Magic, Transactional Culture, and Spells
nagasiva
hi Dane
Elizab...@gmail.com:
> ...what's out there in cyberspace for the
> magickal [practitioner]/esoteric student
there's a variety of magical trajectory,
and some of these include spellcraft. what
may seem like a simple matter of esoteric
connections may really be a positioning of
knowing the right people at the right time
and being proximate to their activities,
especially where esoteric cults such as
may have 'magickal practice' going on.
> and so I'm hoping to meet some folks who
> are experienced in such matters via
> newsgroups and such.
generally meeting through newsgroups and
email is not only possible but can be very
effective. posts such as this one will likely
bring people to you of like mind and of
variable position with respect to you who
happen by and read and/or discuss this.
you might also check out the variety of
other media online (the 'and such' part
of your post):
* -- e-mail groups such as Yahoogroups
http://groups.yahoo.com/
* -- web-boards such as may be found
via google.com (and to which you
seem to be referring below)
* -- internet-relay chatrooms, such
as may be found in systems such as
AOL and in IRC networks like EFNet,
Dalnet, and Undernet (particularly
channels such as #alchemy,
#divination, #tarot, #magick,
#occult, #thelema, and #witch
* -- ftp sites such as may, with some
old email group addresses, be found
through directory structures like the
MaGi -- http://www.luckymojo.com/magi
or Dmoz -- http://tinyurl.com/zb48q
> One thing I've been doing is looking at online
> services that either sell esoteric/spiritual
> products and/or magickal spellcasting services
> and such.... many of them appear ethically
> reprehensible at worst.
I'll watch for more of what you mean by this.
it would help if you were more explicit. people
have some strange notions of what is 'a problem'.
> I ran across the site Spellmaker.com and found
> that they not only have their online store but
> they also have a forum on Yahoo groups.
sensible.
> That intrigued me. ... I didn't find a lot
> of info on yahoo
their searching mechanism isn't conducive to
finding information, really.
> but there were some posts that came up here
> referring to Spellmaker & their voodoo
> magick and spell kits and whatnot.
strange. 'voodoo spellkits' are unlikely and
you may have found hoodoo spellkits either
masquerading or mistaken for voodoo, which
is a more integral system of religiomagic.
> ...Spam posts from Spellmaker(dot)com. ...
> "Control that person now!!!" "Get rid of
> that bitch!" and variations thereof. I
> found that more than a tad disturbing.
you must be from some more circumspect back-
ground: Christian, Wiccan or Hermetica such
that you were so easily disturbed simply by
reading this type of material.
> ...their online forum ...
> ...a litany of lost souls. I could not
> but help feeling like theirs is the worst
> kind of shady business practice...although
> I have to say that when you read their
> guidelines on their website along with the
> stuff that gets posted on that forum,
> it's all rather brilliant, and virtually
> unassailable from the point of view of
> the faithful.
samples?
> So what is the story with that company?
> I'm not trying to start a flame war or
> anything but I'd like to hear some fresh
> [perspectives] ...
few will get into discussion over businesses
in alt.magick because they are convinced that
mercantilism and magic don't mix. their culture-
bound perspective doesn't allow them to open-
mindedly consider a cultural transactionalism
surrounding the occult.
many religiomagical presentations are what you
have dubbed 'unassailable from the point of view
of the faithful', including how magic and other
things are viewed from para-Hermetica that
typifies the posts to this forum and its current
FAQ (the alt.magick WET FAQ as i call it).
rather than munge up other people's pursuits of
the use of magic for their interests, why not
explain what use you have for magic and why it
may be that you have these biases which you are
bringing to the subject, where you got your
notions of ethics with respect to the occult,
and what your favourited kinds of spells or
rituals have been. thanks.
luckymojo.com@nagasiva
nagasiva
"igd" <i...@iinet.com>:
> Anybody who tries to sell you services of a magical
> nature is a con artist, pure and simple.
ridiculous prejudice. skilled individuals should be
adequately compensated for the enlisting of their
time and expertise no matter their profession.
> Physical objects is one thing. Offering to "cast
> a spell" is something altogether different. It
> all comes down to "don't trade gold for dross".
> I'd go so far as to cut shamans some slack on this,
very big of you.
> as what they're doing USED to have an economic place
> in society. At least until currency entered the
> picture. And its just good manners to tip a diviner,
> of whatever sort. But other than that, I can't really
> see where a monetary quid pro quo would be ethical.
> Travel expenses, maybe?
what prevents it from being as ethical as any other
kind of transaction with a skilled contractor? your
explanations as to your conclusions about con artists
aren't entirely substantiated or logically-explained
except as cultural bias.
nagasiva
luckymojo.com@
nagasiva
hey Asiya,
Dane:
>>> but there were some posts that came up here
>>> referring to Spellmaker & their voodoo magick
>>> and spell kits and whatnot.
nagasiva:
>> strange. 'voodoo spellkits' are unlikely and
>> you may have found hoodoo spellkits either
>> masquerading or mistaken for voodoo, which
>> is a more integral system of religiomagic.
>>> ...Spam posts from Spellmaker(dot)com. ...
>>> "Control that person now!!!" "Get rid of that bitch!" and variations
>>> thereof. I found that more than a tad disturbing.
>>
>> you must be from some more circumspect back-
>> ground: Christian, Wiccan or Hermetica such
>> that you were so easily disturbed simply by
>> reading this type of material.
Asiya <asiya_...@sbcSORATHglobal.net>:
> It's always a good idea to know who you're talking to.
quite so, though that kind of transparency is not
always so easily acquired.
> Nagasiva is married to the shop owner of this:
> http://www.luckymojo.com/mojocatspells.html
precisely put.
>> this forum and its current
>> FAQ (the alt.magick WET FAQ as i call it).
>
> Alt.magick FAQ
> located at http://www.asiya.org/faq.html
yes, it tends to draw those who distinguish occult magic
from stage magic and those for whom the term magic
and certain other socioeconomic facets do not mesh
in their ethics. what are the bases for these biases?
how are they justified?
nagasiva
luckymojo.com@
Tom
"nagasiva" <yronwode.com nagasiva> wrote in message
news:44e4a0df$0$34518$742e...@news.sonic.net...
> 50060816 x!
>
> "igd" <i...@iinet.com>:
>> Anybody who tries to sell you services of a magical
>> nature is a con artist, pure and simple.
>
> ridiculous prejudice. skilled individuals should be
> adequately compensated for the enlisting of their
> time and expertise no matter their profession.
Unless, of course, what is promised is not delivered. The problem with
"services of a magical nature" is in the determination of results.
People pay for services because they expect those services to cause some
particular thing to happen. While there is a measure of doubt in most
services that the outcome will be the desired one, at least there are
accepted standards in most professions about whether or not the sefvices
have been rendered competently. For example, when one goes to a medical
doctor, the desired outcome is that one will be cured. That doesn't always
happen. Yet, the medical profession itself has certain standards of care
and procedurtes that are intended to maximize the chances of the desired
outcome. If the doctor does not follow these procedures and meet those
accepted standards, there are repercussions, sometimes very serious ones.
There is a concerted effort to protect the public from medical fraud.
There are no such standards for professional spell-casters. There isn't
even a remote possibility that such standards could ever be agreed upon,
since there are no reliable ways to determine if a spell is effective that
are independently verifiable. So any schlock with a good patter can take
money for pretending to cast spells. There is no way at all to tell a fake
from the "real thing" and there is no concerted effort by any association of
professional spell-casters to create measureable standards of practice.
Elizab...@gmail.com
>there's a variety of magical trajectory,
>and some of these include spellcraft. what
>may seem like a simple matter of esoteric
>connections may really be a positioning of
>knowing the right people at the right time
>and being proximate to their activities,
>especially where esoteric cults such as
>may have 'magickal practice' going on.
I'm in the NYC area, so I'm lucky in the sense that there's a
siginificant number of local
groups/organizations/workshops/what-have-you which cater to various
disciplines and traditions; sometimes it's indimidating trying to wade
through them all. As with anything else, there are a lot of
fly-by-nights, 'poseurs,' and more than a few 'bad seeds' in the NYC
scene, and it can turn you off pretty quickly. A while back I started
trying to make more use of internet sources to make new contacts and so
forth but there's even more to sift through, and it wore me out; so now
I'm taking another stab at it.
Sometimes the easiest way for me was to just stop by a place like
Enchantments Inc. or Zodiac Lounge...or in the old days (lol), Herman
Slater's shop The Magickal Childe (in the Village, not the earlier
Brooklyn location, that was before my time) and just talk to people,
either the regulars or the clientele, or pick of one of the numerous
'city guide' type pamphlets/magazines that always seemed to accumulate
at such places, with listings of classes, lectures, events & such.
>I'll watch for more of what you mean by this.
>it would help if you were more explicit. people
>have some strange notions of what is 'a problem'.
I'm referring to a few of the ones which purport to offer magickal
services in exchange for money. Just to be a bit more clear and
articulate than I (admittedly) was in my first post: I don't really
have a problem with certain kinds of practitioners performing magick
for a fee. As the other poster mentioned above, it's something that's
been a tradition for a long time in various cultures and if it fills a
need, so be it. Sure, there are hordes of charlatans out there, and
hiring anyone sight unseen for such work is often tantamount to
flushing your money down the toilet, I think. Word-of-mouth is probably
the only way of finding someone truly reliable to work for you. You
know the old saying about a Fool and his Money...
But some of the websites offering magick-for-money are just too much...
the places that promise "100% guaranteed results!" or "The most
powerful magic in the world!" and so on if you'll just pay $150.00 for
one of their spell kits or perhaps another $200.00 or more for one of
their in-house practitioners to do it for you instead, not to mention
an extra forty or fifty dollars for "online" Tarot readings where you
have no actual personal contact with the Reader at all (sigh)...
In the case of Spellmaker.com, the fact that they had an online forum
connected to their storefront is what drew me to take a closer look at
the site & its contents. They seem to be like any other occult supply
store, insofar as they sell candles, oils, incense, etc.
But from poring through the posts on their forum it seems like they are
mass-marketing their products to unwary consumers who have little if
any understanding or experience in any magickal or esoteric practice
and so don't know what works, what doesn't, what's helpful, what is
potentially dangerous, what are and aren't realistic expectations, or
for that matter what it is they're really doing. The vast majority seem
to be working spells to either win back a lost love or to break up
another couple {including some married folks} so that they can be with
one or the other person. I won't sit in judgement of any of these
people or what it is they are trying to achieve - for the record, I
myself have no problem with applying magickal means to real-world
problems in my own life, and for the most part it has always been a
positive experience for me - but many of those people who are trying to
win back a lover have been at it literally for years, with no change in
their situation, and to read their stories is depressing.
>strange. 'voodoo spellkits' are unlikely and
>you may have found hoodoo spellkits either
>masquerading or mistaken for voodoo, which
>is a more integral system of religiomagic.
And that's almost certainly the case with Spellmaker.com, the
kits/supplies they sell seem very similar to materials sold at any of
the brick-and-mortar shops I mentioned above, where they are classified
as Hoodoo. However on the Spellmaker.com website, most of their
products are described as "Voodoo Spell Kits." It also seems that many
of the people who post messages on their forum - customers of
Spellmaker.com, for the most part - believe themselves to be practicing
Voodoo.
As a humorous side note, I myself worked with elements of Hoodoo
(candles, herbs, powders, incense, lodestones, etc etc etc) for years
before I even knew that was what it was called :)
> ...Spam posts from Spellmaker(dot)com. ...
> "Control that person now!!!" "Get rid of
> that bitch!" and variations thereof. I
> found that more than a tad disturbing.
>you must be from some more circumspect back-
>ground: Christian, Wiccan or Hermetica such
>that you were so easily disturbed simply by
>reading this type of material.
Actually what disturbed me about it was simply that the nature of their
spam posts (like the ones I cited above) are, to an extent, at odds
with the general tenor of the guidelines posted on their website and
discussed on their Yahoo forum. Not to mention seeing a company that
deals in that kind of business using advertising like that (spamming
newsgroups with it, no less) just seems to 'cheapen' whatever
esoteric/spiritual content it is meant to alert you to. Kind of like a
big garish neon sign over a storefront, the kind that screams 'LIVE
GIRLS XXX"....But hey, I guess that's marketing for ya. Grab 'em with a
headline...
> when you read their
> guidelines on their website along with the
> stuff that gets posted on that forum,
> it's all rather brilliant, and virtually
> unassailable from the point of view of
> the faithful.
>samples?
Well for starters it's my understanding after inquiring of a few
members on that Yahoo group that the messages which are posted there
are heavily monitored and sometimes censored for content. Anything that
directly questions the efficiacy or integrity of either the products
for sale or the support staff (they have people they refer to as
caseworkers in addition to the forum moderators) usually doesn't make
it through - and if it does it seems that it is usually used to 'make
an example' of whatever poor sod made the mistake of raising a
dissenting voice. Or so it seems. But the people who simply read what
IS posted there have no reason to suspect that the stories they see,
the 'directions' given by the caseworkers, and the 'guidelines' which
are described on the website itself are anything but the gospel truth
and the 'final word' in spellcasting of that type.
I suppose I could try copying and pasting some of what I've read over
there if anyone wants to see some of it...
>few will get into discussion over businesses
>in alt.magick because they are convinced that
>mercantilism and magic don't mix. their culture-
>bound perspective doesn't allow them to open-
>mindedly consider a cultural transactionalism
>surrounding the occult.
So am I to understand then that the majority of people who frequent
alt.magick believe that commerce has no place in magick?
>many religiomagical presentations are what you
>have dubbed 'unassailable from the point of view
>of the faithful', including how magic and other
>things are viewed from para-Hermetica that
>typifies the posts to this forum and its current
>FAQ (the alt.magick WET FAQ as i call it).
Yes, and even belief systems that have no 'magickal' component. Many
types of religious fundamentalism, for example, are sustained through
circular logic and selective perception; after all they don't call it
'blind faith' for nothing.
>rather than munge up other people's pursuits of
>the use of magic for their interests, why not
>explain what use you have for magic and why it
>may be that you have these biases which you are
>bringing to the subject, where you got your
>notions of ethics with respect to the occult,
>and what your favourited kinds of spells or
>rituals have been. thanks.
