Just before you get stuck in, I want you all to know that this was written some time ago and that any ideas or themes expressed in the work are completely fictional.  I apoligise for any confusion caused by things that have happened since I wrote this that might result in it appearing to be based on real events.  Enjoy...

There is one thing that really irritates me when I want to use word, and that is when it doesn't work.  Is it irrational to expect a computer program to function when you want to use it? 

Yeah, probably.

Sometimes I feel that appliances are out to get me.  (Here I am including my computer as an appliance.)  I'll be laying in bed at 6:30am, and my alarm clock will go off.  (Yes, I set it, but the fact that I can't un-set it is the fault of the object's want to cause me irritation.)  Then I will turn on the radio.  It will go perfectly well until the song I want to hear comes on, then will loose all of its signal.  The toaster is never plugged in when I go to use it (and I don't realise until I check back later when the bread should be toast).  There is never water in the kettle when I want to make a drink (and I don't realise until it starts spitting).  Light globes become suicidal around me, and the TV never has reception when I want to tape something.  Geez; my mp3 player just ran out of batteries in the middle of a song. 

At the climax of it all I want to use my computer, and word doesn't work.

So, life sucks.

Not a new tip, but not all that much is when you are locked in a house with this many rooms.  Still, it's a bit weird, (sort of ironic) that everything comes down to the idea of life 'sucking'.  I mean, at the off, sucking is what keeps life live. 

(I'm talking lollipops, for our viewers that have just tuned in)

That's a good thing.  Naturally, life, and live things do suck.  It's only after you've got a radio and a mobile phone that 'sucking' becomes a bad thing.

We've come to a stage where we have to accept that mobile phones are a bad thing.  I'm not too sure about the moral greatness of radios, but I'll get onto that later.  Phones were invented...in A year, (not necessarily a single year, rather some year, or series of years in the great history of years) and have improved communications greatly since that year.  Just think, if we had phones in the days of King Arthur he could have just phoned around to find where his magical cup was.  I mean, if we had the handy service of today, he could just enquire at his local store and THEY could call around their other outlets to see what types of goblets were available.  The whole Lancelot/Guinivere thing would become a non-issue.

Don't worry, I've even lost me there.

Well, despite being incredibly handy, mobile phones, (that's what we were talking about) cause cancer. 

(I'd like to take this moment to inform readers that, subject to further testing, it may be found that reading this article can cause cancer.  I take no responsibility for this if it be the case.)

They, (mobile phones) also create and uber-race, and a means for discrimination on this front.  While some find having mobile phones incredibly 'hip' and 'cool', others find it 'shit-comercialised-yuppyism'.  For this reason, the first group discriminate against the latter, and vice-versa.  Eventually, the struggle becomes a war, one group is accused of having invisible weapons of mass-destruction, and we find ourselves in the middle of a world war.

What is that?

That, my comrades, is a thinly veiled reference to said 'war on Iraq'.

Mobile phones suck.  But radios aren't any better.  Well, they are sort of; as of yet it hasn't been PROVEN that they give you cancer.  (That statement is subject to confirmation by someone who actually knows whether or not radios, or any part thereof, have been proven to be carcinogenic.)  I'm sure they are probably worse for you than a mobile if you ate them.  Regardless, they are not much better.

Radios speak total shit with absolute conviction.  By that, I mean that people that are broadcast on radios make up complete crap, then tell it like it is complete fact.  At base, the radio is just like the Internet, only the choice of crap that you ingest is slightly more limited, and the crap chosen is shouted at you.  That can't be cool.  (The author would like to raise the point that she is a geek, and therefore has no claim to coolness of any level, and THEREfore reserves the right to still listen to the radio... if the urge ever claims her.)

There are some exceptions to this rule, some cases where the radio is not shit.  Those cases are when the radio plays good music, (for example The Dandy Warhols) or when the shit expressed is amusing.  This is, (amazingly enough) arguable.  There are some people, (freaks) that believe The 'Hols are not the way to go, those that believe the radio is only good when it plays shit music, (Miss Spears or alternatively, Nelly) and the shit expressed is completely

scankadelic. 

Once again, we find the creation of another uber-race, and another means for discrimination on this front.  While some find FM104.7 incredibly 'hip' and 'cool', others find it 'shit-comercialised-yuppyism'.  For this reason, the first group discriminate against the latter, and vice-versa.  Eventually, the struggle becomes a war, one group is accused of having invisible weapons of mass-destruction, and we find ourselves in the middle of a world war.

