Slashdot Mirror

The guy who wrote the museumofhoaxes page seems to think that the hoaxer is this this guy. If he spent 5 minutes reading the guy's web material, he'd realize that he's quite sincere, though not very bright.

Also, note that the OBJECTIVE web site was originally hosted by a Christian hosting company. Not a logical place to host a spoof!

Finally, notice how OBJECTIVE is distributing this banner demanding that the Landover site be shut down. I can't believe a spoofer would come up with the slogan "He didn't give His life to be mocked!", no matter how mock-serious he was trying to be.

It's pretty easy to "prove" that something on the web is bogus. You pick at little inconsistencies, and you ignore the contrary evidence. I've been accused of being a non-existant person more than once. The last time was on Slashdot, where I had a story accepted gushing about a new TV show I was enthusiastic about. Several people "proved" that I was a pseudo-person invented just to plug the show. Never mind that already had a couple thousand Slashdot posts in my history!

After writing an even loooonger discussion about the site and having it all erased in a system crash, this will be a short version. (On the second reading: ha-ha).

* The web service provider www.truepath.com/ has been online since September 1997. They are definitely for real and serves many, many other cristian sites. Let's not scan or bomb them. They are doing a great job handling the slashdot effect - we have seen many other sites choke immediately.

It all looks very, very much like a real site. Some glitches point in the hoax-direction however:

* On the member page, it is very hard to find any evidence of any pastors or doctors on the web. However, searching for '"Tim Allmon" baptist' on Google returns two hits.
-The Digital Missourian: Citing
"Tim Allmon, 22, plans to vote for Bush. But the Southern Methodist University student says he is tired of candidates "putting on the fake happy face, shaking hands and kissing babies.""
There is acutally a guy called Tim Allmon, about the age (24) of the portrait on the member page, studying at the Southern Methodist University. Sounds OK to study at the Methodist Univeristy if you are ultra christian, but I guess there are 10.000 other students there that are not, on the other hand...

The second link is not about our guy anyway.

* The bible verses they have chosen are good reading.
Tim Allmon, the treasurer, chose Mattew 22:17-22... (bible citations from bible.gospelcom.net)
"Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?" But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away."

Too good to be true? You judge. But the femnine looking Peggy Miller's choice is Luke 11:21:
""When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe."

Pastor Jose Rosas is also surprising. Claiming to work in "the ecumenical Catholic Outreach Baptist Ministries" is exceedingly hard to believe for me. If the catholic and baptist acutally had any collaborations, we would find it on Google... Wouldn't we? Again, we are directed to Objective as the first link...
Corinthians 8:1-13 is not that obvious either...

Kyle Goodman then. His story is almost too good to be true... We can read in the Google cache (to save his Geocities accound from flooding) that he was salvaged by Jim Carlson of the Objective site. He first was a "bad guy" with a webpage against Jim Carlson and pro Landover. Now he has changed and is against Landover. It is hard to know if he is serious. Would anybody changing mind so drastically still keep their old web page that insulted what you now believe in? (His pages are still up on Geocities, but they are often overloaded so use the Google cache instead.
There is some really good reading in Kyles guestbook. I especially like a comment (KirthGersen - 11/22/00 06:05:12):
"Taking parody to the razor's edge... The fact that you left your old site up shows you are faking your conversion. The fact that those idiots at Shutdown Landover believe you shows that they are really, really dumb. Congrats on your parody - it's quite convincing. Can't wait till you suddenly fall from grace - should be hilarious!"

Furthermore, Kyle Goldman is a very uncommon name in Google. Most hits points into golf result tables. Some link actually points to the Faith Presbyterian Church in Huntsville, Alabama, were they have posted the participants in the cermon (how about that privacy?). Actually Melissa Goldman also participated. This seem strange as Kyle have chocked his jewish parents when converting as the Objective site says. Maybe this Kyle Goldman is not the one we are looking for...

One of the links points to a sermon that was held the 15th of October 2000, which is only two days after Kyle's last note on his Geocities webpage. It seems normal to me that a young newcomer in a presbyterian congregation would be asked to lead the prayers.

The golf-playing Kyle was a freshman in Temple Highschool in Bell County, Texas in 1997 (See this link, and this directory listing). Is he the same Kyle Goldman? There also seems to be a horse-riding and -judging Kyle Goldman that originates from Washington in Wilkes county, Georgia. Btw, his horse is named Cookie.

Aaaarghhh. I want to know the truth!

Conclusion
It is harder for me to believe that someone spends the enormous amount of work on a site likeObjective for fun rather than if they do believe in it. (On the other hand it may be hard for people to believe that someone spent the time to write this :-) The only obvious people that could do it "for fun" is the Landover crew (and they are probably overloaded with that site, plus they specialize in sharp and clear irony) and Kyle Goldman that has a very different style on his other webpage. Faking the artwork on the Objective site would also take lots of skill and time.

This has largely turned out to be a study if the people named above really exist. It is hard to determine that using only the Internet, and it gets even harder when the persons are not supposed to use the 'net because of its low moral. It is next to impossible as the pages in discussion lack real-world adresses. Even if that is a sign of a hoax, nobody that tried leaving their mail adress on a page like that would do it again. They may be misinformed, but they are not stupid...

So, I choose to believe that there acutally are people different enough and determined to set up a site like Objective because they do believe in it for real. If anybody have hard evidence of the opposite, I welcome it.

...or maybe I think it is a hoax... :-) /Fredrik

After writing an even loooonger discussion about the site and having it all erased in a system crash, this will be a short version. (On the second reading: ha-ha).

* The web service provider www.truepath.com/ has been online since September 1997. They are definitely for real and serves many, many other cristian sites. Let's not scan or bomb them. They are doing a great job handling the slashdot effect - we have seen many other sites choke immediately.

It all looks very, very much like a real site. Some glitches point in the hoax-direction however:

* On the member page, it is very hard to find any evidence of any pastors or doctors on the web. However, searching for '"Tim Allmon" baptist' on Google returns two hits.
-The Digital Missourian: Citing
"Tim Allmon, 22, plans to vote for Bush. But the Southern Methodist University student says he is tired of candidates "putting on the fake happy face, shaking hands and kissing babies.""
There is acutally a guy called Tim Allmon, about the age (24) of the portrait on the member page, studying at the Southern Methodist University. Sounds OK to study at the Methodist Univeristy if you are ultra christian, but I guess there are 10.000 other students there that are not, on the other hand...

The second link is not about our guy anyway.

* The bible verses they have chosen are good reading.
Tim Allmon, the treasurer, chose Mattew 22:17-22... (bible citations from bible.gospelcom.net)
"Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?" But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away."

Too good to be true? You judge. But the femnine looking Peggy Miller's choice is Luke 11:21:
""When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe."

Pastor Jose Rosas is also surprising. Claiming to work in "the ecumenical Catholic Outreach Baptist Ministries" is exceedingly hard to believe for me. If the catholic and baptist acutally had any collaborations, we would find it on Google... Wouldn't we? Again, we are directed to Objective as the first link...
Corinthians 8:1-13 is not that obvious either...

Kyle Goodman then. His story is almost too good to be true... We can read in the Google cache (to save his Geocities accound from flooding) that he was salvaged by Jim Carlson of the Objective site. He first was a "bad guy" with a webpage against Jim Carlson and pro Landover. Now he has changed and is against Landover. It is hard to know if he is serious. Would anybody changing mind so drastically still keep their old web page that insulted what you now believe in? (His pages are still up on Geocities, but they are often overloaded so use the Google cache instead.
There is some really good reading in Kyles guestbook. I especially like a comment (KirthGersen - 11/22/00 06:05:12):
"Taking parody to the razor's edge... The fact that you left your old site up shows you are faking your conversion. The fact that those idiots at Shutdown Landover believe you shows that they are really, really dumb. Congrats on your parody - it's quite convincing. Can't wait till you suddenly fall from grace - should be hilarious!"

Furthermore, Kyle Goldman is a very uncommon name in Google. Most hits points into golf result tables. Some link actually points to the Faith Presbyterian Church in Huntsville, Alabama, were they have posted the participants in the cermon (how about that privacy?). Actually Melissa Goldman also participated. This seem strange as Kyle have chocked his jewish parents when converting as the Objective site says. Maybe this Kyle Goldman is not the one we are looking for...