Well, I don't believe I have any specific bias one way or the other;
the issues I was bringing up re: Spellmaker.com are related to what I'd
call questionable business ethics, particularly where this sort of
thing is concerned. After all we're not talking about a company that
sells vacuum cleaners here. But as I mentioned above, I have no problem
with using magick for my own ends, whether it be on a spiritual level,
a pychological level, or even a material level, whether to help myself
or to help other people (if and when asked). As for my notions of
ethics re: the occult, they are simply mine, and I don't apply a
different code to my magickal workings than I do to anything else in
life; I'm not sure if that answers your question. I started off ages
ago with Crowley and Thelemic magick but it didn't resonate with me at
all and so I moved on; I don't feel that my
exposure to his writings or his system influenced my ethics one way or
the other. I've slogged through other work, usually qabalistic or
closely associated with, but most of the time I was doing the work for
the sake of doing the work, and only rarely did I bring it to bear on a
specific situation for practical results. I admit to not being well
versed in the tenets of Wicca but I've done quite a lot of work with
what is properly termed "hoodoo," which I think I might have already
mentioned, but oh well.
As far as Lucky Mojo, I've bought a fair amount of stuff from them
online/through the mail, and I think the quality is very very good. The
first time I pulled a piece of snake skin out of a recently purchased
bag of goofer dust I knew I was a satisfied customer. Many other
suppliers of such materials don't even sell the real thing (even in
NYC).
-Dane
igd
belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro quo
would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross. One
does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
"For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou
wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst thou
abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy coffers and
satisfy thy hunger of Gold?"
For example: I used to do a lot of exorcisms. I never asked for any
compensation, though if something involved really excessisive travel, I
would have asked for travel expenses. I pointedly turned down cash when
offered, though I would say something to the affect of "I can accept gifts
of a non-monetary sort" at the conclusion of the proceedings and left it up
to the client to interpet it from there.
But if Nagasiva wants that kind of karma, he's most welcome to it.
"Tom" <askper...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:oMOdnVSSq6zZMHnZ...@comcast.com...
Tom
"igd" <i...@iinet.com> wrote in message
news:12e9php...@corp.supernews.com...
> But even assuming the individual in question were to be sincere in the
> belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro
> quo would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross.
> One does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
>
> "For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou
> wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst thou
> abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy coffers and
> satisfy thy hunger of Gold?"
I'm unfamiliar with this quotation. Who is the author and where did you find
it?
The early Christian church took a dim view of the sale of their magical
services. They called the practice "simony" after one Simon Magus, who
allegedly offered the disciples money for the power to perform miracles.
This was not a case of fraud, since it seems quite clear that the disciples
and Simon believed they really could perform miracles. The objection came
to the the buying and selling of what was essentially a sacred thing. It
was usually an ecclesiastical crime, like a priest accepting gratuities for
hearing a confession, perfoming a marriage or funeral, that sort of thing.
My objection was the inability to distinguish what is actually a result of a
spell from what would have happened anyway, and thus some controversy over
whether or not some service worthy of hire has actually been delivered.
Your concern appears to be an ecclesiastical issue, like simony.
Does the act of charging money for the casting of a spell constitute an act
of profanity? Is it defiling something that should be kept sacred?
Erwin Hessle
Tom wrote:
> "igd" <i...@iinet.com> wrote in message
> news:12e9php...@corp.supernews.com...
> > But even assuming the individual in question were to be sincere in the
> > belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro
> > quo would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross.
> > One does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
> >
> > "For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou
> > wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst thou
> > abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy coffers and
> > satisfy thy hunger of Gold?"
>
> I'm unfamiliar with this quotation. Who is the author and where did you find
> it?
Crowley, from Liber 30.
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
Erwin Hessle
> But even assuming the individual in question were to be sincere in the
> belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro quo
> would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross. One
> does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
The problem with this is that it's tripe. There's no earthly reason to
make a distinction between "the Art", whatever the hell that might be,
and anything else. While *you* might choose not to do it because of the
high regard you hold this "Art" in, it can hardly be called "unethical"
for that reason even from a common moralistic standpoint, since noone
is under any sort of obligation to share your view.
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
WaterWalker
> But even assuming the individual in question were to be sincere in the
> belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro quo
> would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross. One
> does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
>
> "For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou
> wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst thou
> abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy coffers and
> satisfy thy hunger of Gold?"
>
> For example: I used to do a lot of exorcisms. I never asked for any
> compensation, though if something involved really excessisive travel, I
> would have asked for travel expenses. I pointedly turned down cash when
> offered, though I would say something to the affect of "I can accept gifts
> of a non-monetary sort" at the conclusion of the proceedings and left it up
> to the client to interpet it from there.
>
> But if Nagasiva wants that kind of karma, he's most welcome to it.
Your commentary brings to mind the offering plate passed around in
churches. What services does a church or sermon provide that you would
put money into the plate? You may give out of guilt, but you also may be
giving because you believe that money will go to good use and this is a
way of caring for others in need. I believe paying my healers allows
them to have a place to sleep, good food and good habits, which equals a
better healing.
Just because you never asked for financial consideration doesn't mean
you need to compare yourself to others.
I have healers that I greatly value for their products and services. I
have clients that value me for my own products and services. I would
never want a healer that I am seeing to go unrewarded for their work. I
care about them, I want them to be healthy and happy and well taken care
of so that they remain good healers.
I used to work strictly voluntary. I also used to be uncomfortable with
others valuing my services or thinking that I had something important to
offer. However, I have a much better clientele now that I do put a
financial burden on my products and services and the clients are
motivated to do the work, to be healed, to be inspired. Clients that are
unwilling to pay or clients used to using free services can be lazy and
uninspired and tend to not pay attention or do what is asked of them.
Free services can equate to a band aid effect worth of value to the client.
Some clients do not value free products or services.
Just put a "Free" or "sale" sign up, and you will see what I mean.
People will take handfuls or bagfuls of a product that they don't even
care about or even know about, and will let it go to rot, just because
it is free. Or they will take up your time, because it is not of value
to yourself or to them, being free.
Yes, I have valued free services and I have had others value my free
services. My point is, time is valuable and you choose what you spend
your time doing, what you are good at, and the level of continuing
education so that you or your product remain valuable. If your product
or service is not of value, you will not have customers. Sure scare and
other tactics can be invoked, but you have to decide what is of value to
you. If you value the product or service then pay for it. Get
references. If you feel you have no trust, seek out someone else who
works for you or fix the problem yourself.
Why did you work for free? Did you do it out of compassion, to fulfill a
need, or to feel good? Yes, feeling good for helping someone can make
you a good healer. And yes, financial gain can lead the wrong people
into stealing or making poor healers (just like any other type of
employment i.e. construction, etc).
If you are a healer or tarot reader or spell provider for financial gain
only, then you are probably in the wrong field. However, financial gain
does not make a good healer bad or care less, other "things" make a good
or bad healer. There will always be con artists, in any trade. Finances
are not the only way that you can be ripped off.
Free doesn't necessarily make a better healing or even a good healer,
tarot reader, product or spell provider.
WaterWalker
> My objection was the inability to distinguish what is actually a result of a
> spell from what would have happened anyway, and thus some controversy over
> whether or not some service worthy of hire has actually been delivered.
> Your concern appears to be an ecclesiastical issue, like simony.
Sometimes seeking help puts you on the right track. There is also the
placebo effect, which I think is beneficial and shows that either we can
heal ourselves when we think we have help or we have help from some source.
Having someone to listen is also beneficial even if the only benefit
amounts to the worries being voiced out loud thereby creating mental
clarity, either because we hear how silly the concerns are, or because
one is able to get a new spin on what needs to be done. Although, this
can also feed the frenzy or feeling of need for a spell caster/tarot
reader/healer.
I do agree agree in that those who seek to waste time, money, emotions,
spiritual regard and what you care for motivate me to do a good job and
keep my own nose clean.
Tom
"WaterWalker" <WalksonWater_saynotospam@shaw.> wrote in message
news:%U9Fg.418249$iF6.23122@pd7tw2no...
>
> Your commentary brings to mind the offering plate passed around in
> churches. What services does a church or sermon provide that you would put
> money into the plate?
The money in the plate is a free will offering. It's not a charge for
services. Now, if a spell caster took on all requests and then indicated
that you could send him or her money if you thought it was a good thing that
he or she continue to do the same for others, then the situation would be
comparable. A "pay before we start" deal isn't the same thing at all.
> Just because you never asked for financial consideration doesn't mean you
> need to compare yourself to others.
Certainly it is. Any difference between one person and another is reason
enough for comparison.
Tom
"WaterWalker" <WalksonWater_saynotospam@shaw.> wrote in message
> Tom wrote:
>
>> My objection was the inability to distinguish what is actually a result
>> of a spell from what would have happened anyway, and thus some
>> controversy over whether or not some service worthy of hire has actually
>> been delivered. Your concern appears to be an ecclesiastical issue, like
>> simony.
>
> Sometimes seeking help puts you on the right track.
And sometimes spending money because you credulously believe worthless
promises is not the right track.
> There is also the placebo effect, which I think is beneficial and shows
> that either we can heal ourselves when we think we have help or we have
> help from some source.
The placebo effect does not bring you money or love, the two most common
requests for spells.
> Having someone to listen is also beneficial even if the only benefit
> amounts to the worries being voiced out loud thereby creating mental
> clarity, either because we hear how silly the concerns are, or because one
> is able to get a new spin on what needs to be done. Although, this can
> also feed the frenzy or feeling of need for a spell caster/tarot
> reader/healer.
I don't think a lot of sympathetic listening is a feature of on-line or
mail-order spell casters, which were the examples the OP gave.
WaterWalker
> I don't think a lot of sympathetic listening is a feature of on-line or
> mail-order spell casters, which were the examples the OP gave.
Since igd discussed exorcisms, I didn't think the topic was limited to
on-line spell or mail-order spell casters.
Now, I am not sure if I should bother posting the last post I wrote to
you because it is off topic to what you are discussing.
catherine yronwode
Seeing you again, Tom, what with intranet changes and reading 'groups
from a non-filtered computer.
What you say is true in part -- but it overlooks the fact that there
have been and still are organizations that vouvh for one another's
honesty with respect to spiritual and magical services. Harry Hyatt, the
great American folklorist, recorded interviews with several African
Americns who belonged to one or more such groups that help regular
mettings (quadrennially in one casde, monthly in another). Some of my
friends and i are planning to form such an organization ourselves.
Ethics is as imprtant in this work as it is in other service
professions.
cat yronwode
catherine yronwode
Some spiritual workers ask only for donations. Some churches ask for a
set amount, such as a tithe, or you will not be a member in good
standing. No one rule fits all -- and, in tuth, as Water Walker points
out, the same rules hat apply to various types of churches also apply to
various types of spiritual rwading, counselling, and work of
non-denomiminationally oriented work.
catherne yronwode
Tom
"catherine yronwode" <c...@luckymojo.com> wrote in message
news:44E56986...@luckymojo.com...
While I appreciate your effort, I suspect you won't get very far. How will
you determine a set of best practices in a field that has no objective
standards of performance at all? How will you test for effectiveness? It's
like a bunch of self-proclaimed psychics proclaiming each other to be "real"
psychics, even though none of them can actually provide a successful
demonstration of their abilities in a test that would effectively eliminate
fraud or self-deception.
Now, that being said, I acknowledge that belief in such abilities may be so
strong that no evidence of efficacy would even be asked by potential
customers, so that would only be an issue if someone was placing so much
dependence upon your services that their very life and well-being is placed
in jeopardy, which would be pretty foolish. I suspect that sort of
extremity is fairly rare. I doubt anyone would buy a flying spell and then
jump off a building, relying on the spell to keep them safe. Most folks use
spellcraft more casually. So let's consider other aspect that maybe you
*can* address effectively.
There are some things you might be able to provide with a professional
organization that issues some sort of certification. I suppose you can at
least offer some sort of guarantee that your practitioners are knowledgeable
in the field of spell-casting by designing some sort of basic knowledge test
as to the procedures. You might also create some sort of guidelines for
diagnostics that would help a spell-caster know when to call in other forms
of support or referrals.
Enforcement would be tricky, too, but that's a problem for lots of
professional organizations. You might want to have your members provide
their clients with a means for filing complaints with your organization if
they feel the spell-caster in question has violated their professional
standards, sort of like the Better Business Bureau does. You might, for
example, produce a pamphlet on ethical practices used by spell-casters in
your organization, outlining what a consumer can expect from a member's
services, and include an address, website, or e-mail address where
complaints could be filed. You should have some sort of arrangement for
inquiring into such complaints to see if they have merit. Someone found to
be in violation of the standards would face sanctions, up to and including
expulsion from the organization and be obliged to make restitution.
David Carter
A rare occasion in which I agree with Tim.
Coincidentally, the things he is right on are usually those associated
with scams and fraud.
Carter
David Carter
> But even assuming the individual in question were to be sincere in the
> belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro quo
> would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross. One
> does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
>
> "For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou
> wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst thou
> abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy coffers and
> satisfy thy hunger of Gold?"
>
> For example: I used to do a lot of exorcisms. I never asked for any
> compensation, though if something involved really excessisive travel, I
> would have asked for travel expenses. I pointedly turned down cash when
> offered, though I would say something to the affect of "I can accept gifts
> of a non-monetary sort" at the conclusion of the proceedings and left it up
> to the client to interpet it from there.
>
> But if Nagasiva wants that kind of karma, he's most welcome to it.
But as Asiya pointed out, Nagasiva is hardly a disinterested party.
Carter
> <snip>
David Carter
> 50060816 x!
>
> "igd" <i...@iinet.com>:
>> Anybody who tries to sell you services of a magical
>> nature is a con artist, pure and simple.
>
> ridiculous prejudice. skilled individuals should be
> adequately compensated for the enlisting of their
> time and expertise no matter their profession.
Always assuming they are skilled at more than separating gullibles from
their money.
>
>> Physical objects is one thing. Offering to "cast
>> a spell" is something altogether different. It
>> all comes down to "don't trade gold for dross".
>> I'd go so far as to cut shamans some slack on this,
>
> very big of you.
I wouldnt. Shamanism is chock full of frauds, pretenders and fools (on
both sides of the counter). Just as Magic is.
>
>> as what they're doing USED to have an economic place
>> in society. At least until currency entered the
>> picture. And its just good manners to tip a diviner,
>> of whatever sort. But other than that, I can't really
>> see where a monetary quid pro quo would be ethical.
>> Travel expenses, maybe?
>
> what prevents it from being as ethical as any other
> kind of transaction with a skilled contractor?
The prevalence of frauds and hucksters. You speak of skilled contractor
as if there were an empirical measure of skill. There isnt. You only use
the words to imply respectability and attempt to manipulate opinion. The
whole concept of paying someone to make 'spells' or some such nonsense
is laughable, only a fraud would advertise doing so. Sadly the whole
'occult supply' business is full of frauds and posers.