What is that?

That, my comrades, is ANOTHER thinly veiled reference to said 'war on Iraq'.

Both phones and radios serve a single purpose, and that is to allow communication between people over distances. Their sole purpose is to allow people to speak with other people without having to go to the trouble of socialising.  They are anti-social.  They’re sociopathic.  They are creating a people that hate other people. 

Eventually, these people, (who hate other people) will band together with other people who hate other people, (COULD happen) with the intent to destroy those people whom they hate (other ones).  At this stage, they don't even need to find that one group to have large quantities of oil, or accuse them of having invisible weapons of mass-destruction before we find ourselves in the middle of a world war.

What is that?

That, my comrades, is YET ANOTHER thinly veiled reference to said 'war on Iraq'.

I never got that.  It's not really a 'war ON Iraq'.  Iraq itself wasn't what they went to war with.  It's meant to be a 'war on Iraqi Dictator, Saddam Hussein, and his evil regime, and heck; all evilness in the world'.  I guess the name could come from the idea that the war TOOK PLACE on Iraq.  Then again, hot results from occupation, Iraq is soon to be renamed 'McDonalds world' so that idea would be outdated. 

Maybe it was just that they ran out of room on the form.  That's probably it.  Naturally, when you go to war with another country, you fill out a form.  There is a handy-dandy section on said form wherein you can state what exactly you want war on (eg. Iraq, Communism, Casey Chambers).  From extensive internet research, it has been found that the version of the form supplied with informational book series by a popular Texas author entitled 'Making War on Other Countries for Drongo Cowboys' is formatted like those forms you have to fill out when travelling internationally on a visa, (as apposed to when you travel on a plane) where you are given those stupid half-boxes to put all your details in.  They must have run out of room.  Maybe they couldn't spell 'Iraq'.  They probably spelt it 'Earraahke'. 

Think about it.

They managed to get 'terrorism' through; therefore the box must have had nine letters.  So what they really meant was 'war on Iraqi Dictator Saddam Huissein, and his evil regime, and heck; all evilness in the world' but they couldn't fit it in, as they wanted to spell it 'war on EARRAAHKEy Dictator Sahdarm Hughsayne, and heck; all evilness in the world'.  Shite for them, hey.

Though, I'd like to think that the most powerful, (I'd like to call it 'empire', and I will) empire in the world isn't that stupid on something so important.  Maybe they were on the phone, and they were dictating what they wanted written to a person.  The person couldn't spell that well.  No, because I'd like to think that the most powerful empire in the world wouldn't hire someone that stupid for something so important.  The guy on the other end must have been on a mobile, either that, or over a radio-device.  That's it.  He had really bad signal, and couldn't hear properly.  He MISHEARD what the Pres said, but didn't want to argue with him, because he's the man, and you don't argue with the man.

So it can be seen that both mobile phones and radios serve chauvinistic dominating nations, (or interpretations thereof) with excuses to go to war.  (It really CAN be seen but only if you look real close, squint your eyes, and move your head from side-to-side.  ...On second thoughts, even then it's pretty hard.)

Despite this apparent clarity, the question remains:

What does this have to do with word?

As we know, the biggest selling point of word, (other than it WORKING) is that it is a program in which you may write words (come on guys, it's not rocket science!)  Words are used as a form of communication.  The same kind of communication used by mobile phones and radios, no less.  That is, especially if those using the phone or radio are reading from a script.  What we put down on a page, (as I will call it, rather old-wiverly of me, considering that I am talking in reference to a computer screen) is formed in the same part of our mind as that which we speak.  That part of the mind is called the 'brain'.  The brain is a very useful organ that the human body just couldn't do without.  It helps with organisation, maintenance, and general running of the body, as well as a few other minor tasks. 

Therefore, writing, (typing, either/or) and talking are pretty much the same thing, and THEREfore, word, mobile phones and radios are ALSO the same thing, and T H E R E F O R E, word is another means which drives countries into war. 

The next natural step is the crux, so strap yourselves in.

As such a war-friendly program, word must come from a war-friendly company.  That company is 'Microsoft'.  If Microsoft is so keen on war and destruction, then they must be terrorists.

** THIS IS A WARNING TO ALL CITIZENS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES OF AUSTRALIA **

Every time you buy 'Microsoft' branded products, you are supporting terrorism.