One of the links points to a sermon that was held the 15th of October 2000, which is only two days after Kyle's last note on his Geocities webpage. It seems normal to me that a young newcomer in a presbyterian congregation would be asked to lead the prayers.

The golf-playing Kyle was a freshman in Temple Highschool in Bell County, Texas in 1997 (See this link, and this directory listing). Is he the same Kyle Goldman? There also seems to be a horse-riding and -judging Kyle Goldman that originates from Washington in Wilkes county, Georgia. Btw, his horse is named Cookie.

Aaaarghhh. I want to know the truth!

Conclusion
It is harder for me to believe that someone spends the enormous amount of work on a site likeObjective for fun rather than if they do believe in it. (On the other hand it may be hard for people to believe that someone spent the time to write this :-) The only obvious people that could do it "for fun" is the Landover crew (and they are probably overloaded with that site, plus they specialize in sharp and clear irony) and Kyle Goldman that has a very different style on his other webpage. Faking the artwork on the Objective site would also take lots of skill and time.

This has largely turned out to be a study if the people named above really exist. It is hard to determine that using only the Internet, and it gets even harder when the persons are not supposed to use the 'net because of its low moral. It is next to impossible as the pages in discussion lack real-world adresses. Even if that is a sign of a hoax, nobody that tried leaving their mail adress on a page like that would do it again. They may be misinformed, but they are not stupid...

So, I choose to believe that there acutally are people different enough and determined to set up a site like Objective because they do believe in it for real. If anybody have hard evidence of the opposite, I welcome it.

...or maybe I think it is a hoax... :-) /Fredrik

After writing an even loooonger discussion about the site and having it all erased in a system crash, this will be a short version. (On the second reading: ha-ha).

* The web service provider www.truepath.com/ has been online since September 1997. They are definitely for real and serves many, many other cristian sites. Let's not scan or bomb them. They are doing a great job handling the slashdot effect - we have seen many other sites choke immediately.

It all looks very, very much like a real site. Some glitches point in the hoax-direction however:

* On the member page, it is very hard to find any evidence of any pastors or doctors on the web. However, searching for '"Tim Allmon" baptist' on Google returns two hits.
-The Digital Missourian: Citing
"Tim Allmon, 22, plans to vote for Bush. But the Southern Methodist University student says he is tired of candidates "putting on the fake happy face, shaking hands and kissing babies.""
There is acutally a guy called Tim Allmon, about the age (24) of the portrait on the member page, studying at the Southern Methodist University. Sounds OK to study at the Methodist Univeristy if you are ultra christian, but I guess there are 10.000 other students there that are not, on the other hand...

The second link is not about our guy anyway.

* The bible verses they have chosen are good reading.
Tim Allmon, the treasurer, chose Mattew 22:17-22... (bible citations from bible.gospelcom.net)
"Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?" But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied. Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away."

Too good to be true? You judge. But the femnine looking Peggy Miller's choice is Luke 11:21:
""When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe."

Pastor Jose Rosas is also surprising. Claiming to work in "the ecumenical Catholic Outreach Baptist Ministries" is exceedingly hard to believe for me. If the catholic and baptist acutally had any collaborations, we would find it on Google... Wouldn't we? Again, we are directed to Objective as the first link...
Corinthians 8:1-13 is not that obvious either...

Kyle Goodman then. His story is almost too good to be true... We can read in the Google cache (to save his Geocities accound from flooding) that he was salvaged by Jim Carlson of the Objective site. He first was a "bad guy" with a webpage against Jim Carlson and pro Landover. Now he has changed and is against Landover. It is hard to know if he is serious. Would anybody changing mind so drastically still keep their old web page that insulted what you now believe in? (His pages are still up on Geocities, but they are often overloaded so use the Google cache instead.
There is some really good reading in Kyles guestbook. I especially like a comment (KirthGersen - 11/22/00 06:05:12):
"Taking parody to the razor's edge... The fact that you left your old site up shows you are faking your conversion. The fact that those idiots at Shutdown Landover believe you shows that they are really, really dumb. Congrats on your parody - it's quite convincing. Can't wait till you suddenly fall from grace - should be hilarious!"

Furthermore, Kyle Goldman is a very uncommon name in Google. Most hits points into golf result tables. Some link actually points to the Faith Presbyterian Church in Huntsville, Alabama, were they have posted the participants in the cermon (how about that privacy?). Actually Melissa Goldman also participated. This seem strange as Kyle have chocked his jewish parents when converting as the Objective site says. Maybe this Kyle Goldman is not the one we are looking for...

One of the links points to a sermon that was held the 15th of October 2000, which is only two days after Kyle's last note on his Geocities webpage. It seems normal to me that a young newcomer in a presbyterian congregation would be asked to lead the prayers.

The golf-playing Kyle was a freshman in Temple Highschool in Bell County, Texas in 1997 (See this link, and this directory listing). Is he the same Kyle Goldman? There also seems to be a horse-riding and -judging Kyle Goldman that originates from Washington in Wilkes county, Georgia. Btw, his horse is named Cookie.

Aaaarghhh. I want to know the truth!

Conclusion
It is harder for me to believe that someone spends the enormous amount of work on a site likeObjective for fun rather than if they do believe in it. (On the other hand it may be hard for people to believe that someone spent the time to write this :-) The only obvious people that could do it "for fun" is the Landover crew (and they are probably overloaded with that site, plus they specialize in sharp and clear irony) and Kyle Goldman that has a very different style on his other webpage. Faking the artwork on the Objective site would also take lots of skill and time.

This has largely turned out to be a study if the people named above really exist. It is hard to determine that using only the Internet, and it gets even harder when the persons are not supposed to use the 'net because of its low moral. It is next to impossible as the pages in discussion lack real-world adresses. Even if that is a sign of a hoax, nobody that tried leaving their mail adress on a page like that would do it again. They may be misinformed, but they are not stupid...

So, I choose to believe that there acutally are people different enough and determined to set up a site like Objective because they do believe in it for real. If anybody have hard evidence of the opposite, I welcome it.

...or maybe I think it is a hoax... :-) /Fredrik

For me the funniest part is that whoever is perpertrating this satire has the balls to get the site hosted by a Christian web host!

Okay, so, everyone has been crowing at how "Fellowship University" isn't listed on Google. Fine.

So I decided to go to Google and hold my own little Safari of Fun.

I'll list to you all the links I followed [and apologize in advance if I kill anyones' sites]. It took awhile before I got anything out of google. My first mistake was searching for "Fellowship University" -- all you get from that is the ability to hate search engines for not allowing you to exclude punctuation marks from a quoted string. I know why, I understand lexigraphical indexing (mostly), I still don't like it, and a second-pass process for punctuation marks should still go fast. So nya! Are you listening, Google?

Anyhow, my first paydirt didn't hit until I used a search of:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_qdr=all&q=Ba ptist+anti-Christian

Toward the bottom, I got this link (to the australian broadcast servers):
http://www.abc.net.au/compass/explore/anti.htm

Amusingly, they have both the Landover site, and then this other "anti-anti-baptist site" which links to:
http://www.ilovejesus.com/myhome/jimcarlson/

Now, unfortunately, www.ilovejesus.com (which I'm very familiar with, it's NOT a hoax site, more's the pity) says that jimcarlson is a 404. Does that mean ilovejesus found out about him and booted him?

How about "Mt Fellowship Baptist" (which is a good quote from their own pages) ???
http://www.google.com/search?cat=&q=%22Mt+Fellowsh ip+Baptist%22

That gives us the OBJECTIVE links and this:
http://www.orgsites.com/mi/cudi/news.html
Read down to 03/07/2000 for the pertinant info:

"It is unacceptable that innocent and impressionable children should be exposed to the sort derogatory depictions of Christians that are becoming all too common on the 'Net," stated Dr. Andrew Miller, pastor of Mt. Fellowship Baptist Church and a member of a group opposing the Landover site, "It is imperative that we as Christians act now to keep these people in check before another incident like the one that happened at Wedgewood Baptist Church happens again.".

More than that, there's a link to the "OBJECTIVE: Ministries" on that page.

