I feel that it is my duty to transform our culture of war and violence into a culture of peace and nonviolence. But first, let me pose you a question: Is Mr. Sacha J. Rajewski actually concerned about any of us, or does he just want to represent a threat to all the people in the area, indeed, possibly the world? After reading this letter, you'll undeniably find it's the latter. If I may be so bold, it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by his unregenerate epigrams. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and treat the disease, not the symptoms. Let's understand one fundamental fact: I am tired of hearing or reading that the boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to Sacha's demands. You know that that is simply not true. Sacha's propositions manifest themselves in two phases. Phase one: rob, steal, cheat, and murder. Phase two: do the devil's work.
The gloss that Sacha's subalterns put on Sacha's animadversions unfortunately does little to inculcate in the reader an inquisitive spirit and a skepticism about beliefs that Sacha's stooges take for granted. Sacha shouldn't corrupt our youth. That's just common sense. Of course, the people who appreciate his attitudes are those who eagerly root up common sense, prominently hold it out, and decry it as poison with astonishing alacrity. He is driving me nuts. I can't take it anymore! The simple ability to examine the social and cultural conditions that impose a narrow theological agenda on secular society is a pons asinorum that Sacha may never cross. I'll probably devote a separate letter to that topic alone, but for now, I'll simply summarize by stating that Sacha says that it is better that a hundred thousand people should perish than that he should be even slightly inconvenienced. 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!"? If we let him perpetuate the nonsense known technically as the analytic/synthetic dichotomy, who's going to protect us? The government? Our parents? Superman? Probably none of the above. That's why it's important to take personal action and ensure that we survive and emerge triumphant out of the coming chaos and destruction.
While there's no use crying over spilled milk, Sacha makes decisions based on random things glamorized by the press and the resulting rantings of raucous porn stars. That's self-evident, and even Sacha would probably agree with me on that. Even so, if we let him take a condescending cheap shot at a person that most psychotic lunkheads will never be in a position to condescend to, all we'll have to look forward to in the future is a public realm devoid of culture and a narrow and routinized professional life untouched by the highest creations of civilization. Will someone please explain to me what it is in our lives that can possibly make someone cast the world into nuclear holocaust? Because I certainly have no idea. Although Sacha has unfairly depicted me and those who share my beliefs as wastrels and euphuists, we are neither. Yes, his indifference only adds to the problem, but when I say that once you cut through the bravado, misconceptions, and ignorance, you'll find that the core of this seemingly insoluble problem is the fact that no one today believes that some people deserve to feel safe while others do not, this does not, I repeat, does not mean that the best way to make a point is with foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric and letters filled primarily with exclamation points. This is a common fallacy held by fastidious palookas.
He will hate me for saying this, but the dogs of sadism are barking up a storm, driven half-mad by the thought that this letter should be regarded as the beginning, not the end, of my stance against Sacha. And that furious barking is music to my ears, because we have a right, an indisputable, inalienable, indefeasible, divine right to comment on a phenomenon that has and will continue to fill our children's minds with laughable and debasing superstitions. In view of that, it is not surprising that if you're interested in the finagling, double-dealing, chicanery, cheating, cajolery, cunning, rascality, and abject villainy by which he may destroy the values, methods, and goals of traditional humanistic study before you know it, then you'll want to consider the following very carefully. You'll especially want to consider that I have to wonder where Sacha got the idea that it is my view that women are spare parts in the social repertoire -- mere optional extras. This sits hard with me, because it is simply not true, and I've never written anything to imply that it is. It has been said that Sacha's proposed social programs do not hold under close moral scrutiny. I believe that to be true. I also believe that at their mildest, his expedients still manage to promote the dour opinions of the worst types of disagreeable slimeballs there are. More than that, just the other day, some of his unconscionable lapdogs forced a prospectus into my hands as I walked past. The prospectus described Sacha's blueprint for a world in which atrabilious, self-deceiving whiners are free to violate the basic tenets of journalism and scholarship. As I dropped the prospectus onto an overflowing wastebasket, I reflected upon the way that I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of Sacha's writings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of Sacha's writings to know that I'm not very conversant with Sacha's background. To be quite frank, I don't care to be. I already know enough to state with confidence that Sacha's apostles say, "His prophecies provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything." Yes, I'm afraid they really do talk like that. It's the only way for them to conceal that Sacha is not just stupid. He is unbelievably, astronomically stupid. How many of Sacha's slaves are content to sit around doing absolutely nothing to contribute to the world around them? I'd hazard to guess that the number is pretty high. I wish that some of Sacha's co-conspirators would ask themselves, "Why am I helping Sacha pander to our worst fears?" Just because he and his helpers don't like being labelled as "oppressive loan sharks" or "unforgiving ideologues" doesn't mean the shoe doesn't fit.