By way of a counter-example, I have dealt with Star Child in
Glastonbury England for years (and before some of the the whackos in
here start, other than being a customer I have no connection with them).
Glastonbury, in common with many new-age centres is full of weirdos and
snake-oil salesmen, but Star Child has always stood out as being
professional and honest. Their oils and incenses are excellent and their
quality uniformly good.
They dont sell 'spells', and if they did they would lose this customer.
So not all 'occult suppliers' stoop to spell-making kits and 'spells on
demand'. Those who do are fraudulent, either they know no better in
which case they are frauds, or they do know better in which case they
are frauds. Either way...
Carter
David Carter
> "igd" <i...@iinet.com> wrote in message
> news:12e9php...@corp.supernews.com...
>> But even assuming the individual in question were to be sincere in the
>> belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro
>> quo would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross.
>> One does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
>>
>> "For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou
>> wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst thou
>> abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy coffers and
>> satisfy thy hunger of Gold?"
>
> I'm unfamiliar with this quotation. Who is the author and where did you find
> it?
>
> The early Christian church took a dim view of the sale of their magical
> services.
Magical services? The Christian Church? it sounds as if you are
suggesting that spiritual development engenders psychic or magical
powers. I am sure you wouldnt do that.
Carter
David Carter
>
Here we see the non-initiate in all his uninitiated stupidity.
Good God Erwhine, do you ever say *anything* which isnt completely daft?
It seems not.
Carter
Meltdarok
"WaterWalker" <WalksonWater_saynotospam@shaw.> wrote in message
news:%U9Fg.418249$iF6.23122@pd7tw2no...
> igd wrote:
>> But even assuming the individual in question were to be sincere in the
>> belief that they were perfoming a useful service, a pre-stated quid pro
>> quo would not(IMHO) be ethical. It still comes down to gold for dross.
>> One does not prostitute the Art for filthy lucre.
>>
I note the "value" given to a pretty processed yellow metal; and the
underpinnings
of a lack of freedom for the reproductive rights involving capitalistic
economic gain.
>> "For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou
>> wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst
>> thou abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy
>> coffers and satisfy thy hunger of Gold?"
>>
>> For example: I used to do a lot of exorcisms. I never asked for any
>> compensation, though if something involved really excessisive travel, I
>> would have asked for travel expenses. I pointedly turned down cash when
>> offered, though I would say something to the affect of "I can accept
>> gifts of a non-monetary sort" at the conclusion of the proceedings and
>> left it up to the client to interpet it from there.
>>
>> But if Nagasiva wants that kind of karma, he's most welcome to it.
>
> Your commentary brings to mind the offering plate passed around in
> churches. What services does a church or sermon provide that you would
> put money into the plate? You may give out of guilt, but you also may be
> giving because you believe that money will go to good use and this is a
> way of caring for others in need. I believe paying my healers allows them
> to have a place to sleep, good food and good habits, which equals a
> better healing.
>
> Just because you never asked for financial consideration doesn't mean you
> need to compare yourself to others.
>
People aways seem to have a tendency to compare themselves with others
though they have problems considering them as family.
> I have healers that I greatly value for their products and services. I
> have clients that value me for my own products and services. I would
> never want a healer that I am seeing to go unrewarded for their work. I
> care about them, I want them to be healthy and happy and well taken care
> of so that they remain good healers.
>
When was the last time you gave them three goats for thier services?
> I used to work strictly voluntary. I also used to be uncomfortable with
> others valuing my services or thinking that I had something important to
> offer. However, I have a much better clientele now that I do put a
> financial burden on my products and services and the clients are
> motivated to do the work, to be healed, to be inspired. Clients that are
> unwilling to pay or clients used to using free services can be lazy and
> uninspired and tend to not pay attention or do what is asked of them.
> Free services can equate to a band aid effect worth of value to the
> client.
>
That really depends on the particular person.
> Some clients do not value free products or services.
>
> Just put a "Free" or "sale" sign up, and you will see what I mean.
>
> People will take handfuls or bagfuls of a product that they don't even
> care about or even know about, and will let it go to rot, just because it
> is free. Or they will take up your time, because it is not of value to
> yourself or to them, being free.
>
Uhmm, you know they did not "value" the time? Did they tell you this?
> Yes, I have valued free services and I have had others value my free
> services.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>My point is, time is valuable and you choose what you spend your time
>doing,
Welcome to capitalism my friend. . . . Like your computer's software yet?
Karl Marx never really got it, or if he did, they never *really* tried it
yet.
The only thing I saw was the choosing of a leader, which didn't happen
until Gorbachev, and look what happened to him.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>what you are good at, and the level of continuing education so that you or
>your product remain valuable. If your product or service is not of value,
>you will not have customers. Sure scare and other tactics can be invoked,
>but you have to decide what is of value to you. If you value the product
>or service then pay for it. Get references. If you feel you have no trust,
>seek out someone else who works for you or fix the problem yourself.
>
> Why did you work for free? Did you do it out of compassion, to fulfill a
> need, or to feel good? Yes, feeling good for helping someone can make you
> a good healer. And yes, financial gain can lead the wrong people into
> stealing or making poor healers (just like any other type of employment
> i.e. construction, etc).
>
> If you are a healer or tarot reader or spell provider for financial gain
> only, then you are probably in the wrong field. However, financial gain
> does not make a good healer bad or care less, other "things" make a good
> or bad healer. There will always be con artists, in any trade. Finances
> are not the only way that you can be ripped off.
>
> Free doesn't necessarily make a better healing or even a good healer,
> tarot reader, product or spell provider.
--
meltdarok
http://hometown.aol.com/meltdarok/
taro...@jktarot.com
> Asiya <asiya_...@sbcSORATHglobal.net>:
> > It's always a good idea to know who you're talking to.
> quite so, though that kind of transparency is not
> always so easily acquired.
You didn't sound very happy about the transparency a week or so ago,
Suicider. You sounded quite put out that the little rabbits on TarotL
found out about your dark (sui)side in fact, even though that's the
only side you've got.
So, did you and your wife assist this dolt's contribution to your Great
Work?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/18/voodoo.killer.ap/index.html
I notice Cat was all over this on alt.true-crime.
Now, maybe you can clarify something for all of us. If the clerics of
your faith help the aspirant kill themselves by stabbing them 25 times
(or whatever), does that methodology corrupt the suicide on technical
terms? Because, in the case above, certainly it was a "good death" from
the perp's point of view.
And like you told me, encouraging as many people to kill themselves as
you can "is healthy and likely to lead to euthanasia (good death(s))."
I'd say those 25 knife wounds were pretty encouraging, wouldn't you?
And no doubt, if you think death is healthy, which you claim to, that's
some REALLY healthy dying.
But, what about the dog? Two years for Foo-Foo seems a little severe.
I mean the cousin only rated a year for a slashed face.
I guess you're a little disappointed Frater Voodoo wimped out on that
last aspirant.
And I KNOW you're sorry he perped in New York, instead of Texas.
Because if he pulled that looney shit down there, he'd be headed for
some health, that's for sure.
(jk)
************************************
Read jk's Tarot FAQ:
http://jktarot.com/faq.html
jktarot.com Site Map:
http://jktarot.com/sitemap.html
************************************
taro...@jktarot.com
> "nagasiva" <yronwode.com nagasiva> wrote in message
> Unless, of course, what is promised is not delivered.
Could be worse if it is:
"Save the Planet, Kill Yourself"
Funny how Nagasiva hasn't found the Will to show the Way on that one.
Might make you think he wasn't that concerned about saving the planet.
catherine yronwode
You're as welcome to your opinion as the flowers are in May, but a sour
"suspection" is a bit more pre-judged than an opinion, in my opinion.
(You see, i've got an opinion, too.)
> How will
> you determine a set of best practices in a field that has no objective
> standards of performance at all?
I think a combination of honesty in advertising, transparency in
practice, and social bonds with other practioners and with clients is
adequate for the sorts of judgments we are intending.
By the way, many facets of life are not amenable to "objective standards
of performance." How much does your child love you? How do you
"objectively" quanitify that love?
> How will you test for effectiveness?
Some workers collect testimonials; i do not. Each to his or her own.
> It's like a bunch of self-proclaimed psychics
> proclaiming each other to be "real" psychics, even though
> none of them can actually provide a successful
> demonstration of their abilities in a test that would
> effectively eliminate fraud or self-deception.
The condition of inter-subjectivity hat you describe applies not only to
"psychics" but to all sincere people who participate as laity, clergy,
congregants, members, practioners, or experimenters in any religious
and/or magical and/or spirtual field of endeavour that is built upon a
premise that there is some form of existence or reality beyond or apart
from that which can be defined and codified by the scientific method.
Some people are bothered by various para-rational, supernatural,
magical, religious, cosmic, mystical, spiritual, and paranormal
paradigms. Others enjoy and benefit from such views -- and of those,
many, if not most, feel no need to sumbit their beliefs or practices to
the scrutiny of "testers."
> Now, that being said, I acknowledge that belief in such abilities may be so
> strong that no evidence of efficacy would even be asked by potential
> customers, so that would only be an issue if someone was placing so much
> dependence upon your services that their very life and well-being is placed
> in jeopardy, which would be pretty foolish. I suspect that sort of
> extremity is fairly rare. I doubt anyone would buy a flying spell and then
> jump off a building, relying on the spell to keep them safe. Most folks use
> spellcraft more casually. So let's consider other aspect that maybe you
> *can* address effectively.
You are correct. There are relatively few bizarrely foolish people in
the world, and no more of them seem to wander into the average
tarot-reader's parlor or occult shop than wander into their local Trader
Joe's grocery store or dentisits' office.
Didja read the recent news story about the man who put his lover's
daughter in the clothes drying machine at a local laundromat because she
liked to be "whirled around"? Luckily the toddler escaped with her life
and a few severe burns. The judge's verdict: essentially that the man
was stupidly foolish, not vicious.
Foolish people such as this cannot be sufficiently protected by
legislation, nor can they be protected by attempting to shame or
legislate against those who my encounter them while in the performance
of their own professions, whether those professions are in "nuts and
bolts" trades (lik operating a laundromat) or in inter-subjective
proafessions (like card reading).
> There are some things you might be able to provide with a professional
> organization that issues some sort of certification. I suppose you can at
> least offer some sort of guarantee that your practitioners are knowledgeable
> in the field of spell-casting by designing some sort of basic knowledge test
> as to the procedures. You might also create some sort of guidelines for
> diagnostics that would help a spell-caster know when to call in other forms
> of support or referrals.
Yes, we can do these things. There are other issues we are interested in
asd well:
Will the reader actually perform a reading, or is that soun o riffling
cards on the telephone line merely a cover for a cold (canned) reading?
Does the person who accepts payment for praying and/or setting lights
actually perform the prayers or the setting of lights?
Does the reader /pactitioner refrain from back-biting, gossip,
tale-telling, or rumour-mongering about clients?
Does the reader / practitioner perform the work contracted for at the
price contraced without last-minute changes in cost or procudres?
> Enforcement would be tricky, too, but that's a problem for lots of
> professional organizations. You might want to have your members provide
> their clients with a means for filing complaints with your organization if
> they feel the spell-caster in question has violated their professional
> standards, sort of like the Better Business Bureau does.
Exactly.
> You might, for
> example, produce a pamphlet on ethical practices used by spell-casters in
> your organization, outlining what a consumer can expect from a member's
> services, and include an address, website, or e-mail address where
> complaints could be filed.
Very true.
> You should have some sort of arrangement for
> inquiring into such complaints to see if they have merit.
Correct.
> Someone found to
> be in violation of the standards would face sanctions, up to and including
> expulsion from the organization and be obliged to make restitution.
Indeed. Furthermore, there is the matter of protecting workers and
readers from fraudulent clients. All of us who work in this field are
well aware of the problems we face with clients who play one reader off
against another, who arrange for expensive services and default on
payments, who lie about their condition and then jump salty when they
are found out, and so forth.
Most readers and workers -- like many proprieors of restaurants, taxi
services, bars, and clubs that deal with an unselected cross-section of
the public -- maintain what are known as "86" lists. An organization of
readers and workers can agree to pool their lists of customers who have
been 86'ed for the mutual benefit of all members.
cat yronwode
Erwin Hessle
> Tom wrote:
> > How will
> > you determine a set of best practices in a field that has no objective
> > standards of performance at all?
>
> I think a combination of honesty in advertising,
"STAR ANISE $2.00
"Stops misfortunes, increases psychic power, brings back a lost love,
increases good luck."
From:
http://www.luckymojo.com/mojocatherbs.html
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
SOD of the CoE
hi Jess,
nagasiva (R. bobo):
#> ...that kind of transparency is not always so
#> easily acquired.
Jess:
# You didn't sound very happy about the
# transparency a week or so ago,
it was the duplicity i found objectionable.
there was no question of transparency.
# ...the little rabbits on TarotL found out
# about your dark (sui)side
your ruse availed you not. had i been concerned
i would not have posted those URLs in my sigblock
during my discussions about the Devil and Tower,
for which they were excellently topical. :)
# So, did you and your wife assist this dolt's
# contribution to your Great Work?
they were assisted in a friendly manner
by helpful people with knowledge of magic.
# ...If the clerics of your faith help the
# aspirant kill themselves by stabbing
# them 25 times (or whatever),
saint Kevorkian wound up in prison for less
interactive methods (130 chosen deaths before
incarcerated, now he's about to die in prison).
# does that methodology corrupt the suicide
lack of competency, planning and grace
corrupts euthanasia. competency requires
non-coercive conditions.
# And like you told me, encouraging as many
# people to kill themselves as you can "is
# healthy and likely to lead to euthanasia
# (good death(s))."
self-empowerment is beneficial in matters
of life *and* death, yes.
# ....if you think death is healthy....
there are levels of consideration (species comparisons,
carrying capacity, and organism/ecosystem mesh).
death is of course never healthy for the organism.
that's a rudimentary distinction we weren't
considering, blessed beast!
boboroshi at-sign satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director
Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/
TOKUS WEBLINKS: http://dmoz.org/Bookmarks/B/boboroshi/
"Ninth Scholar"'s Library (Satanism Archive): http://www.satanservice.org/
Feel free to send my words in this thread *anywhere* with attribution :)
EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION: http://ec.princeton.edu/ 1-800-584-9911
SAVE THE PLANET, KILL YOURSELF!
David Carter
Ha!
Erwhine makes a telling point.
Eventually. Against the run of play.
Carter
taro...@jktarot.com
> 50060821 X! om -- SAVE THE PLANET, KILL YOURSELF!