But, well, let's face it. As Abercrombie and Fitch learned to their supreme disgruntlement, two Wongs do NOT make a White. Two other sites may have been easily duped by this hoax. Or I might have better evidence that it's real. Goddamnit (no pun intended).

Hmm... but there WAS a link to "OBJECTIVE: ministries" right? Okay, let's grep the internet for that:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Objective% 3A+ministries%22

Besides the CUDI links the only other useful link is from www.metafilter.com and had to be gotten from the googlecache, but it's just talking about that site as hoax:
http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:kvVdd74wwaoC: www.metafilter.com/comments.mefi/16547+%22Objectiv e:+ministries%22&hl=en

Okay, let's try http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_qdr=all&q=Ba ptist+anti-Christian+objective

And we get:
http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:SO6eFb9I3YAC: www.geocities.com/hands_off_lb/index_old.html+Bapt ist+anti-Christian+objective&hl=en
"Hands Off Landover Baptist" (google cache)
If the OBJECTIVE: site is a troll and a hoax, here's your index of all the other ones to go have fun with! (Also lists CUDI on there, w00t) (I think this would be properly described to be an anti-anti-anti-Baptist site?)

Okay, one more Run through the Google Sprinklers:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_qdr=all&q=%2 2jim+carlson%22+landover

The good link from there is:
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/ninglun/fundamental ist.html
Here's some correspondence with the author of the site with Carlson. Of course, this also has a letter back from the Landover people, calling Mr Carlson a 16 year old kid. Which is fine... except 16 year old kids don't make nice happy websites like that. If they do, I want to hire him as an intern. [DON'T SEND ME EMAIL, THAT'S A !@!?! JOKE, YA MOPE]

Luckily for me, I can remember some of the ``offtopic`` pages well enough to find them in google cache: http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:V9xvB3hZdYcC: members.truepath.com/objective/progress.html+Fello wship+Baptist+-Medical+Jesus+anti-Christian&hl=en

They list there that they were once on the ilovejesus page, and had to flee. So at the worst, we could write the ILJ freekies and ask them for the real poop. But that's too much like real work.

Anyhow, even more vaguely-subtle "quite probably hoax but not quite sure" stuff on that page. Like changing the purple bear to a rainbow bear to keep people from thinking it's homosexual.

Dear god.

March 24, 2000, however....

Okay, who is good at spotting badly photoshopped text on signs? (sigh)

I love this guy.

I hate this guy.

He makes my head hurt.

And I mean that in only the best way.

Have I fallen for a troll? Do I care? I wonder if he'll marry me?

How about if he'll feed and support me because I didn't get enough work done tonight and I got fired for having so much brainfire over this silly little site?

I suppose the whole point is that we're all more than prepared to accept that these people really DO exist even when we don't want them to.

Oh well. For a bonus, if you don't mind waiting for the site to log (it's now late enough that the site is readable again if you're patient), here's all his groovy advertising links. Afaict, a random sampling mostly match against WHOIS registrations. But I'm lazy, so don't take my word for it.

http://members.truepath.com/objective/ads/

(Anybody want to research the CUDI site for hoax-or-notahoax? I'm tired and going to sleep)

Just to test who all is bothering to pay attention to all my slaving hard work and effort I've put into this damn article, I'll throw in one more punchline from google:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22OBJECTIVE% 3A+Christian+Ministries%22

Click on the THIRD link on the page (served through "turn.to"). The cache entry doesn't work, but the current entry comes in LOUD and CLEAR (if I need to be more obvious: "don't follow those links if you're at work").

Cheers, folks!

mig

(That's "Before Slashdotted")

I sent this at 6am this morning after having fun with their site all night long. It's not often that I beat slashdot to the punch by 15 hours, but here's the email I sent them, verbatim:

Subject: Dear Dr Paley and Mr Carlson, Thank You.

Michael Gerard wrote:

So I was reading my blissful little heart through the internet this evening, and I came across this article:

http://members.truepath.com/objective/propaganda.h tml

Interesting little read, altho I'd agree with PBS's assertion that Darwin's claims were as welcome to The Church of his day (the Episcopalian C of E, of course) and brought him as much joy and happiness as Galileo's claims did for him back in "renaissance times" (under the rigid hand of Roman Catholicism). That discussion is probably beyond the scope of this email, however, but do try to keep those two people and what happened to them in mind as we keep thinking forward through my point, please?

Wandering through the rest of the article, however, past the suggestion that people should not support public television, really made me start to giggle.

Hah! Wonderful Silliness! Oh yah. Apple is in league with the devil. Hee hee hee.

The "flying leaps of assumption" by which any word, deed, trademark, or othersuch entity vaguely resembling Something of Naughtiness to be prima facia evidence of wrongdoing is simply taken to such an extreme in this article that I couldn't help but laugh and laugh (and laugh and laugh). Especially when you start talking about things like BSD under the covers. Makes me wonder what OS your websites run on. Looks like apache on linux (with all of the "daemons" that run equally well under linux as they do on BSD... as they have on every unix system since the dawn of modern computing.... oops!). And, well, yes, there's enough stupid bits and pieces like that through the whole article that I just couldn't keep from rolling and rolling on the floor with laughter. My proverbial ass was quite fallen off and nowhere to be found.

What a wonderful work of satire!

I realized I must, of course, be reading a parody site! A site not unlike the myriad other parody sites which pretend to have Christians writing about how "Star Wars," "Valentine's Day," "Pepsi Cola," or "The Entire Fall Primetime Lineup On UPN" are such "obvious" anti-Christian works of He Who Must Not Be Named and must therefore be shunned! I smiled at the concept, and passed the link along to many of my friends. Looking at the navbar on that page, I saw another link that said "Landover Baptist Shutdown." Ah, of course, those silly boys over at Landover Baptist! This seemed to obviously be some of their handiwork, so I clicked that link and arrived at this page:

http://members.truepath.com/objective/index.html

Now, let's stop right there, for right about then is when I must confess I became rather confused.

Having a parody site recursively bash itself is, uhm, well, to be honest, more obtuse humor than even I usually engage in. And I'm one to always like the weirder side of the funny pages.

Maybe.... maybe that wasn't a parody site? Maybe people actually do get on the internet and type stuff like that? And honestly mean it? (So, by the way, if it really is a parody site, I think you guys are a little too subtle... but, anyhow, operating under the assumption that that is not the case...)

So. :)

Let me smile nicely at you and give you a free legal opinion from someone who doesn't know anything about how the law in this country actually works, but who thinks they are in tune with the way it's supposed to:

Landover Baptist has a stronger legal defense against you than you do against Apple Computer. Why? Because The Law of The Land respects the rights of people seeking to entertain via satire far more than that of people who seek to damage a business's revenue stream by engaging in insulting innuendo about having gone over to The Dark Side Of The Force. The very horrible nasty secular laws that protect Landover Baptist from your righteous crusade against its "blasphemous atrocities" are the same "god-given rights" that you would hope would protect you from Apple Computer after doing something reporting that they must "obviously" be in league with the Powers of Darkness in making a product both "anti-Christian and cultish."

I'd agree with the latter, of course... cultish in the extreme! Have you ever seen some of those weird freaky Mac users who walk down the street with shaved heads wearing peach bedsheets wrapped around them, beating on drums and tambourines, chanting "MOOF! MOOF! MOOF!" everywhere? Frightening! Mothers should cover the eyes of small children, I wholeheartedly agree, but that doesn't mean they're automatically going to spend their Eternity in the Pit, does it?

Since you seem to be acceptingly fond of quotes from places other than the Bible (especially from our Founding Fathers, and the Constitution), let me give you an additional one you might want to consider as important as the other ones that assist your faith in the fact that our nation was founded in the Name of Christ:
"I cannot agree with your words, but I will defend to the death your right to say them."

Too bad I can't remember who actually said it. But, actually, the fact I can't makes me chuckle. I think it's very funny I can't remember who said he'd defend my right to say whatever the hell I please. That's just my warped sense of humor (which only proves yet again I'm an obvious danger to myself and others, I recognize that, but it doesn't make my argument any less valid -- just more incoherent).

