we need to lead each other towards the understanding that his excuses command as much respect as the tales in the supermarket tabloids, but that's not important now.)
It would be wrong to imply that Gnight is involved in some kind of conspiracy to take rights away from individuals whom only Gnight perceives as unprofessional. It would be wrong because Gnight's plaints are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but Gnight's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial. In a manner of speaking, his apple-polishers often reverse the normal process of interpretation. That is, they value the unsaid over the said, the obscure over the clear.
Gnight wants to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. Is this so he can scar little children's self-image, or is it to alter, rewrite, or ignore past events to make them consistent with his current "reality"? You be the judge. In either case, I have never been in favor of being gratuitously piteous. I have also never been in favor of sticking my head in the sand or of refusing to overcome the obstacles that people like him establish.
The problem with him is not that he's crass. It's that he wants to make all of us pay for his boondoggles. Gnight's crusades are in every respect consistent with the school of effete thought that tends to create a world sunk in the most abject superstition, fanaticism, and ignorance. I am not in any way placing the blame on Gnight for salacious ne'er-do-wells who palliate and excuse the atrocities of Gnight's flunkies. That notwithstanding, Gnight is still culpable for plotting to make nearby communities victims of environmental degradation and toxic waste dumping. If he thinks that he can make me swallow whatever he dishes out, then he's barking up the wrong tree. Lastly, I can't end this letter without mentioning that I certainly seek nothing but justice.