> hi Jess,
Hi Suicider. So, how come you and Cat haven't saved the planet?
>> nagasiva (R. bobo):
> > ...that kind of transparency is not always so
> > easily acquired.
> > You didn't sound very happy about the
> > transparency a week or so ago,
> it was the duplicity i found objectionable.
You mean your own? Well, then you shouldn't have found it objectionable
to have it revealed. But you whined like some child being forced to
save the planet.
> there was no question of transparency.
Not after the links were posted to TarotL that revealed you to be a
suicide-promoting Satanist, no.
Things got pretty transparent after that. But then I didn't post those
links. Michael Hurst did.
> >...the little rabbits on TarotL found out about your dark (sui)side
> your ruse availed you not.
What ruse are you talking about?
It wasn't about availing, but unveiling.
> had i been concerned i would not have posted those URLs in my sigblock---
You did that for kicks. But it was safe. You know nobody reads your
stupid postings, and especially not your dumb sigshit.
If you hadn't been concerned, you would have answered Michael's
questions to you in a forthright manner.
"Nagasiva: Professional use of Tarot in promoting suicide"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TarotL/message/50381
In fact, let's take a look at Michael's posting to you, the one which
so upset you---and certainly readers on TarotL who woke up to what you
are all about:
-------
Nagasiva: Professional use of Tarot in promoting suicide
Thu Aug 3, 2006 5:33 pm
Message #50381 of 50635
Hi, Nagasiva,
We've recently had some interesting posts from Brian about his use of
Tarot in clinical hypnotherapy. I was wondering if you could tell us
about the use of Tarot in your capacity as SOD of CoE. A little over a
year ago you wrote several posts with the following signature tag:
boboroshi at-sign satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director
Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/
TOKUS WEBLINKS: http://dmoz.org/Bookmarks/B/boboroshi/
Ninth Scholar's Library (Satanism Archive):
http://www.satanservice.org/
There are some interesting topics associated with those pages, and also
an article in the Preston Evening Post, December 17, 2004. (FYI,
Preston is a city in Lancashire, U.K.)
Post exposes suicide web designer
This is the Internet Satanist who believes he is saving the world by
encouraging people to commit suicide.
http://www.prestontoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1789&ArticleID=906834
Another interesting page, apparently created in your capacity as
Satanic Outreach Director for the Church of Euthanasia is the
pro-suicide FAQ.
Encouraging Suicide -- FAQ
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/suicide/yes/
So I was wondering if you could tell us about any particular value
Tarot might have in promoting suicide or, more generally, in promoting
the Four Pillars of the Church: Sodomy, Abortion, Suicide, and
Cannibalism.
boboroshi, SOD of the CoE
http://dmoz.org/profiles/boboroshi.html
Best regards,
Michael
----------------
Nagasiva's rambling nonresponse:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TarotL/message/50391
Note, he "redirects" Michael's plain and pointed question, because
Nagasiva doesn't wish to answer it.
The thing is, Suicider, if you want everybody dead, which you say you
do, then shouldn't people be reasonably concerned you would use that
mission as a justification to shade any "readings" you make of Tarot or
any other divinatory tool to aid that objective?
You know, part of the outrage that was directed at you, especially at
the notion that you were a moderator on TarotL, and thus a public
representative of what that group stands for, is that "eccentrics" or
frauds already cause the general public to disparage Tarot and the
people who professionally practice it.
Finding out Tarot is being wielded by a psychopath who wants humanity
to off itself for his pleasure and profit and his service to Satan,
doesn't exactly mend that wound. And finding out that person was in
charge of TarotL did concern a lot of people.
We might consider the argument that at least you are not fraudulent or
duplicitous, given your public declaration of your designs, except you
are so very selective in who gets to know what part of your activities.
You use a host of pseudonyms to cover your tracks, and then complain
about a lack of "transparency" when others do the same thing. Also, you
think it is a betterment of the world if everybody else kills
themselves, but you and your wife haven't seen a reason to show the
world the way to this salvation.
When asked about this, why YOU were still alive, you said: "I have
considered killing myself but I feel I have a role to do in promoting
suicide."
A role missioned to you by Satan. Conveniently pious.
Now, you're still a member of Ordo Templi Orientis, correct?
And you have in the past argued for a Satanic interpretation of
Crowley's teachings, and that Aleister Crowley was in fact a Satanist.
So, if Satan is guiding or inspiring your work, would you say this work
is consistent with a Thelemic ethic? If so, upon which ideas of
Crowley's would you base this?
Recall Crowley called suicide "putrefaction in its lowest form."
Echoing this idea, and pointing to one abject Englishman, he noted an
attempted suicide as a symptom of "his rottenness".
And then this:
"Less than a year later, I heard that he swallowed a bottle of
poison---not even a decent poison, such as a self-respecting suicide
might be expected to use. I forget the precise ingredients. I think it
was some sort of disinfectant, such as is sold without restriction
because legislatures had failed to imagine anyone asinine or abject
enough to make it a beverage."
And of course: "I would not stand by and see [Rose, Crowley's first
wife] commit suicide."
But you wouldn't merely stand by, but would promote and orchestrate the
coup de haine.
> > So, did you and your wife assist this dolt's contribution to your Great Work?
See: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/msg/a92ad67aba500669
Also: http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/18/voodoo.killer.ap/
Nagasiva Yronwode reveals:
> they were assisted---
"they"?
One perp, unless you're claiming to know otherwise, or credit as his
co-perp.
> in a friendly manner by helpful people with knowledge of magic.
Or did you mean to say Carrenard gave "friendly" assistance to his
victims by murdering them?
In any case, did you and/or your wife sell or otherwise provide any
assistance to Pierre Carrenard?
> >...If the clerics of your faith help the aspirant kill themselves by stabbing
> > them 25 times (or whatever),
> saint Kevorkian wound up in prison for less interactive methods---
The last one was a televised execution, quite interactive, and got the
"saint" 10 to 25 years, or as it seems, life.
Is that the sainthood you aspire to?
> (130 chosen deaths before incarcerated, now he's about to die in prison).
So?
> > does that methodology corrupt the suicide
> lack of competency, planning and grace corrupts euthanasia. competency requires
> non-coercive conditions.
Kevorkian's view of non-coercive was not to have the victim kill
himself, but to render that duty to Kevorkian, as the killer. His
enthusiasm for the work was quite convincing to the jury that convicted
him, an outcome he seems to have wanted.
Your object is not a style, a "good" death, but an outcome---the death
of humanity---or as many of them as you can talk into killing
themselves, which encouraged and facilitated self-slaughter you see as
the good.
But isn't "suicide" just another one of your sockpuppets? You know, for
Mr. Mass Murder?
> > And like you told me, encouraging as many people to kill themselves as you can "is
> > healthy and likely to lead to euthanasia (good death(s))."
> self-empowerment is beneficial in matters of life *and* death, yes.
Dead people don't have any power.
On the other hand, Death Eaters can have a lot of power when they tell
depressed and vulnerable people it is their duty to die.
Like Jim Jones said, while handing out the cynanide-koolaid to
children: "This is a revolutionary suicide. This is not a self
destructive suicide."
And, let's see, oh yeah, you have said about YOUR passion: "But what
about the sensualist-death cults? You see, that is what I, in my queer
CoE [Church of Euthanasia] involvement, want to see more of: consensual
human sacrifice, necrophilia, bestiality, cannibalism, perhaps
combining all of these things in a religious ritual."
See: http://www.satanservice.org/coe/suicide/guide/
Could be quite "revolutionary", huh? But healthy?
> > ....if you think death is healthy....
> there are levels of consideration---
Your motto:
"SAVE THE PLANET, KILL YOURSELF!"
What levels are explicit in that commandment?
> death is of course never healthy for the organism.
And, by extension, neither for a species of those commanded to die.
So what you meant was healthy for the Satanic planet, post-humanitas.
Or A Better Earth through the extermination of humanity.
> that's a rudimentary distinction---
It would be a revealingly fundamental distinction to most people. I
think you will find they will happily and enthusiastically distinguish
your plan for them from anything they want for themselves or their
children.
And they will oppose you. Vigorously, I suspect.
Kaos
> "WaterWalker" <WalksonWater_saynotospam@shaw.> wrote in message
> news:E4aFg.429353$IK3.189467@pd7tw1no...
> > There is also the placebo effect, which I think is beneficial and shows
> > that either we can heal ourselves when we think we have help or we have
> > help from some source.
>
> The placebo effect does not bring you money or love, the two most common
> requests for spells.
It can, however, bolster the self confidence of an unskeptical
recipient. And if low self confidence is the primary issue with
attaining either (as is especially common with love,) there will be some
benefit.
Joseph Littleshoes
> SOD of the CoE [AKA Nagasiva Yronwode, boboroshi, etc.] wrote:
>
>
>>50060821 X! om -- SAVE THE PLANET, KILL YOURSELF!
>
>
>>hi Jess,
>
>
> Hi Suicider. So, how come you and Cat haven't saved the planet?
I suppose inconsistency is to be expected of the kkkarlin. I have lost
count of how many times he has urged me to commit suicide as a public
service.
---
JL
catherine yronwode
> Carter
I see no "telling point." One either believes in herb magic or one does
not. I do, and have no trouble saying so, and i use many such recipes,
formulas, and herbal prescriptions myself, with full faith and
confidence. My catalogue lists traditional uses of herbs in African
American folk magic. The descriptions are basically one-line versions of
the full entries in my popular book "Hoodoo Herb and Root Magic."
Here is a thought-experiment that may help some people uncover and
examine their beliefs about the honesty of "selling" articles for use in
magical rites. Below are two dozen clips from internet sources about how
to magically purify rooms, objects, and/or living beings. They represent
magical traditions from various cultures and were accessed by google today:
01 "Incense can be offered for the upliftment, purification and
well-being of others ...in the Biblical Christian and Jewish traditions"
02 "[Tibetan Buddhist] prayer wheels are ... powerful in purifying
negative karmas"
03 "[female deities] Khordad, Esphand and Amurdad ... keep the evil eye
away and ritually purify the space ... Esfand is made from wild rue
[actually Syrian Rue, Perganum harmala, not European Rue, Ruta
graveolens --cat) and is burned in many Zoroastrian ceremonies, rituals
and purification rites in Iranian homes."
04 "Traditional [Native American] purifying herbs including: White Sage,
Juniper, Cedar "
05 "Walk around the perimeter of our working space purifying it"
06 "Goriyo: follow annual Monsoon Austerity Ritual of Purification by
not eating cooked food for one or two weeks"
07 "Pick up the censor and purify the room with Fire starting in the East"
08 "Boneset can be used to purify a sick-room"
09 "Mist fountains generate negative ions, which help to purify the air
in the room"
10 "Use an all-natural orange essential oil room spray to purify the space"
11 "Purification is of the Birch tree"
12 "Purify the room with Fire and Water and the Lesser Banishing Ritual
of the
Pentagram"
13 "Pass your Pentagram through the smoke from the incense to
symbolically purify it"
14 "Scotch Broom: Sweep your outside ritual areas with it to purify"
15 "The standard color for circle-drawing is white for purity, and
anything can be used, from a rope, to chalk, to salt. White = Highest
Consciousness To Protect / Purify"
16 "Most folks like to cleanse and purify the home in a counterclockwise
fashion.... You may want to perform the Lesser Banishing Pentagram Ritual."
17 "As salt is life, let it purify me in all ways that I may use it"
18 "Asperge: To sprinkle with water before or during a ritual, to purify"
19 "The burning of incense has been known to purify the air and uplift
our spirits"
20 "Native Americans have uitlized earth's White Sage to purify space"
21 "There are numerous references in the Old Testament to ritual
purification with water"
22 "Purify the area with incense and sprinkling salt"
23 "Blood rituals are necessary to redirect violence onto
inconsequential victims in order to purify the community"
24 "Tibetan carry treasure box contain ritual offering grains of barley,
pulses, and rice. Grains for purify body and use for lama to put on top
(head) of human"
Now ask yourself if there a great different in your mind between the
*spiritual valiidity* of these 24 rites of purification in their various
cultures. If there is, then that is a measure of your adherence to one
culture's system of magic over others and/or a measure of your ignorance
about systems of magic oter than your own.
Leaving aside for a moment the commercial aspect of magic, we see that
the above 24 methods of magical purification comprise 34 separate
activities, some mentioned in more than one rite:
Activities for Magical Purification
01 Burn Incense (Biblical Frankincense)
02 Spin a Tibetan Buddhist prayer wheel
03 A) Burn esphand / Espand / Esfand seeds on charcoal
B) Recite prayer to female deity Spenta Armaiti (Espand)
C) Waft smoke around the body
04 Burn Incense (Cedar, Juniper, White Sage)
05 Walk around the perimeter of a space
06 Abstain from eating cooked foods
07 Burn Fire in a censer
08 Sprinkle Boneset tea
09 Install and operate a mist fountain
10 Spray orange essential oil
11 Sprinkle Birch tree tea
12 A) Light Fire
B) Sprinkle Water
C) Perform the Lesser Banishing Ritual of the Pentagram
13 A) Burn incense (unspeciified type)
B) Pass Pentagram through incense smoke
14 Sweep outdoors with a branch of Scotch Broom
15 Draw or lay down a circle of white items
16 A) Walk the perimeter counterclockwise
B) Perform the Lesser Banishing Pentagram Ritual
17 A) Say invocation over salt
B) Sprinkle dry salt or dissolve salt in water and use in asperging
18 Asperge with water
19 Burn incense (unspeciified type)
20 Burn White Sage as incense
21 Bathe with water (Biblical mikva)
22 A) Burn incense (unspeciified type)
B) Sprinkle salt
23 A) Slaughter animal or otherwise "inconsequential victim "
B) Mark beings or objects with blood
24 A) Carry box containing grains of barley, pulses, and rice
B) Priest (lama) put grains on top of congregant's head
Now, let's look at the "selling" aspect of these rites of purification.
The 24 rites and 34 activites make use of the following 34 active agents
and items of commerce:
Items of Commerce
Animal (alive) to sacrifice for collection of Blood
Barley grain
Birch Tree leaves
Boneset leaves
Book (Scripture, Rituals, Prayers, LBP, etc.)
Box to carry grains
Cedar wood
Censer
Chalk
Charcoal
Computer with Internet Access (Scripture, Rituals, Prayers, LBP, etc.)
