Tuesday, July 04, 2006

The Battle of One-Nipple Hill

Happy Birthday America. I love you like a brother... or maybe like a crazy uncle who drinks too much at dinner and offends the waitress--except that when the bill comes, he tips more than 20%, and would be the first to his trunk if their car battery died and needed a jump.

Anyway, I give you a post that makes light of history and war, for seemingly no other purpose than to use the word "nipple" as many times as possible. But then isn't that one of my unalienable Rights--to say "nipple" a lot if I want to?

Cheer up World. We will all live, on average, so very much longer than we used to. We forget that sometimes, don't we? We shove our nipples in the mud and forget to look to the stars.

From the archives - 2/19/06:

*******************************

The Battle of One-Nipple Hill

So it turns out Civil War historians tend to get extremely upset if you insist that Confederate General, Robert E. Lee, only had one nipple. They splutter and fuss and call you an ignorant purveyor of ballyhoory. And then eventually try to karate-chop you in the throat if you refuse to recant.

Latigo Flint knows this to be true, because the other day he met a Civil War historian, and after some small talk, Latigo Flint happened to mention that he'd heard that Robert E. Lee only had one nipple.

"Why, that's preposterous." The Civil War historian exclaimed. "Where did you hear such a thing?"

"Oh, here and there, various reliable sources." I replied. "In fact, wasn't Robert E. Lee known to have been fond of saying: 'Give me ten stout and sturdy men, each with but one nipple, and then an enemy could not be assembled that I could not defeat.'"

"No!" The Civil War historian shrieked. "Robert E. Lee never said any such thing!"
"Hmm." I replied. "Perhaps it was Ulysses S. Grant."
"Absolutely not!" The historian howled, his face turning an alarming shade of red.
"It must have been George Meade then." I noted. "And that's probably how he defeated Lee at Gettysburg, right? He had more one-nippled troops than Lee had."

The historian started hopping around in an angry little circle, spitting and punching the air.
"Why you ignorant purveyor of ballyhoory!!!" He spluttered. "Nipples, their presence or lack thereof, never even remotely factored into any conceivable facet of the Civil War conflict, and one would have to be mad to suggest otherwise!!!"

I rubbed my chin thoughtfully, then pointed at him with a contemplative finger.
"But Sir, is it not true that a man with just one nipple would have one less nipple to lose? And surely a general as wise as Robert E. Lee would have recognized this basic truth--especially since he himself possessed just one nipple."

It was almost too much for the historian to bear. His eyes rolled back in his head and he started to hyperventilate. I placed a comforting hand on his shoulder.
"How many nipples do you have Sir?"

"I have two of course!" He wept, and involuntarily stroked them as if to confirm.
"Ah." I replied. "So then you're obviously not related to Robert E. Lee."

And that's when he tried to karate-chop me in the throat. I sidestepped and backed several paces away. As he turned and prepared to lunge at me again, I spread the flaps of my buckskin vest, revealing a muscular chest short exactly one nipple.

And with an audible twang, his mind split in half, and he ran screaming into the night.



(The worst part is I don't know why I did it, and I've regretted it ever since.

As I removed the flesh-colored tape, it ripped painfully at my tender skin.
"Penance." I thought to myself with a nod. "I deserved that nipple tear--for historians take their work so seriously, it's almost unfair to fuck with 'em.")


"The outcome of any battle, be it land, sea or air, must at some point hinge on the actions of a few, brave, nippleless men."
-General George S. Patton Jr.


"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. (Except for the ones born with only one nipple, because they don't have as many nipples as the rest of us.) But that even the one-nippled are still endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of prosthetic nipples. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends (chopping off nipples at birth for instance) it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government--one that won't chop nipples off, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their nipple-safety and happiness."
-Thomas Jefferson

5 Comments:

At 4:28 AM, Blogger Ultra Toast Mosha God said...

Historians don't like talking about anything related to sex in their work.

They have a strange, almost reflexive phobia of the subject.

Sex takes up valuable mind space that could otherwise be filled with trivia about french royalist cake recipe's and repeat firing M16's.

The symptoms you describe are common, and appear without any prior warning should you discuss Adolf Hitlers enormous appendage, or the foul propagandist cinereels that he and Goebbels made.

 
At 8:07 AM, Blogger Sam, Problem-Child-Bride said...

A nipple is to a man as a make-up artist is to a Hell's Angel. Impotently, pinkly trying to decorate; struggling to get through the hair. But well-meant. I do believe the male nipple to be very well-meaning. But they are like performance-artrists in the trenches of war. Completely useless, although oddly amusing. And that is their tragedy.

Happy Independence Day, Latigo.

 
At 6:22 PM, Blogger Trevor Record said...

I do not have to tell you who won the war. You know, the artillery did. Well, that and men with only a single nipple." - Gen George S Patton

 
At 12:12 AM, Blogger Latigo Flint said...