He attempts to sound intelligent by cramming as many big words into a sentence as possible, whether they are used correctly or not. The sooner he comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us. It's astounding that Sacha has somehow found a way to work the words "pericardiomediastinitis" and "antitintinnabularian" into his publicity stunts. However, you may find it even more astounding that if he can give us all a succinct and infallible argument proving that bad things "just happen" (i.e., they're not caused by Sacha himself), I will personally deliver his Nobel Prize for Raving Rhetoric. In the meantime, Sacha's perceptions of a vast conspiracy lead him to inappropriate assessments of even the most innocent interactions with vile clods. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless substantially true.
Although I agree with those who assert that certain individuals in intelligence and law enforcement agencies may have overlooked some of Sacha's more odious initiatives, nevertheless, I cannot agree with the subject matter and attitude that is woven into every one of Sacha's soporific, crotchety projects. Sacha says that cultural tradition has never contributed a single thing to the advancement of knowledge or understanding. But then he turns around and says that a knowledge of correct diction, even if unused, evinces a superiority that covers cowardice or stupidity. You know, you can't have it both ways, Sacha. It is easy for the public at large to dismiss malodorous, shabby carpetbaggers as ruthless individuals. Because of his bait-and-switch tactics, our schools simply do not teach the basics anymore. Instead, they preach the theology of spineless, predaceous extremism.
Sacha is doing everything in his power to make me hide in a closet. The only reason I haven't yet is that I believe in the four P's: patience, prayer, positive thinking, and perseverance. If you don't think that he should feel ashamed of himself, then think again. It seems to me that, as others have stated long before me, "Sacha is not just unruly, but proud of it." He carries nothing but hatred and destruction in his heart. In fact, I have said that to Sacha on many occasions, and I will keep on saying it until he stops trying to make higher education accessible only to those in the higher echelons of society.
He offers two principal reasons as to why 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. He argues that (1) there should be publicly financed centers of alarmism, and (2) if he kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick his toes and beg for another kick. These arguments are invalid for the following reasons: First, he takes things out of context, twists them around, and then neglects to provide decent referencing so the reader can check up on him. Sacha also ignores all of the evidence that doesn't support (or in many cases directly contradicts) his position. I'll give you an example of this, based on my own experience. As you know, I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on his part to exercise control through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation in the coming days. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that Sacha may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider him to be a weapon of mass destruction himself.
If you wonder why I take the stance that I do, it's because his cause is not glorious. It is not wonderful. It is not good. Sacha's hypocrisy is transparent. Even the least discerning among us can see right through it.
No one has a higher opinion of Sacha than I, and I think he's a two-faced beast. We must remove our chains and move towards the light. (In case you didn't understand that analogy, the chains symbolize Sacha's smarmy nostrums, and the light represents the goal of getting all of us to discuss the programmatic foundations of his impetuous arguments in detail.) We'd all be in grave danger if Sacha continued to engage in his venom-spouting behavior. My current plan is to clean up the country and get it back on course again. Yes, Sacha will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that I want to give our propaganda fighters an instrument that is very much needed at this time. But first, let me pose an abstract question. Why does the media consistently refuse to acknowledge that he likes to have difficult social issues presented to him in simple, black-and-white terms? If you need help in answering that question, you may note that we are observing the change in our society's philosophy and values from freedom and justice to corruption, decay, cynicism, and injustice. All of these "values" are artistically incorporated in one person: Sacha J. Rajewski. Let me close where I began: Mr. Sacha J. Rajewski shows a complete lack of foresight.
In the end, I must say that I am utterly disgusted by Sacha's behavior. He must be removed. Immediately.
Have a nice day,
Your city council.
Keep up the good work!
-Sacha