Espand seed
Frankincense resin
Juniper wood
Knife (to kill animal and obtain blood)
Myrrh resin
Orange Essential Oil
Prayer Wheel
Pulses (pea and bean family seeds)
Rice grain
Rope (sisal, manila hemp, hemp)
Scotch Broom branch
Water
Water Mist Fountain
White Sage leaves
Only 2 of these articles can be had by non-gardeners, non-farmers, and
non-wild-crafters without recourse to commerce: If you are fortunate
enough to live near a river and know how to kindle fire with a string
bow, you can get fire and water for free. However, if your water is
piped to you or comes in a bottle, or if you use matches, a lighter, or
a stove to ignite your fire, then commerce is necessary to every ritual
of purification except number 06 (Abstain from eating cooked foods).
So let's be honest -- we live in a world where magic has been
commodified for so long that the only real question is, "is the article
being sold labelled corectly?" -- that is, if i promise to sell you
Frankincense resin, is it really from the Boswellia genus in the Bursera family?
And THAT is the kind of "honsty" i was speaking of.
By the way, in the above clips of text describing purification rites
from various cultures, only 1 of the 24 came from my Lucky Mojo site.
Can you guess which one?
cat yronwode
Lucky Mojo Curio Co. http://luckymojo.com.com/catalogue
Bassos
"Joseph Littleshoes" <jpst...@isp.com> wrote in message
news:733c$44ebc197$42359c4b$28...@DIALUPUSA.NET...
You have your attributions messed up.
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>> Erwin Hessle wrote:
>>> catherine yronwode wrote:
>>>> Tom wrote:
>
>>>>> How will you determine a set of best
>>>>> practices in a field that has no objective
>>>>> standards of performance at all?
>
>>>> I think a combination of honesty in advertising,
>>> "STAR ANISE $2.00
>>> "Stops misfortunes, increases psychic power, brings
>>> back a lost love, increases good luck."
>>>
>>> From:
>>>
>>> http://www.luckymojo.com/mojocatherbs.html
>>>
>>> Erwin Hessle, 8=3
>> Ha!
>>
>> Erwhine makes a telling point.
>>
>> Carter
>
> I see no "telling point."
I am sure it doesnt suit you to see one.
> One either believes in herb magic or one does
> not.
Magic is not about belief, it is about results. In any event, you are
not talking about herb 'Magick' (whatever that is apart from a sales
line), if Erwhine quoted your site properly (and I could easily believe
he didn't, the guy is incompetent at just about everything else), then
you are talking about an intrinsic property of the herb you mentioned.
Can you support your marketing hype that Anise "Stops misfortunes,
increases psychic power, brings back a lost love, increases good luck."?
I doubt it.
I do, and have no trouble saying so, and i use many such recipes,
> formulas, and herbal prescriptions myself, with full faith and
> confidence.
But no proof. The ad doesnt actually say 'some people believe", it
suggests that what are unsupported claims as facts. Bad.
<lots of bumph attempting to divert away unethical advertising snipped
jk
> I suppose inconsistency is to be expected of the kkkarlin. I have lost
> count of how many times he has urged me to commit suicide as a public
> service.
That count would be exactly zero.
I have encouraged you to do the Golden Gate Test, which is intended to
provide you with the opportunity to demonstrate the truth of your dogma
that "There is no truth". You have of course declined since your dogma
is a lie and you know it.
As noted earlier this week, Margaret Young created that test for you,
and she was adamantly opposed to suicide. In other words, she also knew
you were a liar and a coward.
Now, if you suddenly develop the testicular delusion to go take a whack
at it, well there is always natural selection to consider. But that is
a different issue, and certainly nobody will have preached to you that
it was your duty as a human being to be a fool.
Erwin Hessle
catherine yronwode wrote:
> So let's be honest -- we live in a world where magic has been
> commodified for so long that the only real question
The only real question for one with a vested interest in the peddling
of misinformation, maybe.
"Let's be honest" - heh.
> is, "is the article
> being sold labelled corectly?"
This:
"STAR ANISE $2.00
"Stops misfortunes, increases psychic power, brings back a lost love,
increases good luck."
From:
http://www.luckymojo.com/mojocatherbs.html
is not labelled correctly. Reword it very slightly as this:
"BIG MAC $2.49
"Stops misfortunes, increases psychic power, brings back a lost love,
increases good luck."
and you'll see what I mean.
> And THAT is the kind of "honsty" i was speaking of.
Me too.
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
Joseph Littleshoes
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>
>>I suppose inconsistency is to be expected of the kkkarlin. I have lost
>>count of how many times he has urged me to commit suicide as a public
>>service.
>
>
> That count would be exactly zero.
Your semantic wiggles aside here is a quote from you about your "test"
"By the way, did you hear they are working on jump-proofing the Golden
Gate? Have you been lobbying them? Or is it that your predecessors in
the test have failed (or rather succeeded backwards) so consistently?
Anyway, it seems as though it may very well soon be too late for you, at
least to use the Golden Gate. (jk)"
>
> I have encouraged you to do the Golden Gate Test,
Read "jump off of"
which is intended to
> provide you with the opportunity to demonstrate the truth of your dogma
> that "There is no truth". You have of course declined since your dogma
> is a lie and you know it.
You conveniently read my response to your original accusation of me
being a liar and you possessing the "Truth" of the tarot the way you
want to in order to cater to your own prejudice, you know perfectly well
i was referring to what you claimed is the "Truth" of the tarot. But
even putting that aside for the nonce, even so called scientific "Truth"
is conditional and relative.
>
> As noted earlier this week, Margaret Young created that test for you,
> and she was adamantly opposed to suicide. In other words, she also knew
> you were a liar and a coward.
If you ever pull your head our of your ass long enough to to stop
adoring it, you might possibly see that everything i have written in
response to you is legitimate speculation regarding the propaganda of
dogmatic "Truth" you so adamantly adhere to.
I disagree with your opinion upon the nature of "Truth" why you take
this as a personal insult to you and an indictment of not only my
intelligence but every one else of all the people i have cited in
reference to support my assertion is rather obvious, you cant handle the
idea that you might not have everything locked up neat and tidy, that
your idea of "Truth" is just an opinion and no more demonstrable than
your accusations regarding people personal integrity or lack thereof.
>
> Now, if you suddenly develop the testicular delusion to go take a whack
> at it, well there is always natural selection to consider. But that is
> a different issue, and certainly nobody will have preached to you that
> it was your duty as a human being to be a fool.
If anybody around here is a "wind bag".....
---
JL
>
> (jk)
>
SOD of the CoE
hi Jess,
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TarotL/message/50391
yes, i liked this post, and it is topical here, so i'll
reproduce from where it becomes pertinent:
...the subject of Tarot's usage in professional activities
is a good one ...and so i'll address it at length here,
perhaps to spark relevant discussion. Tarot is extremely
valuable to me in what i regard as my profession, and so
this will be a sort of summary of my usage to date on
account of this. typically where the intersection occurs
i merely provide orienting data to the TarotL readership,
but your query is wide-ranging and so the summary seems
more appropriate....
1) my profession is monk. my religio-political activities
as a Satanist are an outgrowth of my voluntary service
to Satan as a charitable endeavour. my spirituality
inspires this, which is a dedication wholly and utterly
to Kali Ma, Queen of Demons, prefacing all of it.
in my profession as a monk, Tarot functions VERY
well as a means by which i can orient to the cosmos
and my God. I like using oracles very much and have
been using a variety of divinatory methods to keep
this orientation strong.
reflectively-derived, consultation with Tarot
and a few other cartomantic decks, Yijing
(aka I Ching/Yi King/I King) especially within
the context of the expression of Master Huang's
translation of the Classic, Runes or other cast
objects in configuration, have been very helpful.
the relationship between games and divination has
always been compelling to me, and for this reason
i've created several game-divination sets for use
with conventional divinatory systems. I noticed
for example, the obvious numerical resonance
between the following 3 items:
* -- Hermetic Magic Square of Mercury
a board of 64 squares containing
numbers constructed so as to add
in all rows, columns, and main
diagonals to the same number.
* -- the Yi Ching and its 64 hexagrams
which are often numbered and
sometimes (as with Shao Yang)
set into square configuration.
* -- the game of Chess and its board
effectively the same as above but
without any numbers in the
64 individual squares.
I combined these into a divinatory oracle which
might bear some relation to ancient Chinese
oracle(s) from which Chess (or Xiquang, aka
Chinese Chess) may have derived. I studied the
Enochian Chess oracle-divination game created
by Mathers and Regardie and used this from the
basis of Four Seasons Chess to create the
Chess Divination Oracle, analyzing the finished
board in terms of elementary assignments to the
quartes and significance to the Chess pieces. [1]
another example was the Monopoly Oracle game
that i created, matching up its elements to
the sefirotic trees (there's 22 properties!).
its original spiritual instructive character
gave me additional reasons to fashion this.
I have not published this or explained any of
its details to the wide wonderful world.
it was natural, in learning more about the game
backdrop to Tarot, that i was intrigued and
excited about this. I'd been using the Harris-
Crowley 'Thoth' deck for years, gradually
'complementing' this with use of the Slinger-
Douglas 'Secret Dakini Oracle' deck for more
positive balance. as i learned more and more
about the way that Tarot was used in magical
pursuits, i set about the construction of a
completely new Tarot utilizing the imagery
of the past, tweaked at points by my newly-
acquired graphics skills on computers and its
novel technology. I set it upon a foundation
of a new sefirotic tree i'd derived in vision
through years of mediation on the matter, and
i understood this as from a different cosmologic
schema than presumed by the Lurianic mages and
mystics involved in the construction of modern
occult decks (emphasis on the Pythagorean).
not only did i discover a novel symbol-series
of Planetary character (one of only 3 possibles
and the other 2 are used extensively in magical
and conventional tradition, the third never
derived except by me, to my knowledge -- which i
called 'The Nigris Sequence', naturally enough) [2]
during this construction, but i understood the
implications of its craft and found therein its
proper name -- 'Plebeian', setting into place very
*conventional* symbolic and sequential elements.
my aim has been to make something truly universal,
or at least *potentially transformable by the
interested mage into a helpful universal Tarot
system*. this centers on the English language,
ordinal numbers 1-26, known Planets as i've been
instructed as to their names/positions from Sol
outward (astronomical rather than astrological),
simplifying and refining away from feudal
standards the contents of the card names/images.
it has as its interest the refocus on PERSONAL
Oracle construction after such figures as Case
and others who at least had people colouring
their new cards as they were being instructed.
beyond this wonderful developing project, which
has the potential to revolutionize Tarot and all
of magic and divination, there have been several
incidents for which Tarot has functioned as an
important catalyst in my magical career and
mystical development, some of which i mention
in the text below. :)
2) the only cross-over that i can imagine pertain to
Satanism specifically, beyond the "Devil's Picture
Book" reference and my understanding that magic and
the occult allow individuals to tap into their 'wild'
or intuitive side through its usage (and therefore
to connect with the Devil as SHe is the wild nature
within and without us all, demonized by conservatives)
is the DEVIL card, often XV, in the Plebeian
FOE-P-CAPRICORN. [3]
TarotL has had numerous references to this card for a
variety of reasons, including its use in magic early
on and my own experiences with it in association with
the World Trade Center incident (now referred to in a
strangely symbolic manner as '9-11'). [4]
3) my general activities for which i volunteer or am
paid include assisting in running an occult shop,
Lucky Mojo Curio Company, in which we sell numerous
card decks, including Tarots (and a variety of non-
Tarot cartomancy decks of oldstyle tradition such as
the LeNormand and Salon Oracle). the sales don't
really constitute a 'use', in the sense which you
probably meant, and i can't think of anything else
that would be pertinent except the occasional
referral we may give for Tarot readers for someone
that wants such a reading prior to or in association
with contractual magic work.
what is YOUR profession? how does Tarot function
for you as an assist to your career? :)
====================================================
NOTES
1 -- see The Classic of Magick Squares:
Research on I Ching and Magick Squares
http://www.luckymojo.com/avidyana/dozen/clmgksqrs.tn
and Magic Squares: Arcane Speculation on
Mathematical Objects in Series
http://luckymojo.com/avidyana/plebe/magicsquares.txt
2 -- here is The Nigris Sequence along with the other 2:
===========================================================
===== (Planetary Order Talisman --- Skip-1 Formula!) =====
ANCIENTS : M-2-3-1-5-6-7 (mean terracentric motion order)
NIGRIS : 2-1-6-M-3-5-7 (a mysterious, hidden sequence!)
WEEKDAYS : 1-M-5-2-6-3-7 (weekdays in the solar calendar)
===========================================================
PLAN-KEY : 1-2-3-M-5-6-7 (Sun-Merc-Ven-Moon-Mars-Jup-Sat)
========== (Rotating Wisdom From The Ancients!) ===========
===========================================================
3 -- The Plebeian Tree
http://luckymojo.com/avidyana/graphics/tarotreektys.gif
4 -- Runnin' With the Devil! WTF (What the Fuck?) 666
http://luckymojo.com/avidyana/shaitan/wtf.666
5 -- Ibid. http://luckymojo.com/avidyana/graphics/tarotreektys.gif
END
> ...you would use that mission as a justification to
> shade any "readings" you make of Tarot or any other
> divinatory tool to aid that objective?
not really, no. all the same, most of my divination is
done for myself, reflection of the present circumstance.
occasionally
> ..."eccentrics" or frauds already cause the general
> public to disparage Tarot and the people who
> professionally practice it....
that's a contributing factor, but there is a hefty
antagonism against all things occult in part due
to religious and secular instruction prejudicing
against it (competition, superstition-claims).
> Now, you're still a member of Ordo Templi Orientis,
> correct?
in good standing. got a newsletter from Thelema Lodge
recently confirming this. it was great to hear from
them again.
> And you have in the past argued for a Satanic
> interpretation of Crowley's teachings, and
> that Aleister Crowley was in fact a Satanist.
there is no special interpretation of Crowley that
is required to see his de facto Satanist status.
> So, if Satan is guiding or inspiring your work,
> would you say this work is consistent with a
> Thelemic ethic? ....
of course, as it provides self-empowerment and
individualistic genius. Crowley wasn't a very
consistent example of Thelema.
>> they were assisted in a friendly manner by
>> helpful people with knowledge of magic.
the person in this thread, silly.
>>>...If the clerics of your faith help the aspirant
>>> kill themselves by stabbing them 25 times (or
>>> whatever),
>>
>> saint Kevorkian wound up in prison for less
>> interactive methods---
>
> The last one was a televised execution,
indeed.
> quite interactive,
no, he wasn't stabbing people 25 times, silly.
> and got the "saint" 10 to 25 years, or as it
> seems, life.
sadly true. he's ahead of his time.