Now, if Apple decided to sue the living snot out of you for "Libel and Defamation," how would you defend yourselves? If they decided to play hardball, would you hire a lawyer or would you assume that God would intervene? Ah. Well, of course, I'm sure you have plenty of lawyer friends who would cut you a deal to stop that horrible evil Apple Computer Corporation from censoring the important message that you have to get out to the public at large about how everyone's everlasting salvation is in grave (a pun! hah! see, I do have a sense of humor!) peril from the evil brainwashing secularistic vibrations that originated from the drug addled brains of a couple of hippies in the 70's and now resides in Cupertino, CA.

Yes, indeedy! We must get a campaign going immediately to inform the public that "Think Differently" is just another noisy gravel-slide on the vast slippery slope into The Abyss.

Of course.

If you decided to play hardball with the "Landover Baptist" site, would you hire a lawyer, or would you just assume that now that you've seen the site and that you're praying about it, God will just take care of the rest for you? Ah. Well, of course, I'm sure you have plenty of lawyer friends who would cut you a deal to help you censor that horrible evil Landover Baptist site (do your lawyers give 10% off on instant conversions, too? do I get to mutter under my breath about "moneychangers in the temple" for that slap in the face at anyone who actually has TRUE faith? no... the email is getting long enough without going into that).

Luckily, so far, the America I've been blessed to have been born and grow up in and learn so much about has done a fairly decent job over the last few centuries at protecting both "the many" from "the few" AND "the few" from "the many."

Tell me, is the same thing true for the America you live in?

Or maybe I just find it moderately, hmmm... stupid? typical? ironic? Well, none of those are quite the appropriate word to describe the manner in which your own article is so easily mistaken for the others' parodies which you would point at and call "hatespeech." ``Sanctimonious`` gets even closer still, but still isn't quite on the nose. What word do you think would go best there?

I'm just curious, of course.

I'm even more curious to see if anyone will bother to answer this letter, or if I'll just be immediately dismissed as something worthy of nothing more than your pity because I will, obviously, Burn in the Lake of Fire because I Think Differently than You. (I don't personally believe I Think Differently than Him, but that's not the point of this email, now, is it? I mean, you weren't attacking me, personally, were you? yet?)

Speaking of personal attacks, let's get back to what happened to Darwin and Galileo... which entity do you think is most likely to be rejected and villified by the "entire" (read: "entrenchedly secular") population at large, this upcoming century: Apple Computer, Landover Baptist, or You?

Who shall be the one to be accused of engaging in writing "such that they look arrogant, hateful, or just idiotic?" Chris Harper? Dr Paley? Both? Neither? (My personal money is on ``C`` -- but you should already have guessed that, otherwise I wouldn't be writing this email. Right?)

Think carefully (certainly not differently!), and make sure you've legibly written your response before the "Jeopardy Theme" completes.

Or, maybe, the whole problem with "parody sites" is that the people being parodied are too often incapable of realizing the underlying reason for which satirists find them to be such a juicy target for their irreverent wit. Nobody ever thinks it's funny when the people are actually laughing at them. That might be it. I'll have to include that question in my prayers before bed this evening. Yes. God promised me he'd give me 10% off any answers asked if I was willing to convert on the spot.....

(Okay, I lied. I can't help it. I must talk about this! YOU'RE THE ONES who got upset at the Landover site for, in your own words: "offering a free cellphone as a reward for those who become saved - demeaning the value of Salvation to that of some material trinket." -- What would your good Timothy Allmon think about such marketing tactics? Think, people! You're really alot making the rest of us just look bad in general as human beings. http://members.truepath.com/objective/members.html )

By the way, to make a "small" correction, and just to beat this lovely dead horse into a long crimson smear across the asphault, any good sysadmin should (and, hopefully, would, but some are anti-Christian bigots, I think) inform you that `chmod 666` is just about the stupidest and most unsecure thing you could do to random files on your filesystem, especially executable binaries. Well, almost. You could delete them. That would be worse. Probably. Most of the time.

You're far better off using `chmod 755` if an executable, `chmod 644` if not, and `chmod 600` or `chmod 700` if you have secrets to keep from the other users on your box. Obviously, you're not going to be able to keep secrets from root or from God, so limiting all the other users' access isn't quite as important for a Christian admin as for an anti-Christian (by definition) BOFH.

If some unsuspecting user, Christian or anti- (since they who are not with us must be against us, and your computer doesn't really know or care), were to do a chmod 666 like you suggest (and while `chmod 777` exists as a command, keep your numerological lusts in control and just trust me that it is even worse than `chmod 666`), they're very likely going to hurt their operating system. And then at least one of them will hire a lawyer and probably sue you, too.

Unfortunately, some things about America still do Suck. Right? How'd you like to be McDonalds paying someone $3,000,000 because they weren't smart enough to protect a stupid woman from herself? In America, you always have to ask yourself: "in what way could my actions cause someone to hurt themselves in a manner which leaves me open to lawsuit?" Does that make you think twice before randomly posting commands that you don't understand onto the internet? Or would you argue in court that whatever happened to a user attempting to do such things was really just the Inevitable Will Of God for using such a Beastly OS?

But even while the computer illiterate population mobilize to sue you, the computer savvy reader, Christian or anti-, is just going to think... well... let's hypothesize that, say, 50% of the pieces of information presented as "evidence" are as ludicrously and hilariously wrong as your little "fun with chmod" paragraph. If that _were_ true, even if you were a devout Christian computer user (and I know how patronizingly "rare" you believe such people must be), you'd think the person writing that nonsense, well, you'd probably believe that they Suck. Maybe you'd think you were just reading another parody site because you wouldn't want to have to believe that there were actually people out there who did stuff like that. Maybe it's all just, you know, ``psychological.``

It is left as an exercise for the reader to go back and actually and objectively research the origin, status, context, and any other necessary bits of needful information to be able to properly determine if the validity of your article about Apple computer remains above the 50% "does not Suck" margin.

Luckily, in America, all of us irrespective of race, color, or creed have the ability to know for an undying fact deep in our immortal (or otherwise) souls that WE do not, at all, personally Suck, even without having to prove it when odd gentlemen send us long and confusing emails asking us to do so! It is, of course, only everyone else who is not us or like enough to us that are responsible for how much everything does Suck. Yes, of course, that must be it.

Isn't it neat how human nature works? There's enough of that kind of nonsense to make each man woman and child on earth act like an egotistical hypocrticial moron 5 or 6 times a day and still provide enough energy left over to comprise a viable alternative to Fossil Fuels (if only the damn Oil Cartels wouldn't spend so much time and money on their vast conspiracy to discredit a perfectly valid scientific theory that would so wonderfully benefit all of mankind! Quo vadis, baby! Quo vadis!).

Shameful, don't you think?

Yours, cheerfully, nigh gleefully,
mig
Favourite Passage From Scripture -- Leviticus 16:2
"And The Lord said unto Moses: ``Tell Aaron to quit coming into my room
whenever he feels like it, or I'll kill him. He might see me!``"

ps: That was fun! Write another article making fun of, ah, excuse me, I mean righteously exposing to the world the subltly seductive evil anti-Christian ways of the WWF, or maybe the Kellogg's Cereal characters, next!

Or how about how I show that Pascal's Wager is an horrifically bad evangelical tool because 1) believing in God should be for the sake of God, not "just in case I might be wrong" (ie: if you were told pascal's wager, said "yes, that makes sense," and were then shot in the head, you'd still not be Saved, and you'd still go Into the Pit) and 2) because Pascal's Wager is equally valid for any other religion as well, so your evangelical target could possibly be captured back by any further evangelical contacts from, say, Islam or Baha'i.... well, then again, Baha'i wouldn't be likely to use Pascal's Wager as an evangelical tool... but I think you see my point, anyhow, right? I could write it up better than that, of course, if you'd want me to.

Hey, like, wanna make this like a weekly thing or something, guys?

Guys?

Hello?

Well, if you're still with me, feel free to forward this to anyone you think might also need or want or hate to read it. :)

What do you think will happen if they look my picture up on the team page?

(That's "Before Slashdotted")

I sent this at 6am this morning after having fun with their site all night long. It's not often that I beat slashdot to the punch by 15 hours, but here's the email I sent them, verbatim:

Subject: Dear Dr Paley and Mr Carlson, Thank You.

