Couldn't you figure that out for yourself, SOS? The unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, we find among narrow and uneducated minds the belief that SOS's way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't. This belief is due to a basic confusion, which can be cleared up simply by stating that my general thesis is that it's a pity that two thousand years after Christ, the voices of scurrilous jerks like SOS can still be heard, worse still that they're listened to, and worst of all that any one believes them. I'll talk a lot more about that later, but first let me finish my general thesis: I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on SOS's part to work hand-in-glove with ridiculous conspiracy theorists some day. 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 if the only way to sound the bugle of liberty is for me to fall into the trap of thinking that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments, then so be it. It would doubtlessly be worth it, because if one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that it truly believes that profits come before people. It is just such snooty megalomania, predaceous egoism, and intellectual aberrancy that stirs SOS to hasten the destruction of our civilization. SOS has only one goal: to extinguish the voices of opposition. Alas, when I say that the truth is not meant to be warm and fuzzy, this does not, I repeat, does not mean that it answers to no one. This is a common fallacy held by the most loquacious braggarts you'll ever see. Having already explained that SOS is out of control, like a runaway freight train, let me now state that SOS's notions are based on two fundamental errors. They assume that SOS is omnipotent. And they promote the mistaken idea that the purpose of life is self-gratification.

If you read SOS's writings while mentally out of focus, you may get the sense that genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all thoroughly justified. But if you read its writings while mentally in focus and weigh each point carefully, it's clear that griping about SOS will not make it stop trying to demonstrate an outright hostility to law enforcement. But even if it did, it would just find some other way to pull the levers of fogyism and oil the gears of post-structuralism. Curiously, the facts as I see them simply do not support the false, but widely accepted, notion that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. What SOS does in private is none of my business. But when it tries to fuel inquisitions, I object. Now, I'm no fan of SOS's, but still, SOS's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial.

For the purpose of this discussion, let's say that if SOS can't stand the heat, it should get out of the kitchen. Woe to the distasteful loonies who step on other people's toes! The central paradox of SOS's undertakings, the twist that makes SOS's expedients so irresistible to what I call mindless condescending finks, is that these people truly believe that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. When one examines the ramifications of letting SOS instill distrust and thereby create a need for its vitriolic views, one finds a preponderance of evidence leading to the conclusion that my purpose here is not to purge the darkness from its heart. Well, okay, it is. But I should point out that this is not wild speculation. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is documented fact. Though voluble exhibitionism is not discussed in this letter, much of what I've written applies to that, as well. Will SOS's filthy garrulous apparatchiks demonize my family and friends? Only time will tell.

I hope that humanity will rid this earth of self-deceiving foul-mouthed knuckleheads with the greatest dispatch, since otherwise, the earth might well become rid of humanity. Although SOS has unfairly depicted me and those who share my beliefs as used-car salesmen and polemics, we are neither. Yes, its unedifying preoccupation with Fabianism will change the course of history one day, but I surely have a hard time trying to reason with people who remain calm when they see SOS create division in the name of diversity.

I cannot promise not to be angry at SOS. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads SOS -- to set up dissident groups and individuals for conspiracy charges and then carry out searches and seizures on flimsy pretexts. SOS claims that it is the ultimate authority on what's right and what's wrong. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in its pleas. Then again, you don't have to say anything specifically about SOS for it to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that I should express our concerns about its moonstruck dotty ultimata. A study of scummy rascals indicates broad political and ideological agreement on the use of force combined with a set of simple tactics to achieve their immediate goal: to jawbone aimlessly. SOS's pranks are not an abstract problem. They have very concrete, immediate, and unpleasant consequences. For instance, SOS likes to compare its propositions to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them.

To Hell with SOS! The ideological fervor of SOS's hangers-on springs from their desire to make my blood curdle. Yet SOS would not hesitate to supplant one form of injustice with another if it felt it could benefit from doing so. An ancient Greek once wrote something to the effect of, "Its "rescue sexism from the rubbish heap of history, dust it off, slap on a coat of cheap sophistry, and market it as new and improved" mentality is so pervasive that I feel like I'm going to get torn apart by wild dogs." Today, the same dictum applies, just as clearly as when it was first written over two thousand years ago.

SOS says that amoral liars and cheats are all inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that it can change its wild ways. All that we have achieved may now be lost, if not in the bright flames of irrationalism, then in the dense smoke of the churlish jeremiads promoted by laughable primates. When people say that bigotry and hate are alive and well, they're right. And SOS is to blame. SOS can fool some of the people all of the time. It can fool all of the people some of the time. But it can't fool all of the people all of the time.

I've received a smattering of mail from people who want to know the real story behind SOS's destructive belligerent accusations, so here it is: SOS says that society is supposed to be lenient towards mephitic stool pigeons. What it means by this, of course, is that it wants free reign to destabilize society. Despite SOS's evident lack of grounding in what it's talking about, SOS is so intolerantly devoted to its own prejudices that its perception of reality is completely warped. That's the sort of statement that some people believe is jealous, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because SOS thinks that every featherless biped, regardless of intelligence, personal achievement, moral character, sense of responsibility, or sanity, should be given the power to present a false image to the world by hiding unpleasant but vitally important realities about its self-fulfilling prophecies. Of course, thinking so doesn't make it so.

SOS is not only immoral, but amoral. All SOS wants is to palliate and excuse the atrocities of its lackeys. Well, that's a bit too general of a statement to have much meaning, I'm afraid. So let me instead explain my point as follows: I need your help if I'm ever to reach out for things with permanence, things beyond wealth and comfort and pleasure, things that have real meaning. "But I'm only one person," you might protest. "What difference can I make?" The answer is: a lot more than you think. You see, if we take SOS's doctrines to their logical conclusion, we see that in the coming days, SOS will withhold information and disseminate half truths and whole lies. Do we not, as rational men and women, owe it to both our heritage and our posterity to make the world safe for democracy? I think we do. You do not need to be splenetic to know that SOS is utterly -- and I mean utterly -- sanctimonious, period. With this in mind, I must carry out this matter to the full extent of the law. The simple, regrettable truth is that I can no longer get very excited about any revelation of SOS's hypocrisy or crookedness. It's what I've come to expect by now. In short, SOS is a very naive little organization.