• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Xàbia Shrimper

Co-founder of ShrimperZone
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
13,804
Location
Xàbia, España
What I am about to say is strictly off the record. On that understanding, I shall give you candidly and without circumlocution the best estimate of our present plight that I have been able to make. Before I start, however, I should state that to understand what Southend United's particularly parasitic form of sectarianism has encompassed as a movement and as a system of rule, we have to look at its historical context and development as a form of chthonic politics that first arose in early twentieth-century Europe in response to rapid social upheaval, the devastation of World War I, and the Bolshevik Revolution. The original purpose of deconstructionism was to exert more and more control over other individuals. But even if we disregard all that and examine only Southend United's disaffected scare tactics, this seems to me to be enough to show that Southend United hates people who have huge supplies of the things it lacks. What it lacks the most is common sense, which underlies my point that Southend United's revenge fantasies do not represent progress. They represent insanity masquerading as progress. Southend United will probably throw another hissy fit if we don't let it propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright onanism. At least putting up with another Southend United hissy fit is easier than convincing Southend United's brethren that Southend United says that society is screaming for its orations. You know, I don't think I have heard a less factually based statement in my entire life.

Lest I seem like a hypocrite, I should tell you that Southend United's method (or school, or ideology -- it is hard to know exactly what to call it) goes by the name of "Southend United-ism". It is a contumelious and avowedly unprofessional philosophy that aims to demand special treatment that, in many cases, borders on the ridiculous. Southend United does not want to judge people based solely on hearsay because it is brainless, morally questionable, crass, and merciless (though, granted, Southend United is all of the aforementioned), but rather because Southend United presents itself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. It is eloquent in its denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors vapid riffraff. And here we have the ultimate irony, because it always gives noncommittal answers to questions. That should serve as the final, ultimate, irrefutable proof that all of the foregoing information has been served up as a necessary prelude to understanding the motive and force behind the current mad rush by Southend United and its comrades to mock, ridicule, deprecate, and rebuke people for their religious beliefs. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that it claims that it is a martyr for freedom and a victim of Trotskyism. I, not being one of the many humorless vendors of antipluralism of this world, would say that that claim is 70% folderol, 20% twaddle, and 10% another unbalanced attempt to outrage the very sensibilities of those who value freedom and fairness. Here's an idea: Instead of giving Southend United the ability to turn a deaf ear to need and suffering, why don't we exemplify the principles of honor, duty, loyalty, and courage? If we do, we'll then be able to denounce those who claim that men are spare parts in the social repertoire -- mere optional extras. I have now said everything there is to say. So, to summarize it all, few people realize that that statement can be most easily defended, since it is not quantitative, but qualitative.

I thank you.

WS
 
Cheers, WS. Without you I would never have been able to understand what the hell was going on...
wink.gif
 
Can someone please explain to me what has led to this post. I seem to have miss something.
 
I read it reasonably thoroughly to be fair and found it to be a jumbled mess.

Perhaps XS just got a dictionary for his birthday...

tounge.gif
biggrin.gif
 
On behalf of several members of the community, I would like to express my shock and disappointment at some of sufcintheprem's conclusions. I realize that some of you may not know the particular background details of the events I'm referring to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but you can read up on them elsewhere. Sufcintheprem's viewpoints manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: slow scientific progress. Phase two: give voice, in a totally emotional and non-rational way, to its deep-rooted love of larrikinism. In short, I feel we must name and shame sufcintheprem's apple-polishers for their wrongheaded acts of tribalism. I hope other members of the community feel the same.

Regards,

WS
 
laugh.gif


I think I was wrong. I think XS got the wrong tape in a Simspons-esque style when trying to lose weight subliminally!

Me and my apple-polishers are not amused
mad.gif
 
My entire life I have been taught to stand up for my beliefs, to be a person of high morals and ethics. That's why I feel obligated to begin a course of careful, planned, and coordinated action. To begin with, Sufcintheprem is planning to promote, foster, and institute classism. This does not bode well for the future, because he will bamboozle people into believing that his decisions are based on reason because he possesses a hatred that defies all logic and understanding, that cannot be quantified or reasoned away, and that savagely possesses yawping ochlocrats with deplorable and uncontrollable rage. The interesting point is this: I frequently wish to tell him that he engages in pietistic babble that nauseates even some of my more religious friends. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue. The bottom line is that when one looks at this hideous parade of iconoclastic calumniators, one instantly thinks of the word "disproportionableness".

I kid ye not ...

WS
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Xàbia Shrimper @ Sep. 11 2005,11:09)]To begin with, Sufcintheprem is planning to promote, foster, and institute classism.
Why not? Who's with me?!

unclesam.gif


Or are you all thinking disproportionableness. I do get that a lot. Particularly from women....

sad.gif


disproportionableness

Disproportionable \Dis`pro*por"tion*a*ble\, a. Disproportional; unsuitable in form, size, quantity, or adaptation; disproportionate; inadequate. -- Dis`pro*por\"tion*a*ble*ness, n. --Hammond. -- Dis`pro*por\"tion*a*bly, adv
 
Back
Top