Michael Gerard wrote:

So I was reading my blissful little heart through the internet this evening, and I came across this article:

http://members.truepath.com/objective/propaganda.h tml

Interesting little read, altho I'd agree with PBS's assertion that Darwin's claims were as welcome to The Church of his day (the Episcopalian C of E, of course) and brought him as much joy and happiness as Galileo's claims did for him back in "renaissance times" (under the rigid hand of Roman Catholicism). That discussion is probably beyond the scope of this email, however, but do try to keep those two people and what happened to them in mind as we keep thinking forward through my point, please?

Wandering through the rest of the article, however, past the suggestion that people should not support public television, really made me start to giggle.

Hah! Wonderful Silliness! Oh yah. Apple is in league with the devil. Hee hee hee.

The "flying leaps of assumption" by which any word, deed, trademark, or othersuch entity vaguely resembling Something of Naughtiness to be prima facia evidence of wrongdoing is simply taken to such an extreme in this article that I couldn't help but laugh and laugh (and laugh and laugh). Especially when you start talking about things like BSD under the covers. Makes me wonder what OS your websites run on. Looks like apache on linux (with all of the "daemons" that run equally well under linux as they do on BSD... as they have on every unix system since the dawn of modern computing.... oops!). And, well, yes, there's enough stupid bits and pieces like that through the whole article that I just couldn't keep from rolling and rolling on the floor with laughter. My proverbial ass was quite fallen off and nowhere to be found.

What a wonderful work of satire!

I realized I must, of course, be reading a parody site! A site not unlike the myriad other parody sites which pretend to have Christians writing about how "Star Wars," "Valentine's Day," "Pepsi Cola," or "The Entire Fall Primetime Lineup On UPN" are such "obvious" anti-Christian works of He Who Must Not Be Named and must therefore be shunned! I smiled at the concept, and passed the link along to many of my friends. Looking at the navbar on that page, I saw another link that said "Landover Baptist Shutdown." Ah, of course, those silly boys over at Landover Baptist! This seemed to obviously be some of their handiwork, so I clicked that link and arrived at this page:

http://members.truepath.com/objective/index.html

Now, let's stop right there, for right about then is when I must confess I became rather confused.

Having a parody site recursively bash itself is, uhm, well, to be honest, more obtuse humor than even I usually engage in. And I'm one to always like the weirder side of the funny pages.

Maybe.... maybe that wasn't a parody site? Maybe people actually do get on the internet and type stuff like that? And honestly mean it? (So, by the way, if it really is a parody site, I think you guys are a little too subtle... but, anyhow, operating under the assumption that that is not the case...)

So. :)

Let me smile nicely at you and give you a free legal opinion from someone who doesn't know anything about how the law in this country actually works, but who thinks they are in tune with the way it's supposed to:

Landover Baptist has a stronger legal defense against you than you do against Apple Computer. Why? Because The Law of The Land respects the rights of people seeking to entertain via satire far more than that of people who seek to damage a business's revenue stream by engaging in insulting innuendo about having gone over to The Dark Side Of The Force. The very horrible nasty secular laws that protect Landover Baptist from your righteous crusade against its "blasphemous atrocities" are the same "god-given rights" that you would hope would protect you from Apple Computer after doing something reporting that they must "obviously" be in league with the Powers of Darkness in making a product both "anti-Christian and cultish."

I'd agree with the latter, of course... cultish in the extreme! Have you ever seen some of those weird freaky Mac users who walk down the street with shaved heads wearing peach bedsheets wrapped around them, beating on drums and tambourines, chanting "MOOF! MOOF! MOOF!" everywhere? Frightening! Mothers should cover the eyes of small children, I wholeheartedly agree, but that doesn't mean they're automatically going to spend their Eternity in the Pit, does it?

Since you seem to be acceptingly fond of quotes from places other than the Bible (especially from our Founding Fathers, and the Constitution), let me give you an additional one you might want to consider as important as the other ones that assist your faith in the fact that our nation was founded in the Name of Christ:
"I cannot agree with your words, but I will defend to the death your right to say them."

Too bad I can't remember who actually said it. But, actually, the fact I can't makes me chuckle. I think it's very funny I can't remember who said he'd defend my right to say whatever the hell I please. That's just my warped sense of humor (which only proves yet again I'm an obvious danger to myself and others, I recognize that, but it doesn't make my argument any less valid -- just more incoherent).

Now, if Apple decided to sue the living snot out of you for "Libel and Defamation," how would you defend yourselves? If they decided to play hardball, would you hire a lawyer or would you assume that God would intervene? Ah. Well, of course, I'm sure you have plenty of lawyer friends who would cut you a deal to stop that horrible evil Apple Computer Corporation from censoring the important message that you have to get out to the public at large about how everyone's everlasting salvation is in grave (a pun! hah! see, I do have a sense of humor!) peril from the evil brainwashing secularistic vibrations that originated from the drug addled brains of a couple of hippies in the 70's and now resides in Cupertino, CA.

Yes, indeedy! We must get a campaign going immediately to inform the public that "Think Differently" is just another noisy gravel-slide on the vast slippery slope into The Abyss.

Of course.

If you decided to play hardball with the "Landover Baptist" site, would you hire a lawyer, or would you just assume that now that you've seen the site and that you're praying about it, God will just take care of the rest for you? Ah. Well, of course, I'm sure you have plenty of lawyer friends who would cut you a deal to help you censor that horrible evil Landover Baptist site (do your lawyers give 10% off on instant conversions, too? do I get to mutter under my breath about "moneychangers in the temple" for that slap in the face at anyone who actually has TRUE faith? no... the email is getting long enough without going into that).

Luckily, so far, the America I've been blessed to have been born and grow up in and learn so much about has done a fairly decent job over the last few centuries at protecting both "the many" from "the few" AND "the few" from "the many."

Tell me, is the same thing true for the America you live in?

Or maybe I just find it moderately, hmmm... stupid? typical? ironic? Well, none of those are quite the appropriate word to describe the manner in which your own article is so easily mistaken for the others' parodies which you would point at and call "hatespeech." ``Sanctimonious`` gets even closer still, but still isn't quite on the nose. What word do you think would go best there?

I'm just curious, of course.

I'm even more curious to see if anyone will bother to answer this letter, or if I'll just be immediately dismissed as something worthy of nothing more than your pity because I will, obviously, Burn in the Lake of Fire because I Think Differently than You. (I don't personally believe I Think Differently than Him, but that's not the point of this email, now, is it? I mean, you weren't attacking me, personally, were you? yet?)

Speaking of personal attacks, let's get back to what happened to Darwin and Galileo... which entity do you think is most likely to be rejected and villified by the "entire" (read: "entrenchedly secular") population at large, this upcoming century: Apple Computer, Landover Baptist, or You?

Who shall be the one to be accused of engaging in writing "such that they look arrogant, hateful, or just idiotic?" Chris Harper? Dr Paley? Both? Neither? (My personal money is on ``C`` -- but you should already have guessed that, otherwise I wouldn't be writing this email. Right?)

Think carefully (certainly not differently!), and make sure you've legibly written your response before the "Jeopardy Theme" completes.

Or, maybe, the whole problem with "parody sites" is that the people being parodied are too often incapable of realizing the underlying reason for which satirists find them to be such a juicy target for their irreverent wit. Nobody ever thinks it's funny when the people are actually laughing at them. That might be it. I'll have to include that question in my prayers before bed this evening. Yes. God promised me he'd give me 10% off any answers asked if I was willing to convert on the spot.....

(Okay, I lied. I can't help it. I must talk about this! YOU'RE THE ONES who got upset at the Landover site for, in your own words: "offering a free cellphone as a reward for those who become saved - demeaning the value of Salvation to that of some material trinket." -- What would your good Timothy Allmon think about such marketing tactics? Think, people! You're really alot making the rest of us just look bad in general as human beings. http://members.truepath.com/objective/members.html )

By the way, to make a "small" correction, and just to beat this lovely dead horse into a long crimson smear across the asphault, any good sysadmin should (and, hopefully, would, but some are anti-Christian bigots, I think) inform you that `chmod 666` is just about the stupidest and most unsecure thing you could do to random files on your filesystem, especially executable binaries. Well, almost. You could delete them. That would be worse. Probably. Most of the time.

