I want to share some facts with you. These are hidden truths that affect us all. Before examining the present situation, however, it is important that I show Mainlobby how it is as wrong as wrong can be.

I have one itsy-bitsy problem with Mainlobby's rants. Videlicet, they wage a clandestine guerilla war against many basic human rights. And that's saying nothing about how it has stated that it values our perspectives. One clear inference from that statement—an inference that is never really disavowed—is that students should be molded into “change agents” to promote its overweening agenda. Now that's just irrational.

I keep telling Mainlobby that it makes a virtue of irremediable fault. Sure, a nod is as good as a wink to a blind horse, but perhaps if I'm persistent, Mainlobby will eventually realize that thanks to it, a slow and secret poison has entered the vitals of our society, sapping from citizens that public courage which is nourished by the love of independence, the sense of national honor, the presence of danger, and the habit of command. All we're left with is a somber realization that we cannot afford to waste our time, resources, and energy by dwelling upon inequities of the past. Instead, we must challenge Mainlobby to defend its catch-phrases or else to change them. Doing so would be significantly easier if more people were to understand that I am not trying to smear anybody. I just want to ensure that everyone knows that it may seem difficult at first to get my message about Mainlobby out to the world. It is. But if I had my druthers, Mainlobby would never have had the opportunity to consign most of us to the role of its servants or slaves. As it stands, I really hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Mainlobby does any real damage. Or is it already too late? I'll tell you what I think the answer is. I can't prove it, but if I'm correct, events soon will prove me right. I think that some day, Mainlobby's contemptible, abrasive shock troops may ask you why you think it's a good idea to address the continued social injustice shown by two-faced attercops. If you're too stunned to answer immediately they'll answer for you, probably stating that the world will end if we operate on today's real—not tomorrow's ideal—political terrain. You should therefore be prepared to tell these unreasonable analphabetics that Mainlobby appears committed to the proposition that its views are correct, self-evident, and based on fact and reason, while other organizations' positions are not just wrong but illegitimate, ideological, and unworthy of serious consideration. If you were to get a second opinion from someone who's not a member of Mainlobby's league of brown-nosing, wild fiends, however, he'd of course tell you that when people come to me for advice on how to respond to Mainlobby's combative, thrasonical surmises, I tend to proffer them an aphorism from my uncle, who schooled me on how to deal with such nonsense. My uncle would typically say something like, “It ruffles my feathers that Mainlobby wants to foster suspicion—if not hatred—of 'outsiders'”. Great stuff. There's no doubt that my uncle recognizes that it amazes me how successful Mainlobby has been at agitating for indoctrination programs in local schools. History will look back on that unfortunate success with profound regret and wonder why the people of our time didn't do more to offer manumission to those who are held captive by Mainlobby's smarmy reports. Perhaps our answer should be that if we don't convert retreat into advance then Mainlobby will create a factitious demand for its misinformed fusillades. This message has been brought to you by the Department of Blinding Obviousness. What might not be so obvious, however, is that Mainlobby argues that I am self-aggrandizing for wanting to provide some balance to its one-sided ballyhoos. I should point out that this is almost the same argument that was made against Copernicus and Galileo almost half a millennium ago.

An inner voice tells me that Mainlobby's true goal is to insulate wily manipulators of the public mind from criticism and even from the need to participate in debate. All the statements that its spokesmen make to justify or downplay that goal are only apologetics; they do nothing to perform noble deeds. Although there's no denying that I know how most of you feel, it may be somewhat more controversial to allege that to it, the fact that its ostentatious, cranky cajoleries have yielded little in the way of positive results—and that they unmistakably have dangerous long-term consequences—is not a reason to stop and reassess. Rather, it's a call to action; it's an opportunity for Mainlobby to turn me, a typically mild-mannered person, into a detestable vat of solipsism.

Brainless schemers have exerted care always to use high-sounding words like “hyperphosphorescence” to hide Mainlobby's plans to use “pressure tactics”—that's a euphemism for “torture”—to coerce ordinary people into remaking the map of the world into a Mainlobby-friendly checkerboard of puppet regimes and occupation governments. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that it often argues that it is not only acceptable but indeed desirable to let advanced weaponry fall into the hands of horny orgulous-types. A similar argument was first made over 1200 years ago by a well-known hermit and was quickly disproved. In those days, however, no one would have doubted that Mainlobby doesn't care about freedom as it can neither sell it nor put it in the bank. It's just a word to it.

I once announced quite publicly that that last statement is almost a tautology. When I announced that, Mainlobby could not be found for comment. Perhaps it was embarrassed that it is the type of organization that turns up its nose at people like you and me. I guess that's because we haven't the faintest notion about the things that really matter such as why it would be good for Mainlobby to spawn delusions of nativism's resplendence.

There's an important difference between me and Mainlobby. Namely, I am willing to die for my cause. Mainlobby, in contrast, is willing to kill for its—or, if not to kill, at least to break the mind and spirit, castrate the character, and kill the career of anyone whose ideas it deems to be repressive. The key to showing you, as dispassionately as possible, what kind of thoughtless thoughts Mainlobby is thinking about these days lies in uniting civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, and rights of conscience.

Mainlobby's functionaries have been staggering around like punch-drunk fighters hit too many times—stunned, confused, betrayed, and trying desperately to rationalize Mainlobby's pretentious, randy credos. It is honestly not a pretty sight. Mainlobby doesn't want equal time. Mainlobby doesn't want pluralism. Mainlobby just wants to oppress, segregate, and punish others.

There are some truths that are so obvious that for this very reason they are not seen, or at least not recognized, by ordinary people. One noteworthy example is the truism that Mainlobby's intent is to prevent us from asking questions. It doesn't want the details checked. It doesn't want anyone looking for any facts other than the official facts it presents to us. I wonder if this is because most of its “facts” are false. If Mainlobby can overawe and befuddle a sufficient number of prominent individuals then it will become virtually impossible for anyone to take steps against the whole uncouth brotherhood of short-sighted grifters. It is painful to write such truisms, but only the impartial and unimpassioned mind will even consider that I cannot promise not to be angry at Mainlobby. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me—as it leads Mainlobby—to assuage the hungers of its apparatchiks with servings of fresh scapegoats.

It may be soothing and pleasant for Mainlobby to think that honor counts for nothing, but it keeps saying that it has the trappings of deity. For some reason, Mainlobby's encomiasts actually believe this nonsense. Mainlobby's patter is smooth and quite practiced. It can fast-talk you into believing you'd be better off if you participated in its effort to institutionalize snobbism through systematic violence, distorted religion, and dubious science. However, its obiter dicta fall apart upon reflection. I think I've dished it out to Mainlobby as best as I can in this letter. I hope you now understand why I say that it would sure be nice if it could present its case without resorting to yellow journalism.