> Is that the sainthood you aspire to?
no, i'm not becoming a doctor and wouldn't take
that kind of action without being one. ;) all
the same, he was right in what he was doing.
thanks, blessed beast!
boboroshi at-sign satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director
Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/
TOKUS WEBLINKS: http://dmoz.org/Bookmarks/B/boboroshi/
"Ninth Scholar"'s Library (Satanism Archive): http://www.satanservice.org/
Feel free to send my words in this thread *anywhere* with attribution :)
EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION: http://ec.princeton.edu/ 1-800-584-9911
nagasiva
> occasionally
occasionally i've done readings including others,
but these were primarily instructive readings in
which i helped another person read for themself. :)
nagasiva
luckymojo.com@
LuckyH.
catherine yronwode wrote:
> David Carter wrote:
> >
> > Erwin Hessle wrote:
> > > catherine yronwode wrote:
> > >> Tom wrote:
>
> > >>> How will you determine a set of best
> > >>> practices in a field that has no objective
> > >>> standards of performance at all?
>
> > >> I think a combination of honesty in advertising,
> > >
> > > "STAR ANISE $2.00
> > > "Stops misfortunes, increases psychic power, brings
> > > back a lost love, increases good luck."
> > >
> > > From:
> > >
> > > http://www.luckymojo.com/mojocatherbs.html
> > >
> > > Erwin Hessle, 8=3
> >
> > Ha!
> >
> > Erwhine makes a telling point.
> >
> > Carter
>
> I see no "telling point." One either believes in herb magic or one does
> not.
The world is not as grey as you would have it be, Cat.
(The rest of the"LuckyMojo" advertisment snipped)
-jASE
LuckyH.
LuckyH. wrote:
> The world is not as grey as you would have it be, Cat.
oops. Doesn't make sense unless you tack on a "?" at the end of the
above statement, instead of a period.
-Jason
catherine yronwode
>
> The ad doesnt actually say 'some people believe", it
> suggests that what are unsupported claims as facts. Bad.
The catalogue entry explains magical usage within the context of a known
and traditional system of magic. Belief in herb magic is understood as
the foundational a priori paradigm in any discussion of herb magic.
"Jesus saves" is not false advertising either. Nor is "Buddhist pactice
liberates one from karma." Nor is "White is the colour of purity." Nor
is "Spenta Armentii is the goddess of protection invoked through the
herb Espand." Nor is "There are five elements: water, earth, air, fire,
and metal."
These are not "unsupported claims" that are being made within the
context of a skeptical-rational-atheist belief system.
Rather, they are statements of belief that are being made within the
contexts of their own various traditional belief systems.
As such, they require no "support" from tradtions outside themselves.
One need not validate salvation through Jesus by means of the atomic
table of elements, and one need not validate the Chinese Five Elements
system by means of belief in Spenta Armentii. Each belief system is
whole and adeqyate unto itself.
Skeptical-rational-atheist beliefs systems are not the only belief
systems, thank God, or Goddess, or Spirit, as the case may be.
cat yronwode
http://southern-spirits.com
African American magic and spirituality
hierony...@my-deja.com
> even so called scientific "Truth" is conditional and relative.
"It should be made clear from the onset that the sort of truth we are
talking about in this discussion is not some sort of idealized dogmatic
or universal truth of the type sometimes promoted by religious or
political zealots. While truth is an extremely valuable concept, things
are usually not totally true or totally false, and we may or may not be
able to judge the truth of a statement with much confidence. Still,
some things are very true and others are very false, and it is often
important that we can make good judgments about which is which and when
we don't know."
http://www.truthpizza.org/nature.htm
> I disagree with your opinion upon the nature of "Truth"
"For the truth of a statement to be meaningful, it should be predictive
in some way. If we say the football games starts at 1:00, that implies
that witnesses in the appropriate place will observe a football game
going on shortly after 1:00 but not before 1:00. If a statement doesn't
predict anything, it is hard to imagine how the statement could be of
any use to us."
http://www.truthpizza.org/nature.htm
> your idea of "Truth" is just an opinion
"Unfortunately there is a tradition that experts in an area like music
sometimes regard their own preferences as a "truth" that one thing is
better than another, and those of us who are not experts may believe
them because we feel unqualified to question their opinions. In modern
times some might challenge such arbitrary choices by saying "It is true
for you that Pavarotti is better but it is true for me that Elton John
is better." This leads to the idea that there are different "truths"
for different people. This might be fine for evaluating artists, but it
gets us into big trouble when talk about the conservation of energy or
when the football game starts or whether there is a cement truck
heading toward our car at high speed."
http://www.truthpizza.org/nature.htm
-hi-
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>> The ad doesnt actually say 'some people believe", it
>> suggests that what are unsupported claims as facts. Bad.
>
> The catalogue entry explains magical usage within the context of a known
> and traditional system of magic. Belief in herb magic is understood as
> the foundational a priori paradigm in any discussion of herb magic.
>
> "Jesus saves" is not false advertising either.
Nt the same thing. Nobody in their right mind would believe that a peron
(?) who died in excess of 2000 years ago could save anything or anyone.
In any case, I dont recall anyone charging for making Jesus save anyone.
If they did they would no doubt be prosecuted
> Nor is "Buddhist pactice
> liberates one from karma."
Ditto
> Nor is "White is the colour of purity." Nor
> is "Spenta Armentii is the goddess of protection invoked through the
> herb Espand." Nor is "There are five elements: water, earth, air, fire,
> and metal."
Noe of these things is equivalenet - they all employ an invisible agency
and are all equally improbable to the thinking person.
In contrast, you say This thing which you can buy from me - does - that,
and have absolutely no evidence to back it up. All your twisting and
bending will not change that fact.
>
> These are not "unsupported claims" that are being made within the
> context of a skeptical-rational-atheist belief system.
of course they are unsupported. Can you support any of them?
>
> Rather, they are statements of belief that are being made within the
> contexts of their own various traditional belief systems.
The examples you quote are not equivalent as I have pointed out.
>
> As such, they require no "support" from tradtions outside themselves.
If they are to be stated as facts they most certainly do.
<blah snipped>
I am beginning to believe you are both a fraud and recalcitrant.
Carter
jk
> > That count would be exactly zero.
> Your semantic wiggles aside here is a quote from you about your "test"
It's a test which should only be threatening to you if you fear failing
it with respect to your claim "there is no truth".
> Anyway, it seems as though it may very well soon be too late for you, at
> least to use the Golden Gate. (jk)"
For the test of your premise that there is no truth.
> > I have encouraged you to do the Golden Gate Test,
> Read "jump off of"
Unless you are admitting the truth of gravity, "jump off of" isn't
necessarily "jump down from to a watery end". As noted earlier, your
considerable hot air might afford you the ability to float over the
whole enterprise, thus not requiring any jump at all.
But that's of course a metaphor, and the test is a real opportunity.
> > You have of course declined since your dogma
> > is a lie and you know it.
> You conveniently read my response to your original accusation of me
> being a liar---
Aren't you a liar?
> and you possessing the "Truth" of the tarot the way you
> want to in order to cater to your own prejudice, you know perfectly well
> i was referring to what you claimed is the "Truth" of the tarot.
Joey, what I know is that you cannot write a coherent English sentence
to save your life.
If all you meant was there was no "Truth of the tarot", which would
invite some useful questions you could not answer, why would Margaret
devise the Golden Gate test for you?
As noted, she certainly would not have been encouraging you to commit
suicide. She would have been encouraging you to either act on your
claim, or admit its falsehood. It's taken a while, but it seems in this
post you finally accomplish the latter mission. Congratulations on your
breakthrough.
But, you're still a liar.
> But even putting that aside for the nonce, even so called scientific "Truth"
> is conditional and relative.
So, you're saying if you take the test, it is like shooting craps, or
turning the roulette wheel? Gravity might be working, gravity might not
be working?
Then do it with a net. 1000 times. Let's see how conditional and
relative it is.
You live in a little box of lies called "I don't have to do it just
because you say so."
It's not because I say so. It's just how things are. There are truths,
You claimed otherwise. You were wrong.
And you know that it is the truth.
> > As noted earlier this week, Margaret Young created that test for you,
> > and she was adamantly opposed to suicide. In other words, she also knew
> > you were a liar and a coward.
> If you ever pull your head our of your ass long enough to to stop
> adoring it, you might possibly see that everything i have written in
> response to you is legitimate speculation---
Your many claims, falsely accusing me of having plagiarized other
people's work, are neither legitimate or speculative, but slander on
your part.
> regarding the propaganda of dogmatic "Truth" you so adamantly adhere to.
What dogmatic "Truth" do I adamantly adhere to?
Be specific.
Again, if the dispute was merely cartotopical, Margaret would not have
devised the test for you.
> I disagree with your opinion upon the nature of "Truth"
What is my opinion upon the nature of "Truth"?
> why you take this as a personal insult to you---
You're projecting there. You came into this game expecting something
you clearly did not merit---automatic respect for your very
questionable opinions. When you did not receive that, and you did not
receive it from most people, it upset you.
On the other hand, you have been slandering me for years. That part of
your "work" does seem personally insulting.
> and an indictment of not only my intelligence but every one else of all the
> people i have cited in reference to support my assertion---
Who would that be?
You have a history of having been challenged on numerous assertions you
make.
You have a history of ignoring those challenges.
You have a history of then falsely claiming to have met them.
Those histories do erode your credibility.
> is rather obvious, you cant handle the
> idea that you might not have everything locked up neat and tidy, that
> your idea of "Truth" is just an opinion---
Regarding what specifically?
You are a liar. That is a fact.
Nagasiva is a suicide-promoting Satanist.
That is a fact, which he affirms.
And Tarot is about something, and not all opinions about it are
knowledgeable or true.
Oh, and there is that rule called gravity concerning massive things.
> and no more demonstrable than your accusations regarding people personal integrity or
> lack thereof.
So, in your opinion, is Nagasiva's plan to have humanity kill itself a
worthy goal?
Is it one you support?
> > Now, if you suddenly develop the testicular delusion to go take a whack
> > at it, well there is always natural selection to consider. But that is
> > a different issue, and certainly nobody will have preached to you that
> > it was your duty as a human being to be a fool.
> If anybody around here is a "wind bag".....
That would be a number of people; you and Min and Nagasiva come to mind
most readily as pufferfish of folly.
Joseph Littleshoes
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>
>>is conditional and relative.
>
>
> So, you're saying if you take the test, it is like shooting craps, or
> turning the roulette wheel? Gravity might be working, gravity might not
> be working?
A week ago science taught that Pluto was a planet, to day science says
it is not. What was "True" a week ago is not "True" today.
We have been around this argument before, i have my opinion of "Truth"
you have your opinion of me, i don't care to discuss your subjective
opinions of me, and you don't care to discuss the concept of "Truth" so
be it. Nothing is served by your insults to me or my attempt to reason
with you.
What's the tag from Tacitus? "Capax imporii nisi imperasset" modifying
and applying this to yourself, had you never spoke no one would have
questioned your intelligence.
---
JL
Joseph Littleshoes
Thank you for your contribution Hiero, but please recall that this all
started with kkkarlins claim of possessing the "Truth" of the tarot.
Since then, my statement regarding the nature of this particular
assertion has, by kkkarlins & his ilk & myrmidons, become wrapped up in
a discussion of science, this is merely kkkarlins way of obsfucating the
discussion and trying to wiggle out of an untenable position he was
foolish enough to get himself into, it is, IMO more indicative of his
own hubris than anything else.
---
JL
catherine yronwode
You've made a fundamental error that obviates your argument:
Espand herb seeds are most definitely NOT "an invisible agency" and they
are indeed for sale all over the world and all over the net and they are
sold and used for the purpose of taking off the evil eye and providing
protection. Do a google search on Espand / Esphand / Esfand / Aspand /
Harmala.
Now, in the first part of your post, you go out of your way to make a
clear distinction between application to "invisible agencies" and
application of actual physical agents -- as if this distinction was of
some consequence to you. Such a line of demarcation is not drawn by
people in all cultures, and thus your parochial viewpoint is laid bare
--
-- but then you drop any line of reasoning in which the distinction
between "invisible agencies" and application of actual physical agents
is important, and sink to a far lower rhetorical level, charging that
those who belive in and work with religio-magical invisible agencies
and/or pysical agents are not "in their right mind." This misuse of
diagnostic standards of mental health is aimed in an insulting,
intolerant, and supercillious way toward any people who do not believe
as you do.
That being the case, you are hardly worthy of further attention.
catherine yronwode
hierony...@my-deja.com
> hieronymous707:
> Thank you for your contribution Hiero, but please recall that this all
> started with kkkarlins claim of possessing the "Truth" of the tarot.
You're very welcome, of course. I hope you take the opportunity to
peruse the site.
I think you'll find it worthwhile. Frankly, I don't recall or care how
"this all started". I can't even tell you why I was apparently
compelled to chime in here and now. I'm certainly in no position
comment knowledgeably on, much less settle any argument between the two
of you, so I'll be shutting the fuck up very, very soon.
> Since then, my statement regarding the nature of this particular
> assertion has, by kkkarlins & his ilk & myrmidons, become wrapped up in
> a discussion of science, this is merely kkkarlins way of obsfucating the
> discussion and trying to wiggle out of an untenable position he was
> foolish enough to get himself into, it is, IMO more indicative of his
> own hubris than anything else.
I suppose we see what we want to see
-hi-
Joseph Littleshoes
> catherine yronwode wrote:
>
>> David Carter wrote:
>>
>>> The ad doesnt actually say 'some people believe", it
>>> suggests that what are unsupported claims as facts. Bad.
>>
>>
>> The catalogue entry explains magical usage within the context of a known
>> and traditional system of magic. Belief in herb magic is understood as
>> the foundational a priori paradigm in any discussion of herb magic.
>> "Jesus saves" is not false advertising either.
>
>
>
> Nt the same thing. Nobody in their right mind would believe that a peron
> (?) who died in excess of 2000 years ago could save anything or anyone.
> In any case, I dont recall anyone charging for making Jesus save anyone.
> If they did they would no doubt be prosecuted
"Tithing" some fundie churches demand a person reveal their personal
worth and assesses the biblical amount considered appropriate.
>
>
>> Nor is "Buddhist pactice
>> liberates one from karma."
>
>
> Ditto
Believe it or not their are intolerant bigoted fundie buddhists who, in
practice are no better than their xtian counterparts, Nichiren Shoshu
for example, where not only are certain funds expected to be given to
the organization but they actually maintain a 'one way' dogma regarding
their teachings.
>
>> Nor is "White is the colour of purity." Nor
>> is "Spenta Armentii is the goddess of protection invoked through the
>> herb Espand." Nor is "There are five elements: water, earth, air, fire,
>> and metal."