You're far better off using `chmod 755` if an executable, `chmod 644` if not, and `chmod 600` or `chmod 700` if you have secrets to keep from the other users on your box. Obviously, you're not going to be able to keep secrets from root or from God, so limiting all the other users' access isn't quite as important for a Christian admin as for an anti-Christian (by definition) BOFH.

If some unsuspecting user, Christian or anti- (since they who are not with us must be against us, and your computer doesn't really know or care), were to do a chmod 666 like you suggest (and while `chmod 777` exists as a command, keep your numerological lusts in control and just trust me that it is even worse than `chmod 666`), they're very likely going to hurt their operating system. And then at least one of them will hire a lawyer and probably sue you, too.

Unfortunately, some things about America still do Suck. Right? How'd you like to be McDonalds paying someone $3,000,000 because they weren't smart enough to protect a stupid woman from herself? In America, you always have to ask yourself: "in what way could my actions cause someone to hurt themselves in a manner which leaves me open to lawsuit?" Does that make you think twice before randomly posting commands that you don't understand onto the internet? Or would you argue in court that whatever happened to a user attempting to do such things was really just the Inevitable Will Of God for using such a Beastly OS?

But even while the computer illiterate population mobilize to sue you, the computer savvy reader, Christian or anti-, is just going to think... well... let's hypothesize that, say, 50% of the pieces of information presented as "evidence" are as ludicrously and hilariously wrong as your little "fun with chmod" paragraph. If that _were_ true, even if you were a devout Christian computer user (and I know how patronizingly "rare" you believe such people must be), you'd think the person writing that nonsense, well, you'd probably believe that they Suck. Maybe you'd think you were just reading another parody site because you wouldn't want to have to believe that there were actually people out there who did stuff like that. Maybe it's all just, you know, ``psychological.``

It is left as an exercise for the reader to go back and actually and objectively research the origin, status, context, and any other necessary bits of needful information to be able to properly determine if the validity of your article about Apple computer remains above the 50% "does not Suck" margin.

Luckily, in America, all of us irrespective of race, color, or creed have the ability to know for an undying fact deep in our immortal (or otherwise) souls that WE do not, at all, personally Suck, even without having to prove it when odd gentlemen send us long and confusing emails asking us to do so! It is, of course, only everyone else who is not us or like enough to us that are responsible for how much everything does Suck. Yes, of course, that must be it.

Isn't it neat how human nature works? There's enough of that kind of nonsense to make each man woman and child on earth act like an egotistical hypocrticial moron 5 or 6 times a day and still provide enough energy left over to comprise a viable alternative to Fossil Fuels (if only the damn Oil Cartels wouldn't spend so much time and money on their vast conspiracy to discredit a perfectly valid scientific theory that would so wonderfully benefit all of mankind! Quo vadis, baby! Quo vadis!).

Shameful, don't you think?

Yours, cheerfully, nigh gleefully,
mig
Favourite Passage From Scripture -- Leviticus 16:2
"And The Lord said unto Moses: ``Tell Aaron to quit coming into my room
whenever he feels like it, or I'll kill him. He might see me!``"

ps: That was fun! Write another article making fun of, ah, excuse me, I mean righteously exposing to the world the subltly seductive evil anti-Christian ways of the WWF, or maybe the Kellogg's Cereal characters, next!

Or how about how I show that Pascal's Wager is an horrifically bad evangelical tool because 1) believing in God should be for the sake of God, not "just in case I might be wrong" (ie: if you were told pascal's wager, said "yes, that makes sense," and were then shot in the head, you'd still not be Saved, and you'd still go Into the Pit) and 2) because Pascal's Wager is equally valid for any other religion as well, so your evangelical target could possibly be captured back by any further evangelical contacts from, say, Islam or Baha'i.... well, then again, Baha'i wouldn't be likely to use Pascal's Wager as an evangelical tool... but I think you see my point, anyhow, right? I could write it up better than that, of course, if you'd want me to.

Hey, like, wanna make this like a weekly thing or something, guys?

Guys?

Hello?

Well, if you're still with me, feel free to forward this to anyone you think might also need or want or hate to read it. :)

What do you think will happen if they look my picture up on the team page?

(That's "Before Slashdotted")

I sent this at 6am this morning after having fun with their site all night long. It's not often that I beat slashdot to the punch by 15 hours, but here's the email I sent them, verbatim:

Subject: Dear Dr Paley and Mr Carlson, Thank You.

Michael Gerard wrote:

So I was reading my blissful little heart through the internet this evening, and I came across this article:

http://members.truepath.com/objective/propaganda.h tml

Interesting little read, altho I'd agree with PBS's assertion that Darwin's claims were as welcome to The Church of his day (the Episcopalian C of E, of course) and brought him as much joy and happiness as Galileo's claims did for him back in "renaissance times" (under the rigid hand of Roman Catholicism). That discussion is probably beyond the scope of this email, however, but do try to keep those two people and what happened to them in mind as we keep thinking forward through my point, please?

Wandering through the rest of the article, however, past the suggestion that people should not support public television, really made me start to giggle.

Hah! Wonderful Silliness! Oh yah. Apple is in league with the devil. Hee hee hee.

The "flying leaps of assumption" by which any word, deed, trademark, or othersuch entity vaguely resembling Something of Naughtiness to be prima facia evidence of wrongdoing is simply taken to such an extreme in this article that I couldn't help but laugh and laugh (and laugh and laugh). Especially when you start talking about things like BSD under the covers. Makes me wonder what OS your websites run on. Looks like apache on linux (with all of the "daemons" that run equally well under linux as they do on BSD... as they have on every unix system since the dawn of modern computing.... oops!). And, well, yes, there's enough stupid bits and pieces like that through the whole article that I just couldn't keep from rolling and rolling on the floor with laughter. My proverbial ass was quite fallen off and nowhere to be found.

What a wonderful work of satire!

I realized I must, of course, be reading a parody site! A site not unlike the myriad other parody sites which pretend to have Christians writing about how "Star Wars," "Valentine's Day," "Pepsi Cola," or "The Entire Fall Primetime Lineup On UPN" are such "obvious" anti-Christian works of He Who Must Not Be Named and must therefore be shunned! I smiled at the concept, and passed the link along to many of my friends. Looking at the navbar on that page, I saw another link that said "Landover Baptist Shutdown." Ah, of course, those silly boys over at Landover Baptist! This seemed to obviously be some of their handiwork, so I clicked that link and arrived at this page:

http://members.truepath.com/objective/index.html

Now, let's stop right there, for right about then is when I must confess I became rather confused.

Having a parody site recursively bash itself is, uhm, well, to be honest, more obtuse humor than even I usually engage in. And I'm one to always like the weirder side of the funny pages.

Maybe.... maybe that wasn't a parody site? Maybe people actually do get on the internet and type stuff like that? And honestly mean it? (So, by the way, if it really is a parody site, I think you guys are a little too subtle... but, anyhow, operating under the assumption that that is not the case...)

So. :)

Let me smile nicely at you and give you a free legal opinion from someone who doesn't know anything about how the law in this country actually works, but who thinks they are in tune with the way it's supposed to:

Landover Baptist has a stronger legal defense against you than you do against Apple Computer. Why? Because The Law of The Land respects the rights of people seeking to entertain via satire far more than that of people who seek to damage a business's revenue stream by engaging in insulting innuendo about having gone over to The Dark Side Of The Force. The very horrible nasty secular laws that protect Landover Baptist from your righteous crusade against its "blasphemous atrocities" are the same "god-given rights" that you would hope would protect you from Apple Computer after doing something reporting that they must "obviously" be in league with the Powers of Darkness in making a product both "anti-Christian and cultish."

I'd agree with the latter, of course... cultish in the extreme! Have you ever seen some of those weird freaky Mac users who walk down the street with shaved heads wearing peach bedsheets wrapped around them, beating on drums and tambourines, chanting "MOOF! MOOF! MOOF!" everywhere? Frightening! Mothers should cover the eyes of small children, I wholeheartedly agree, but that doesn't mean they're automatically going to spend their Eternity in the Pit, does it?

Since you seem to be acceptingly fond of quotes from places other than the Bible (especially from our Founding Fathers, and the Constitution), let me give you an additional one you might want to consider as important as the other ones that assist your faith in the fact that our nation was founded in the Name of Christ:
"I cannot agree with your words, but I will defend to the death your right to say them."