Yours are words of truth and wisdom Ultra Toast Mosha God. Verily so. And most historians refuse to admit that repeat-firing M16 would frequently overheat and wouldn't fire again until the soldier asked his foxhole neighbor to lick his barrel cool again.

You speak of the male nipple so eloquently, Sam Problem Child Bride, that I almost wish you were speaking over mine.
(And to you Kid.)

Perfection Trevor.
"If I win I can't be stopped. If I lose I shall be dead. And if I have but one nipple, then I have one less nipple to lose."
-General George S. Patton, Jr.

 
At 12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

METOZ will be able to create A NEW KIND OF CLEAN ENERGY.
METOZ IN THEORY IS THE PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE.
My idea is very difficult for understanding. It is not difficult for engineer - mechanic, who knows very good the Pascal’s law and even-arm lever.

THE CLEAN ENERGY
The entire world is looking for a source of clean energy. I have discovered a certain paradox basing on which a machine called METOZ can be built which by harnessing the gravitation of our EARTH can produce clean energy.
The energy producing process is demonstrated in:
http://www.nets.pl/~metozor/paradox.html
and can be very easily confirmed by an experiment.
I am also in possession of a set of calculations which prove that the METOZ machine:
1/ does not consume water / 39 A5-pictures /;
2/ does not consume compressed air / 39 A5-pictures /;
3/ produces energy to the outside = 4 839 kGm during a „swing cycle” /39 A5-pictures /;
/ this is a „weight cycle” = the centre of gravity of the water in the METOZ machine sinks ( downward movement ) /
4/ energy is produced / released to the outside = 44 600 kGm during the „straightening cycle” / 39 A5-pictures /.
/ this is a “pressure cycle” = the water mass centre of gravity inside the METOZ machine travels upwards (upward movement) /
Features: 1/; 2/; 3/; 4/, of the machine owing to appropriate dimensions of individual elements of the lever mechanism.
The METOZ has an even-arm lever of a 1.72 m length. The centre of gravity of the lever lies beneath the lever suspension point. The METOZ is equipped with two cylinders of a 1.6 m diameter each. Piston sidewalls do not contact directly with cylinder walls. The lever swing changes between 0 and 25 dgr
Figures ( 3 x 13 x 4 = 156 ) present temporary, consecutive action situations at intervals of . The middle figure presents the machine and the side figures the position of the left and right cylinder and the mathematical description of these situations.
In the past I have made two models, which confirmed the legitimacy of my theoretical assumptions concerning the METOZ machine. I have got photographs.
I am looking for a person who would be interested in my invention. I can offer ample information. I look forward to hearing from you.

http://www.nets.pl/~metozor/three_levers.html

13 - 03 -2005 Gdynia, Polska Zygmunt Orłowski
P.S. The term “gravitational paradox” use in this description relates to the mathematical and physical description of the action of the METOZ-machine.
THE EARTH GRAVITATION CAN BE THE SOURCE OF CLEAN ENERGY

=============================================================

By
Orlowski Zygmunt
Poland 2005
index html
COMMENTS CONCERNING MACHINE “METOZ”
“METOZ” is able to realize the cycle “deflection” and the cycle “straighening.” Both cycles are in accordance with current physic’s laws. “METOZ” as machine can not work and hand over the energy because it would be inconsonant to the law of conservation of energy.
I propose to execute the following intelectual process:
we have found ourselves in the Europe of XVII century. We know the trigonometry in the scope of being occured for “METOZ.” We know what is the even-arm lever and moment of force too. Just appeears Mr. Baise Pascal / 1623–1662/ and he publishes his hydraulics law with adequated experiment. All thinkers are sure that this law is correct and quite real. This time someone invents machine “METOZ”. Now turn up the following questions:
1/ why the implementation of the cycle “deflection” is impossible?
2/ why the implementation of the cycle “straightening” is impossible?Both groups: opponents and followers of bulding “METOZ” live in XVII–th century and they not know that:
a/ the idea of an “energy” will be introduced into science scarlerly in mid. of XIX century,
b/ the law of conservation of the energy will be exist scarlerly after 1847 y.
QVESTION!!!
WHAT KIND OF RATIONALY ENTERELY / ARGUMENT/ CAN BE DREAMED UP THE OPPONENTS OF BUILDING THE MACHINE “METOZ’ IN XVII CENTURY.
==============================================================
Please open GOOgle and klick metozor and after : index of metozor At is site that explains technical details in easy to understand language. example : http://www.nets.pl/~metozor/for_greenpeace.html or
http://www.nets.pl/~metozor/energy_for_everybody.html
Everyone is able to build just the model of METOZ machine and test it. Please, have a look at http://www.nets.pl/~metozor/supplement.html Perhaps METOZ is some duplicating machine of a clean energy.
I am inventor and owner of Metoz machine invention. Everyone can take absolutely and legitimate the METOZ invention and build the Metoz machine. I can help only. I can not build METOZ. I am moneyless. Thank you for your time and interest.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home