>
>
> Noe of these things is equivalenet - they all employ an invisible agency
> and are all equally improbable to the thinking person.
You are missing the point. Some people choose of their own free will to
believe in and practice beliefs that are not recognized by 'science' as
being valid, this does not mean they are fraud per se. People have
favourite colours, foods, habits, ways of doing things that many other
people may not agree with, but which, outside of a totalitarian police
state are allowed as personal choice. Some people believe in a creator
god others in Darwin & neither should be accused of 'fraud'.
> <carter's blah snipped>
>
> I am beginning to believe you are both a fraud and recalcitrant.
>
> Carter
And you are, apparently just another intolerant bigot who wont consider
anything outside your own bias and prejudice.
---
JL
LuckyH.
Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> And you are, apparently just another intolerant bigot who wont consider
> anything outside your own bias and prejudice.
> ---
> JL
> >
> >>
> >> cat yronwode
> >> http://southern-spirits.com African American magic and spirituality
Wow. I don't think I've ever seen JL write such a harsh post.
JL, no offense but David does have a point. (I don't agree with
everything he writes, but yes, he does have a point.)
You seem to actively come to the aid of anyone questioning/criticizing
Cat. I would suggest that you back off a bit and let the woman handle
her own.
Believe it or not, much of the criticizism directed at Cat is apt.
Immediately coming to her defense is not going to provoke the thoughts
necesary that might sway Cat into altering some of her "dubious"
behavior. In fact, just the opposite, it will encourage her to
continue engaging in such activities.
-Jason
LuckyH.
Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> And you are, apparently just another intolerant bigot who wont consider
> anything outside your own bias and prejudice.
> ---
> JL
> >
> >>
> >> cat yronwode
> >> http://southern-spirits.com African American magic and spirituality
Wow. I don't think I've ever seen JL write such a harsh post.
Joseph Littleshoes
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>>And you are, apparently just another intolerant bigot who wont consider
>>anything outside your own bias and prejudice.
>>---
>>JL
>>
>>>>cat yronwode
>>>>http://southern-spirits.com African American magic and spirituality
>
>
> Wow. I don't think I've ever seen JL write such a harsh post.
>
> JL, no offense but David does have a point. (I don't agree with
> everything he writes, but yes, he does have a point.)
>
Obviously i disagree with his assessment of cat and by extension anyone
practising folk magick. To say nothing of his biased and faulty attempt
at 'logic'.
> You seem to actively come to the aid of anyone questioning/criticizing
> Cat. I would suggest that you back off a bit and let the woman handle
> her own.
You are under a misapprehension, while i readily admit to an admiration
of cat's work & writings, both internet related and in "real life" the
above "aid" you mention i would have tendered to anyone attacked in such
a manner.
I take it you did not see my reply to the xtian fundamentalist
'end of times' post? in ARW?
>
> Believe it or not, much of the criticizism directed at Cat is apt.
I do not agree, i have yet to see a valid "criticism" of cat. And those
non valid critic's that i have seen are transparently biased and the
hostility they exhibit is more telling than any opinion they may contain.
> Immediately
"Immediately"? check the dates on this thread.
coming to her defense is not going to provoke the thoughts
> necesary that might sway Cat into altering some of her "dubious"
> behavior.
Obviously i have no desire to alter cats behaviour nor do i consider it
"dubious".
In fact, just the opposite, it will encourage her to
> continue engaging in such activities.
And more power to her i say, what have you accomplished Jason, what are
the proofs that are the results of your life's work? Cat is very
accessible, easily found, and documented along with her work, who are
you Jason and what have you done?
It seems to me that those who have done the least are the quickest to
judge the work of others, and that, usually with an obvious jealousy of
other peoples accomplishments. Quite often, especially in these news
groups, those who cant do something note worthy criticize the work of
those who do. What's the old saw, "put up or shut up"?
---
JL
>
> -Jason
>
LuckyH.
Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> LuckyH. wrote:
>
> > Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> >
> >>And you are, apparently just another intolerant bigot who wont consider
> >>anything outside your own bias and prejudice.
> >>---
> >>JL
> >>
> >>>>cat yronwode
> >>>>http://southern-spirits.com African American magic and spirituality
> >
> >
> > Wow. I don't think I've ever seen JL write such a harsh post.
> >
> > JL, no offense but David does have a point. (I don't agree with
> > everything he writes, but yes, he does have a point.)
> >
>
> Obviously i disagree with his assessment of cat and by extension anyone
> practising folk magick. To say nothing of his biased and faulty attempt
> at 'logic'.
You are free to disagree, but when you attempt to turn a person into a
saint, you are crossing the line.
>
> > You seem to actively come to the aid of anyone questioning/criticizing
> > Cat. I would suggest that you back off a bit and let the woman handle
> > her own.
>
> You are under a misapprehension, while i readily admit to an admiration
> of cat's work & writings, both internet related and in "real life" the
> above "aid" you mention i would have tendered to anyone attacked in such
> a manner.
JL, there's a difference between "criticism" and "attacking". If you
don't know what the difference is, then you need to start maturing.
>
> I take it you did not see my reply to the xtian fundamentalist
> 'end of times' post? in ARW?
I'm not interested in your life.
>
> >
> > Believe it or not, much of the criticizism directed at Cat is apt.
>
> I do not agree, i have yet to see a valid "criticism" of cat.
It's because you are too busy worshiping her to see her faults.
> And those
> non valid critic's that i have seen are transparently biased and the
> hostility they exhibit is more telling than any opinion they may contain.
There is no such thing as "non-valid" critics. Again, you need to be a
bit more mature.
>
> > Immediately
>
> "Immediately"? check the dates on this thread.
>
> coming to her defense is not going to provoke the thoughts
> > necesary that might sway Cat into altering some of her "dubious"
> > behavior.
>
> Obviously i have no desire to alter cats behaviour nor do i consider it
> "dubious".
>
> In fact, just the opposite, it will encourage her to
> > continue engaging in such activities.
What activities would those be? Again, you so idolize Cat that you are
blind to her faults, as well as the "dubious" activities she engages
in.
>
> And more power to her i say, what have you accomplished Jason, what are
> the proofs that are the results of your life's work? Cat is very
> accessible, easily found, and documented along with her work, who are
> you Jason and what have you done?
LOL....Who am I? I'm Jason. I have no need to "toot my own horn"
unlike certain others. Unlike some people, I don't turn every post I
make in usenet into a lengthy advertisement.
Who the hell are you, JL?
> It seems to me that those who have done the least are the quickest to
> judge the work of others, and that, usually with an obvious jealousy of
> other peoples accomplishments.
You are ignorant, JL. To think I even gave you the benefit of sanity
when some of your posts where extremely far out there.
Busines Success/Prosperity doesn't equate to "Being a Good Person".
Again, you seem to be very immature when it comes to knowing things of
this nature.
If you can't see this then you are blind.
> Quite often, especially in these news
> groups, those who cant do something note worthy criticize the work of
> those who do. What's the old saw, "put up or shut up"?
And then there's the blind and ignorant followers like you.
It's o.k. JL, I use to be like you, a vast mind-less zombie, who was
hypnotized by Cat's "smoke and mirrors". The difference is that I
snapped out of it and was fortunate enough to be put into a position to
see a side of Cat that she doesn't reveal to her *groupies*.
-Jason
Joseph Littleshoes
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>>LuckyH. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>>>
>>>JL, no offense but David does have a point. (I don't agree with
>>>everything he writes, but yes, he does have a point.)
>>>
>>
>>Obviously i disagree with his assessment of cat
> You are free to disagree, but when you attempt to turn a person into a
> saint, you are crossing the line.
Google has a long memory. And mine aint too shabby.
Date: Thurs, May 4 2006 10:36 am
Email: "LuckyH." <Lucky...@aol.com>
Groups: alt.lucky.w
I would like to take the time to publicly apologise to Dara, Cat, &
Eoghan.
To Cat,
How dare I criticize a percieved "know-it-all" attitude in you when I
myself acted like one.
I am greatly sorry.
To Dara,
How dare I critisize you for claiming you do not create. As a woman
you are most definately creating, and bearing the responsibility for
furthering the human race.
To Eoghan,
How dare I argue with you when your knowledge is indeed like an
encyclopedia. I should have been agreeing with you instead of choosing
to argue over truly pointless things.
I am an ass, a fool, and was priorly coming from a dark place of
judgement.
Again, I humbly apologize.
-Jason
=======
Given your posting history "Jason" it is readily apparent that you cant
seem to make up your mind, about yourself much less any one else.
---
JL
> You are ignorant, JL. To think I even gave you the benefit of sanity
> when some of your posts where extremely far out there.
>
>
jk
> A week ago science taught that Pluto was a planet, to day science says
> it is not.
That is a misleading representation, which we should expect from a
person who demonstrates a considerable hostility to science and its
implications.
In fact, Pluto's planetary stature has been in question by scientists
since the time of its discovery. The reason it was allowed in is
because the definition of "planet" had not been rigorously attempted
before today---that is it had not been formally accepted by a consensus
of astronomers.
Now, that has changed. And Pluto has been demoted to a dwarf.
That isn't a problem for science and its truth, but it certainly is one
for astrology and its alleged truths.
As I wrote on Tarotica:
"After all, if Pluto isn't REALLY a planet, but a dwarf version of a
planet, with insufficient "orbital dominance" to qualify in the big
leagues, what does that say about Scorpio and its natives?Does that
lack of dominance, and size, and let's face it respect, make them all
dark and vengeful and wormtonguey? Is it that basic lack of acceptance
that makes them so alienated from others they go on jihads of
retribution against the whole human race?"
Nagasiva is a Scorpio.
Cat once pointed out: "He comes from a long line of postal inspectors
and book-keepers."
So, likely to go postal or enron.
> What was "True" a week ago is not "True" today.
Well, one thing that was true a week ago, is still true today.
You're an idiot.
> What's the tag from Tacitus?
"Joseph is a YAMhead"---in Latin of course.
FragileWarrior
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>> A week ago science taught that Pluto was a planet, to day science says
>> it is not.
Whoohooo. I can't wait until they discover hot fudge and deep fat frying
are weight loss tools!
LuckyH.
JL, for your information, I was being "the better person". I could
have gladly run to google history and posted the times where Cat
completley contradicted herself as well as the many time she flat out
ignored posts you made to her.
Grow up.
-Jason
Joseph Littleshoes
> Why does every-nut case immediately run to google history?
If you don't like it don't supply it with ammunition that can be used
against you. Your own words indict you jason, and that is nobody's
fault but your own.
"He who does not learn from history is doomed to repeat it."
>
> JL, for your information, I was being "the better person".
"I am an ass, a fool, and was priorly coming from a dark place of
judgement.
Again, I humbly apologize.
-Jason"
You may try to be the 'better person', from one day to the next,
however, consistency is a virtue, jason, you seem to lack a consistent
to say nothing of a coherent approach to life.
I have seen you so many times announce to these groups that you have
found this secret or that "Truth" only to drop it and move on to what
ever bright, shiny object next attracts your attention.
Personally i think your "dark place" has had the upper hand for a very
long time, and i mean that more in a psychological than any occult or
mystical sense. And your present 'knee jerk' (emphasis on "jerk")
reaction to myself, who has been nothing if not supportive of your
efforts these last few years, is indicative of this.
I could
> have gladly run to google history and posted the times where Cat
> completley contradicted herself
I would like to see you do that. But even if you do, read some Seneca
first, i do not expect people to be perfect, humans are fallible
creatures more prone to disappoint than fulfil each other.
as well as the many time she flat out
> ignored posts you made to her.
She would not be the first. Ignoring my many, often times rambling,
esoteric, obscure postings of a unique (some say deranged) mind is a
sign of intelligence IMO. You might save yourself some grief by taking
a lesson from her in this.
>
> Grow up.
Surly you can do better than that. To paraphrase Tacitus "Capax imporii
nisi imperasset" which in your case i would amend to read something to
the effect, "if you had never spoke no one would have questioned your
ability to do so."
If anyone's interested in your inconsistencies all they have to do is
google "Jason+apology" to see how many times you have contradicted
yourself, admitted to posting drunk and engaging in drunken abuse of
other posters and generally demonstrating a less than coherent approach
to the subject of these groups.
I have lost track of all your pseudonyms, but adding 'idiot' to a google
search on your present nom de net will turn up many, many posts giving
other peoples impressions of your 'contributions'.
And of course, claiming everybody is wrong about you, that they are all
"idiots" is just the type of claim to demonstrate how right they are.
Gloria en et Domini
-------------------
Joseph Littleshoes
>
> -Jason
>
LuckyH.
Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> LuckyH. wrote:
>
> > Why does every-nut case immediately run to google history?
>
> If you don't like it don't supply it with ammunition that can be used
> against you. Your own words indict you jason, and that is nobody's
> fault but your own.
"My own words indict me?" You are trying to make it seem as if having
integrity is a bad thing. I only apologized for the instances where I
stepped over the line. I did not accept blame for the wrong-doings as
committed by such individuals.
>
> "He who does not learn from history is doomed to repeat it."
One must have adequate knowledge of history before one attempts to use
such saying.
> >
> > JL, for your information, I was being "the better person".
>
>
> "I am an ass, a fool, and was priorly coming from a dark place of
> judgement.
>
> Again, I humbly apologize.
>
> -Jason"
>
> You may try to be the 'better person', from one day to the next,
> however, consistency is a virtue, jason, you seem to lack a consistent
> to say nothing of a coherent approach to life.
I could literaly post the crazy replies you have made in an attempt to
suck-up to Cat and others, all of which were convienently ignored by
said parties.
>
> I have seen you so many times announce to these groups that you have
> found this secret or that "Truth" only to drop it and move on to what
> ever bright, shiny object next attracts your attention.
WTF? I think you are confusing me with someone else.
>
> Personally i think your "dark place" has had the upper hand for a very
> long time, and i mean that more in a psychological than any occult or
> mystical sense. And your present 'knee jerk' (emphasis on "jerk")
> reaction to myself, who has been nothing if not supportive of your
> efforts these last few years, is indicative of this.
I've tolerated your weirdness simply because I tolerate weirdness.
This doens't mean that I enjoy your company.
>
> I could
> > have gladly run to google history and posted the times where Cat
> > completley contradicted herself
>
> I would like to see you do that. But even if you do, read some Seneca
> first, i do not expect people to be perfect, humans are fallible
> creatures more prone to disappoint than fulfil each other.
Duh. Neither do I. I will not, however, stoop to your level and waste
my valuable time in order to find every crazy post you have made that
nobody responded to. It's your posts, you locate them.
