Giant self-explanatory sentence
Antiscientific Antiamerican has been working for several decades to obliterate truth and logic and science and the universe.

Their latest editorial against truth and civilization sounds like a straightforward call for revolution and assassination, and it makes a deeply (or Deepstately) revealing connection at the end.

Americans don’t look kindly on bullies, people who try to suppress the truth, or people who try to intimidate scientists and the press. In the long run, this always backfires. The dustbin of history is full of people who have tried, and failed. You will too.

The next time you visit the CIA headquarters, I hope you will take a moment to notice their unofficial motto, etched in the walls of the lobby. It says, “And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." (John VIII-XXXII.)

In other words, CIA is the gold standard for truth, and CIA is the leader of the coup.

Self-explanatory sentence. Tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about science. Science is omnicide. Science destroys all.

Well, fuckheads, if you don't like the government, you should STOP TAKING GOVERNMENT MONEY. Science could conceivably regain some tiny picofragment of honesty if it ran without government grants. But you're not going to do that. You're going to continue competing for Federal grants even while you plot the assassination of the Chief Executive.

= = = = =

Stupid but irresistible sidenote: Antiscientific Antiamerican cites 'John VIII-XXXII'. I think they must mean John 8:32, since subtracting a larger number from a smaller number is not defined in Roman arithmetic. Aside from that, I'm pretty sure they DON'T mean to imply that 'the truth' = 'Jesus is the son of God', which is what the real Bible verse says. Antiscientific American was running a jihad against all gods except Gaia LONG before they specifically commanded the assassination of a President.

= = = = =

Even stupider sidenote: Since they obviously don't agree with the Bible verse, maybe they're quoting Popes John the 8th through John the 32nd? No, the highest John was 23. Are they mistakenly doing the Roman subtraction to get Pope John the Negative 24th? Or by the commutative property Antipope John 24? Close but no anticigar. There was an illegitimate John 23 in the 1400s, replaced by the supposedly legitimate John 23 in the 1900s, but no John 24 on either side of zero.

Labels: Askedanswered

  ¶ 2:11 AM