Too bad I can't remember who actually said it. But, actually, the fact I can't makes me chuckle. I think it's very funny I can't remember who said he'd defend my right to say whatever the hell I please. That's just my warped sense of humor (which only proves yet again I'm an obvious danger to myself and others, I recognize that, but it doesn't make my argument any less valid -- just more incoherent).

Now, if Apple decided to sue the living snot out of you for "Libel and Defamation," how would you defend yourselves? If they decided to play hardball, would you hire a lawyer or would you assume that God would intervene? Ah. Well, of course, I'm sure you have plenty of lawyer friends who would cut you a deal to stop that horrible evil Apple Computer Corporation from censoring the important message that you have to get out to the public at large about how everyone's everlasting salvation is in grave (a pun! hah! see, I do have a sense of humor!) peril from the evil brainwashing secularistic vibrations that originated from the drug addled brains of a couple of hippies in the 70's and now resides in Cupertino, CA.

Yes, indeedy! We must get a campaign going immediately to inform the public that "Think Differently" is just another noisy gravel-slide on the vast slippery slope into The Abyss.

Of course.

If you decided to play hardball with the "Landover Baptist" site, would you hire a lawyer, or would you just assume that now that you've seen the site and that you're praying about it, God will just take care of the rest for you? Ah. Well, of course, I'm sure you have plenty of lawyer friends who would cut you a deal to help you censor that horrible evil Landover Baptist site (do your lawyers give 10% off on instant conversions, too? do I get to mutter under my breath about "moneychangers in the temple" for that slap in the face at anyone who actually has TRUE faith? no... the email is getting long enough without going into that).

Luckily, so far, the America I've been blessed to have been born and grow up in and learn so much about has done a fairly decent job over the last few centuries at protecting both "the many" from "the few" AND "the few" from "the many."

Tell me, is the same thing true for the America you live in?

Or maybe I just find it moderately, hmmm... stupid? typical? ironic? Well, none of those are quite the appropriate word to describe the manner in which your own article is so easily mistaken for the others' parodies which you would point at and call "hatespeech." ``Sanctimonious`` gets even closer still, but still isn't quite on the nose. What word do you think would go best there?

I'm just curious, of course.

I'm even more curious to see if anyone will bother to answer this letter, or if I'll just be immediately dismissed as something worthy of nothing more than your pity because I will, obviously, Burn in the Lake of Fire because I Think Differently than You. (I don't personally believe I Think Differently than Him, but that's not the point of this email, now, is it? I mean, you weren't attacking me, personally, were you? yet?)

Speaking of personal attacks, let's get back to what happened to Darwin and Galileo... which entity do you think is most likely to be rejected and villified by the "entire" (read: "entrenchedly secular") population at large, this upcoming century: Apple Computer, Landover Baptist, or You?

Who shall be the one to be accused of engaging in writing "such that they look arrogant, hateful, or just idiotic?" Chris Harper? Dr Paley? Both? Neither? (My personal money is on ``C`` -- but you should already have guessed that, otherwise I wouldn't be writing this email. Right?)

Think carefully (certainly not differently!), and make sure you've legibly written your response before the "Jeopardy Theme" completes.

Or, maybe, the whole problem with "parody sites" is that the people being parodied are too often incapable of realizing the underlying reason for which satirists find them to be such a juicy target for their irreverent wit. Nobody ever thinks it's funny when the people are actually laughing at them. That might be it. I'll have to include that question in my prayers before bed this evening. Yes. God promised me he'd give me 10% off any answers asked if I was willing to convert on the spot.....

(Okay, I lied. I can't help it. I must talk about this! YOU'RE THE ONES who got upset at the Landover site for, in your own words: "offering a free cellphone as a reward for those who become saved - demeaning the value of Salvation to that of some material trinket." -- What would your good Timothy Allmon think about such marketing tactics? Think, people! You're really alot making the rest of us just look bad in general as human beings. http://members.truepath.com/objective/members.html )

By the way, to make a "small" correction, and just to beat this lovely dead horse into a long crimson smear across the asphault, any good sysadmin should (and, hopefully, would, but some are anti-Christian bigots, I think) inform you that `chmod 666` is just about the stupidest and most unsecure thing you could do to random files on your filesystem, especially executable binaries. Well, almost. You could delete them. That would be worse. Probably. Most of the time.

You're far better off using `chmod 755` if an executable, `chmod 644` if not, and `chmod 600` or `chmod 700` if you have secrets to keep from the other users on your box. Obviously, you're not going to be able to keep secrets from root or from God, so limiting all the other users' access isn't quite as important for a Christian admin as for an anti-Christian (by definition) BOFH.

If some unsuspecting user, Christian or anti- (since they who are not with us must be against us, and your computer doesn't really know or care), were to do a chmod 666 like you suggest (and while `chmod 777` exists as a command, keep your numerological lusts in control and just trust me that it is even worse than `chmod 666`), they're very likely going to hurt their operating system. And then at least one of them will hire a lawyer and probably sue you, too.

Unfortunately, some things about America still do Suck. Right? How'd you like to be McDonalds paying someone $3,000,000 because they weren't smart enough to protect a stupid woman from herself? In America, you always have to ask yourself: "in what way could my actions cause someone to hurt themselves in a manner which leaves me open to lawsuit?" Does that make you think twice before randomly posting commands that you don't understand onto the internet? Or would you argue in court that whatever happened to a user attempting to do such things was really just the Inevitable Will Of God for using such a Beastly OS?

But even while the computer illiterate population mobilize to sue you, the computer savvy reader, Christian or anti-, is just going to think... well... let's hypothesize that, say, 50% of the pieces of information presented as "evidence" are as ludicrously and hilariously wrong as your little "fun with chmod" paragraph. If that _were_ true, even if you were a devout Christian computer user (and I know how patronizingly "rare" you believe such people must be), you'd think the person writing that nonsense, well, you'd probably believe that they Suck. Maybe you'd think you were just reading another parody site because you wouldn't want to have to believe that there were actually people out there who did stuff like that. Maybe it's all just, you know, ``psychological.``

It is left as an exercise for the reader to go back and actually and objectively research the origin, status, context, and any other necessary bits of needful information to be able to properly determine if the validity of your article about Apple computer remains above the 50% "does not Suck" margin.

Luckily, in America, all of us irrespective of race, color, or creed have the ability to know for an undying fact deep in our immortal (or otherwise) souls that WE do not, at all, personally Suck, even without having to prove it when odd gentlemen send us long and confusing emails asking us to do so! It is, of course, only everyone else who is not us or like enough to us that are responsible for how much everything does Suck. Yes, of course, that must be it.

Isn't it neat how human nature works? There's enough of that kind of nonsense to make each man woman and child on earth act like an egotistical hypocrticial moron 5 or 6 times a day and still provide enough energy left over to comprise a viable alternative to Fossil Fuels (if only the damn Oil Cartels wouldn't spend so much time and money on their vast conspiracy to discredit a perfectly valid scientific theory that would so wonderfully benefit all of mankind! Quo vadis, baby! Quo vadis!).

Shameful, don't you think?

Yours, cheerfully, nigh gleefully,
mig
Favourite Passage From Scripture -- Leviticus 16:2
"And The Lord said unto Moses: ``Tell Aaron to quit coming into my room
whenever he feels like it, or I'll kill him. He might see me!``"

ps: That was fun! Write another article making fun of, ah, excuse me, I mean righteously exposing to the world the subltly seductive evil anti-Christian ways of the WWF, or maybe the Kellogg's Cereal characters, next!

Or how about how I show that Pascal's Wager is an horrifically bad evangelical tool because 1) believing in God should be for the sake of God, not "just in case I might be wrong" (ie: if you were told pascal's wager, said "yes, that makes sense," and were then shot in the head, you'd still not be Saved, and you'd still go Into the Pit) and 2) because Pascal's Wager is equally valid for any other religion as well, so your evangelical target could possibly be captured back by any further evangelical contacts from, say, Islam or Baha'i.... well, then again, Baha'i wouldn't be likely to use Pascal's Wager as an evangelical tool... but I think you see my point, anyhow, right? I could write it up better than that, of course, if you'd want me to.

