Mail Bombs

On or about December 3, 1994, defendant  THEODORE JOHN KACZYNSKI, a/k/a "FC,"  knowingly and willfully did deposit for mailing and delivery and knowingly and willfully did cause to be delivered by mail at North Caldwell, in the District of New Jersey, and elsewhere, according to the direction thereon, nonmailable matter, to wit: a device and composition which could ignite and explode, with the intent to kill and injure another, and which did result in the death of Thomas J. Mosser.

From:  Equity Private <equityprivate@hushmail.com>
To:  aaa bbb <nlki1@hotmail.com>
Date:  Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:20:38 -0500
This message is not encrypted, and is not digitally signed by .
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:24:11 -0500 aaa bbb <nlki1@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I hope you read this and feel stupid:
>
>
>http://www.slate.com/id/2186786/pagenum/2/

Ah, look, my reader mail has brought me another angry, amateur,
"unbiased" armchair scientist and expert on the subject of electro-
intensive metal fabrication and manufacture.

Actually, I read it and feel smart.  I know most of the players
mentioned in the article, and I know how competent (incompetent)
they are and I know the flaws in their argument.

>Also,a brief editorial comment: please work on your literary
>voice.  Look up "verbose" in the dictionary.  Understand it has a
>negative connotation.  Remember , more and bigger words do not
>mean more and bigger intelligence.
>
>Aside from that, I enjoy your blog.

"More and bigger intelligence"?  Now that is a classic place for a
grammar flub.

If you are threatened by vocabulary and wit (and prone to rely on
Slate.com for your technical education) it is probably better if
you just find another blog to read- or at least resist the
masturbatory temptation to ejaculate your sticky commentary all
over my screen.

I suspect the world will eventually teach you that the slagging
rumble your email's tone- a sing-song, schoolyard whine- conveys is
something not entirely flattering to you.

Other than that I enjoyed your email.  Thanks for writing!

-ep

From: Equity Private <equityprivate@hushmail.com>
To: aaa bbb <nlki1@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:22:58 -0500
This message is not encrypted, and is not digitally signed by .

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:51:56 -0500 aaa bbb <nlki1@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>My what a witty and grammatically correct riposte - I'm genuinely
>hurt.

Excellent!

>However, you still seized on some  pseudo-scientific
>garbage (you ridicule Slate?), then deemed it sancrosanct fact
>because it fits your  self-image as some sagacious contrarion -

"Contrarian" ?

>somewhat reminiscent of Beckett's fictonal presentation to the
>Modern Language Society of Dublin, no?

You meant "fictional" I suppose.  And "sacrosanct," I think.

No, it was you who seized on pseudo-scientific garbage.  Slate is
pseudo-whateveritprints actually.

Toyota, for instance, in claiming an energy consumption number for
the manufacture of their hybrids, does not include the extraction
and refinement of their raw materials.  Aluminum and Magnesium in
particular are highly energy intensive to produce and form into
prefabricated forms (where Toyota takes possession of them).  All
the energy spend in those processes is before Toyota gets them, and
Toyota doesn't bother to count that, or count the post-manufacture
costs of, e.g., disposal, recycling, etc.  Convenient for Toyota,
this ignores as much as 85% of the energy cost of their "miracle"
product.

But, since you rely on the likes of Slate to make me "feel stupid,"
you wouldn't know any of that.  This is because you are an arm-
chair reactionary, much more married to your own preconceived
notions of "reality" than an exerciser of critical thought or
skeptical inquiry.  Typical armchair leftist, I am afraid.

>And it doesn't matter that you deftly spin the phrase "electro-
>intensive metal fabrication and manufacture", and that you "know
>most of the players" and dismiss them as incompetent.  You still
>look like a fool.

To who, your ilk?  I take that as a compliment of the highest order.

Exercise for the student: What percentage of total electricity use
in the United States is consumed in the manufacture of aluminum?

Exercise #2 for the student: What is the "kilowatt per pound" cost
of aluminum manufacture?

You never should have written me with your preachy (but content
free) taunt without having these figures at your disposal- but
then, none of your ilk will let facts get in the way of your moral
self-aggrandizement.

>Now to my point about verbosity.  I am not threatened in the
>slightest by grammer

You mean "grammar"?  I can see you don't have enough of a
relationship with the concept to be threatened by your abysmal
proficiency in it.

>wit, or big words (btw the grammer flub was intentional genius).

Whatever helps you sleep at night.  (Your three others so far were
intentional too I suppose?)

>HOwever I've noticed you succumb to the
>common temptation to rely heavily on multi-syllabic words of latin

You mean "Latin" ?

[Drivel elided]

>also as an aside, its been my experience that intellectually
>arrogant people typically make crappy investors.

Gee, what do your returns look like?