Hey, like, wanna make this like a weekly thing or something, guys?

Guys?

Hello?

Well, if you're still with me, feel free to forward this to anyone you think might also need or want or hate to read it. :)

What do you think will happen if they look my picture up on the team page?

This is the page that got me.

Not even part of their site. Man, do I feel like a sucker now!

jimcarlson@ilovejesus.net -- real domain name of real, free, web-based email (address unverified)

amiller@minister.com -- site not up, whois shows owned by afternic, a domain reseller

timtax777@msn.com -- address unverified, could be fake

tfranklin@antioccult.org -- site doesn't show, whois shows no owner, Register domain here

diamondjack@nacgt.org -- register nagct.org here

cobm16273@aol.com -- see MSN address above

holby4life@christianemail.net -- site not up, whois says registered to Strang Communications; this "member's" homepage is hosted for free

drdinosaur@covenant.org -- Richard Paley does not appear on the covenant.org site staff-contact page

zounds@groovy.nu -- domain forwards to a Danish site

I could go on, but I think you see the point. A hoax, but an elaborate one.

The kids section.

The section on what to do if you discover that there is a grumpy old atheist in the neighborhood is hilarious. Also the little cartoon about how dinosaurs and humankind used to walk the earth together because the earth is only 10,000 years old is beyond compare. Evolution as a tool of Satan! I love it! Almost as funny as good ole Elron's theory about intergalactic genocide 75,000,000 years ago being the cause of all suffering for humans.

Here's the Best Page of the site. It's the Kid's Page. :-)

What should you do if you find an atheist?

Atheists such as crotchety old Mr. Gruff think they've got it all figured out...
...but then why are they always so sad?

If you find an atheist in your neighborhood, TELL A PARENT OR PASTOR RIGHT AWAY!

You may be moved to try and witness to these poor lost souls yourself, however AVOID TALKING TO THEM! Atheists are often very grumpy and bitter and will lash out at children or they may even try to trick you into neglecting God's Word.

Very advanced witnessing techniques are needed for these grouches. Let the adults handle them.

The TruePath host is gonna be some stiffed what with all the Slashdot, MeFi, Fark, ARS, and Memepool hits... Atheist geeks destroy Christianity!

I have long suspected that Steve Jobs is in fact the Devil! You guys where all worried about Bill Gates, but he's pretty pathetic compared to Steve.

You want more proof ...

The Devil is supposed to be good at tempting you right? But Windows isn't tempting. Take a look at a PC running Windows? It's not tempting, it's just an ugly beige box with a boring UI. You look at the damn thing and are instantly bored.

But, look at an iMac or better yet a G4 Tower with 21" Studio Display and don't just want to lick the buttons, you want to make love to the damn thing, you want to sacrifice small animals before it and commit unholy acts on it!!! Chr*st, even Micro$oft software looks sexy on it! And have you seen the iPod? Don't let me get started on what I want to do with the iPod ...

-------------

Actually, I just wish that the server wasn't slashdotted so I could check out the link to BibleMan Action Figures at the bottom of the page ...

Objective Landover Baptist Shutdown aims to get religious parody (?) site Landover Baptist shut down, removed from the internet, basically because they disagree with their message... very little to no legal ground to stand on. They're just trying to use tactics like contacting the hosting ISP and talking to WIPO to reach their goals. They apparently don't even pretend to grasp the first amendment.

...according to this article:

Evolutionism Propaganda

Did you know that Apple's Darwin is based on Darwinism and therefore Anti-Christian? Read that article. Hah!

If this proves correct, it would date the discovery at more than 5,000 years old.

Actually I thought the sea level rose about 120 meters at the end of the last ice age (starting about 20,000 years ago)

There are some interesting graphics here: One, Two, Three

If this proves correct, it would date the discovery at more than 5,000 years old.

Actually I thought the sea level rose about 120 meters at the end of the last ice age (starting about 20,000 years ago)

There are some interesting graphics here: One, Two, Three

If this proves correct, it would date the discovery at more than 5,000 years old.

Actually I thought the sea level rose about 120 meters at the end of the last ice age (starting about 20,000 years ago)

There are some interesting graphics here: One, Two, Three

"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." (Revelation 13:16--18)

I run a small non-profit project for at-risk kids in a slum area in Rio de Janeiro state. We have a small Novell 3.11 network (legally licensed, even though the server does think we're in 1901) and running on a variety of ancient, often rebuilt hardware, ranging from 386-SX-16s to a 486-DX-120. The reason for such low-end hardware is very simple: money (or rather the lack of it).

I have been unable to find a Linux version with a GUI that runs on such low end boxes. Windows 3.1 runs on some, I have OS/2 2.1 on a 386 and Windows 98 on the 486-DX. I'm also using FreeGEM and homewritten VB/DOS software on most machines.

Does anybody know of a low-end Linux distribution (that will ideally install without needing a CD drive) with some sort of GUI and some useful application software that could be used for teaching purposes on such ancient hardware?

Maybe Linux couldn't be installed on some of the existing hardware in some Mexican schools for the reasons?

Comments anyone?

"the so-called "pro-life" [highly ironic since people have been killed in the "pro-life" battle] movement wants to impose their will on all others. pro-choice does not. "

FYI, Pro-Choicers Are not Innocent in the Violence Issue

Insane Abortionist

Dr. Bruce Steir, Abortionist, Charged With Murder

before you continue basing your opinion in the misconception that the pro-choice side is any less violent to grown-up people (as they are already are encouraging the killing of the unborn from 2 weeks to 9 months).

We here at Anarchists for Life took a stand against violence when we adopted this as part of our faq that "We do not support violence inside or outside of abortion clinics. We do support peaceful protest." We are hardly alone on the issue

Pat Goltz's Pro-life and Feminist Writings

Leftout: A Haven for Progressive (Liberal) Pro-Lifers

Pro-Woman, Pro-Life: Stop Abortion

What A Wonderful World

"A Life Is..."

Serena & Semira's Home

Check Your Stereotypes At the Door

neon goddess page

Idle Hands Productions

MaeFlowers

Straight Edge Power!

Christian Morality

Tree of Life Pro-life Page

Human Life is Sacred

Vox Crying

Laura's Homepage

Respect Life Ministry

Rennaissance Suffragettes (Pro-Life Feminism)

Star Angel's Pro-Life Page

Lutherans for Life

DazedHippie's Causes

Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League

RightGrrl: Conservative Pro-Life Women

Life Links

Linkie's Place

Sweet Pain's Causes

An American Patriot's Page of Thanks

Diogenes's Friends

Anarchists for Life

(( apprehension ))

Versailles Artists for Life

Matt Wallace: A Pro-Life/Anti-Violence Secular Humanist Atheist

BroPeace's Page: Shalom!

Carol's Pro-Life Page

Mallory's Owner's Page

Jim Sieffert's Page

Military Spouse Club

Rebecca's Pro-Life Page

Reality Check-Canada

Rochester Area Right To Life Committee (Rochester, NY)

Joel's Journey

Indiana University Students for Life

Consistent Life Ethics

Electric Cheetahland

Central Truths

Linda's Lair

David Horne's Gay Pro-life Christian Homepage

Roy and Joanna's Beliefs

In Susan B. Anthony's Footsteps: Pro-Woman, Pro-Life! Webring

The New Abolitionists (or "Funny, I Don't Feel Like A Conservative!")

STAAR: Standing Together Against Abortion Rights (Canada)

Do Babies Have a Choice?

Weird Politik: Because Politics Can be Very Strange Sometimes

Elizabeth's Place

Sehlat's LifeLinks

Sleepless in Atlanta

Bill Samuel's Pro-Life Links

Pro-Life Activities in Maryland / Washington DC

Daweena's Political Page

Glitched

Doubet Family Page

I question the veracity of the above comment. It sounds like a testimonial, and the author's home page link is to a church home page. Plus there is the comment about prefering chaplains to guidance counselers. All together, it seems to forward the agenda characterized by these cartoons.

If Amphigory really did experience the so-called "hellmouth", I apologize, but please remember that religious intolerance was a pretty big part of it for most of us. I would consider being forced to see a chaplain much more insulting than any sort of geek profiling test.