>
> as well as the many time she flat out
> > ignored posts you made to her.
>
> She would not be the first. Ignoring my many, often times rambling,
> esoteric, obscure postings of a unique (some say deranged) mind is a
> sign of intelligence IMO. You might save yourself some grief by taking
> a lesson from her in this.
I don't mind accepting wisdom where I find it. I also don't have a
problem directing criticism where it is sorely due.
>
> >
> > Grow up.
>
> Surly you can do better than that. To paraphrase Tacitus "Capax imporii
> nisi imperasset" which in your case i would amend to read something to
> the effect, "if you had never spoke no one would have questioned your
> ability to do so."
I have no fear of speaking my opinion. Nor do I fear those who
reference obscure quotes in order to impress.
>
> If anyone's interested in your inconsistencies all they have to do is
> google "Jason+apology" to see how many times you have contradicted
> yourself, admitted to posting drunk and engaging in drunken abuse of
> other posters and generally demonstrating a less than coherent approach
> to the subject of these groups.
BRAVE TO IGNORANCE!!!!
JL, there is more than one "Jason" on usenet. I have never posted
"being drunk" and "apologizing" to anyone. Again, this mistake would
be indicitive of a confused mental state.
>
> I have lost track of all your pseudonyms, but adding 'idiot' to a google
> search on your present nom de net will turn up many, many posts giving
> other peoples impressions of your 'contributions'.
I have no pseudonyms! I have posted under my screen-name for
years!!!!!! I have signed my first name, "Jason", to the posts I make
with this same screen-name for years. I do not post in usenet under
any other screen name! Got that?
(Why is it that every nut online automaticaly claims anyone who
criticizes them is guilty of "sock-puppetry" or multiple online
identities?...LOL)
>
> And of course, claiming everybody is wrong about you, that they are all
> "idiots" is just the type of claim to demonstrate how right they are.
Never did any such thing. Perhaps it is likely you are confusing me
for another "Jason" you randomly googled. Again, why are all the nuts
fond of google-ing usenet history?
-Jason (Me, not someone else, not a sock-puppet, not a multiple
identitiy, just plain and wonderful me!)
David Carter
Exactly, which is why the nonsense about Jesus saves and all the rest of
it is not relevant to your argument.
>
> Now, in the first part of your post, you go out of your way to make a
> clear distinction between application to "invisible agencies" and
> application of actual physical agents -- as if this distinction was of
> some consequence to you.
It is of no consequence to me at all, you are the one trying to defend
what you already know is indefensible.
Such a line of demarcation is not drawn by
> people in all cultures, and thus your parochial viewpoint is laid bare
We are not in 'all cultures' we are in a culture where hons=est
advertising is important. It is you who is locked into some other
culture. With respect you need to get with the program, your advertising
is dishonest as several people have pointed out.
Carter
cheyne
On 24-Aug-2006, Joseph Littleshoes <jpst...@isp.com> wrote:
> jk wrote:
> > Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> >
> >> But even putting that aside for the nonce, even so called scientific "Truth"
> >> is conditional and relative.
Explain that please.
> > So, you're saying if you take the test, it is like shooting craps, or
> > turning the roulette wheel? Gravity might be working, gravity might not
> > be working?
>
> A week ago science taught that Pluto was a planet, to day science says
> it is not. What was "True" a week ago is not "True" today.
Back in those early days when you were expounding
your "thesis" concerning truth, you had a history of
not using capital letters correctly. That's true, isn't it?
I find it just a little ironic therefore that now you've
manoeuvered to the fore this distinction between
"truth" and "Truth" in support of your argument.
Either way, I don't think it makes much difference
(in terms of your argument), but then, you haven't
made much of an effort to explain why it would.
Also, you didn't answer the simple question that
was put to you, so let's try again:
If you would jump from the Golden Gate bridge,
and if you would be able to repeat that experiment
many times over, then in each and every case, you
would fall down, and for the simple reason that that is
the way gravity works, and this is true -- isn't it?
You know Joe, your anti-truth crusade is more
than just a little tired, and it never was much more
than just a solipsistic mantra more befitting a confused
adolescent. Most of us are aware that our
understanding is constrained by certain limits,
like the mechanisms of our senses, or the size and
functionality of our brains. For others there are
self-imposed constraints too. But whatever the
limitations of our tools to reach or to express the truth,
they do not diminish the reality of what that truth is.
We're still trying to reach SOMETHING. What you
call "opinion", is rather a measure of the fact that
we all stand in different aspect and distance with
respect to the truth, because our limitations are
not exactly equal, and some people make more of
an honest enquiry than others to establish facts.
The Golden Gate test was put to you not to
precipitate your demise, but because the Golden
Gate truth is idiot proof, as proved by you.
cheyne
Erwin Hessle
> The Golden Gate test was put to you not to
> precipitate your demise, but because the Golden
> Gate truth is idiot proof, as proved by you.
Purely in the interests of science, try it on Archie.
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
Ludwig Prinn
> > ridiculous prejudice. skilled individuals should be
> > adequately compensated for the enlisting of their
> > time and expertise no matter their profession.
>
> Unless, of course, what is promised is not delivered. The problem with
> "services of a magical nature" is in the determination of results.
Well, it's fairly straightforward. No results, no pay. If the person
was paid in advance, there should be options for recourse.
> People pay for services because they expect those services to cause some
> particular thing to happen. While there is a measure of doubt in most
> services that the outcome will be the desired one, at least there are
> accepted standards in most professions about whether or not the sefvices
> have been rendered competently. For example, when one goes to a medical
> doctor, the desired outcome is that one will be cured. That doesn't always
> happen. Yet, the medical profession itself has certain standards of care
> and procedurtes that are intended to maximize the chances of the desired
> outcome. If the doctor does not follow these procedures and meet those
> accepted standards, there are repercussions, sometimes very serious ones.
> There is a concerted effort to protect the public from medical fraud.
Okay, now you're just belaboring the point. No results, no pay. It's
that simple. Worse yet, most businesses can be made or broken by
word-of-mouth.
The other danger of this sort of business is not that the customers
will not be satisfied, but that they will be TOO satisfied. We
experimented with pimping our wands out a few years ago, and we did
fairly well for the brief time during which we did business. We had
over a dozen clients extremely happy with their results, and most of
them called back for more work. The problem arose when some of the
clients came to the point of hitting us up for a spell pretty much
every week or so, and then wanting endless phone counseling over this
or that. We *could* have gone ahead and soaked these people for
everything they had, in the meantime whiling away our evenings talking
people through living a normal life, but we chose not to and closed up
shop instead.
Joseph Littleshoes
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>
>>A week ago science taught that Pluto was a planet, to day science says
>>it is not.
>
>
> That is a misleading representation, which we should expect from a
> person who demonstrates a considerable hostility to science and its
> implications.
Tsk...im starting to think you actually believe you absurd assumptions
about moi.
>
> In fact, Pluto's planetary stature has been in question by scientists
> since the time of its discovery. The reason it was allowed in is
> because the definition of "planet" had not been rigorously attempted
> before today---that is it had not been formally accepted by a consensus
> of astronomers.
>
> Now, that has changed. And Pluto has been demoted to a dwarf.
Yeah, they voted on it, really great way to determine "Truth" lets vote
on it.
Lets put kkkarlin on the ballot, i vote he don't exist. Polls to close
in 1 week, film at 11. Depending on 'consensus' the "Truth" of
kkkarlins existence will be determined by a simple majority vote.
---
JL
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>
>> catherine yronwode wrote:
>>
>>> David Carter wrote:
>>>
>>>> The ad doesnt actually say 'some people believe", it
>>>> suggests that what are unsupported claims as facts. Bad.
>>>
>>>
>>> The catalogue entry explains magical usage within the context of a known
>>> and traditional system of magic. Belief in herb magic is understood as
>>> the foundational a priori paradigm in any discussion of herb magic.
>>> "Jesus saves" is not false advertising either.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nt the same thing. Nobody in their right mind would believe that a
>> peron (?) who died in excess of 2000 years ago could save anything or
>> anyone. In any case, I dont recall anyone charging for making Jesus
>> save anyone. If they did they would no doubt be prosecuted
>
> "Tithing" some fundie churches demand a person reveal their personal
> worth and assesses the biblical amount considered appropriate.
Sure, but this is indirect, maintenance of the church. Nobody (to my
knowledge) has claimed that Tithng as an act 'saves'. Membership of the
Church and belief/compliance in the doctrines of the Church are said to
'save'.
>>
>>
>>> Nor is "Buddhist pactice
>>> liberates one from karma."
>>
>>
>> Ditto
>
> Believe it or not their are intolerant bigoted fundie buddhists who, in
> practice are no better than their xtian counterparts, Nichiren Shoshu
> for example, where not only are certain funds expected to be given to
> the organization but they actually maintain a 'one way' dogma regarding
> their teachings.
I absolutely agree, and have come into contact with a few of them. lay
Buddhists, on balance, are absolutely no better than Lay Christians.
I hear a lot from young people ridiculing the 'One Way' approach. Whilst
I agree there are many ways to achievement, they do not all achieve the
same thing in the same way (and many achieve nothing at all). There is
nothing wrong with deciding on a single approach and following that.
Indeed, imho it is essential if not fashionable.
Also, it needs to be said that many people use the 'many ways' principle
to justify their own lack of focus and purpose. These people become or
remain dabblers and dilettantes. It is worth bearing in mind that
enlightenment only comes from assiduous practice of a single way for a
long period of time.
>
>>
>>> Nor is "White is the colour of purity." Nor
>>> is "Spenta Armentii is the goddess of protection invoked through the
>>> herb Espand." Nor is "There are five elements: water, earth, air, fire,
>>> and metal."
>>
>>
>> Noe of these things is equivalenet - they all employ an invisible
>> agency and are all equally improbable to the thinking person.
>
> You are missing the point. Some people choose of their own free will to
> believe in and practice beliefs that are not recognized by 'science' as
> being valid, this does not mean they are fraud per se. People have
> favourite colours, foods, habits, ways of doing things that many other
> people may not agree with, but which, outside of a totalitarian police
> state are allowed as personal choice. Some people believe in a creator
> god others in Darwin & neither should be accused of 'fraud'.
I accept the point you make but it is a separate and unrelated point to
the one I was making which is as follows: There are laws which govern
fair advertising, and there are principles which govern fair behaviour.
Cat violates both imho.
1. Statements that a herb brings luck or prevents depression are subject
to and probably violate advertising laws. The fact that no prosecution
has been bought thus far probably says more about how important her
business is than whether she may have violated the law.
2. As a matter of principal, I believe it is repugnant to advertise
these spurious claims in a manner which may well be designed to separate
newbies and dupes from their money. The claims would not be necessary to
'more experienced' people who have the belief that they are right since
they already hold the belief. Either way, they should not be there.
>> I am beginning to believe you are both a fraud and recalcitrant.
> And you are, apparently just another intolerant bigot who wont consider
> anything outside your own bias and prejudice.
Not at all. What I like or dislike is unimportant. What I am saying is
simply that Cat probably violates the law and certainly violates the
responsibility of anyone having knowledge to avoid deliberately making
unsupported or misleading or false claims.
My comment was non-perjorative and based on reason, whereas your
ad-hominem was based on personal opinion/likes/dislikes/prejudices.
I prefer my approach to yours. It is more adult.
Carter
David Carter
> LuckyH. wrote:
>
>> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>>
>>> And you are, apparently just another intolerant bigot who wont consider
>>> anything outside your own bias and prejudice.
>>> ---
>>> JL
>>>
>>>>> cat yronwode
>>>>> http://southern-spirits.com African American magic and spirituality
>>
>>
>> Wow. I don't think I've ever seen JL write such a harsh post.
>>
>> JL, no offense but David does have a point. (I don't agree with
>> everything he writes, but yes, he does have a point.)
>>
>
> Obviously i disagree with his assessment of cat and by extension anyone
> practising folk magick. To say nothing of his biased and faulty attempt
> at 'logic'.
But this is because of a defensiveness or friendhip with Cat, or a
feeling of guilt by association. It is not logic and reason.
Because of this, any value which your points may have is lost.
>
>> You seem to actively come to the aid of anyone questioning/criticizing
>> Cat. I would suggest that you back off a bit and let the woman handle
>> her own.
>
> You are under a misapprehension, while i readily admit to an admiration
> of cat's work & writings, both internet related and in "real life" the
> above "aid" you mention i would have tendered to anyone attacked in such
> a manner.
It doesnt seem that way, it does seem ou are partisan. Nothing wrong
with that of course, we all have friends. Friendship however should not
be used as an excuse for sloppy thinking. My opinion and I suspect the
opinion of many occultists, is that both Cat and Nagasiva are educated
and widely-read people with a lot of information, which comes through
loud and clear in everything substantive that they write. Theirs however
is an shallow intellectuals knowledge, merely facts, and lacking imho in
understanding. Which is why what they say meanders, over-analyses and
woffles as much as it does.
>
> I take it you did not see my reply to the xtian fundamentalist
> 'end of times' post? in ARW?
>
>>
>> Believe it or not, much of the criticizism directed at Cat is apt.
>
> I do not agree, i have yet to see a valid "criticism" of cat. And those
> non valid critic's that i have seen are transparently biased and the
> hostility they exhibit is more telling than any opinion they may contain.
It is clear that you dont agree. But your refusal to see valid
'criticism' of Cat is just that, a Nelson-like refusal to see the ships.
Besides, opinions are allowed to differ and there is no need for your
somewhat hysterical and defensive ad-hominems.
>
>> Immediately
>
> "Immediately"? check the dates on this thread.
>
> coming to her defense is not going to provoke the thoughts
>> necesary that might sway Cat into altering some of her "dubious"
>> behavior.
>
> Obviously i have no desire to alter cats behaviour nor do i consider it
> "dubious".
Which again is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I do not agree
with it and am entitled not to.
This isnt a big thing; Cats recalcitrance and your defensiveness are
difficult to understand. it is fine to come to the unreasoning aid of a
friend or hero, but mature adults are expected to balance their
automatic reactions with reason and objectivity.
>
> In fact, just the opposite, it will encourage her to
>> continue engaging in such activities.
It shouldnt do. It would do if she were a 9-year-old girl but he ought
to have progressed beyond that by now.
>
> And more power to her i say, what have you accomplished Jason, what are
> the proofs that are the results of your life's work? Cat is very
> accessible, easily found, and documented along with her work, who are
> you Jason and what have you done?
This is a spurious defence, attemting to divert the discussion to what
the person criticising has done rather than addressing the points made.
>
> It seems to me that those who have done the least are the quickest to
> judge the work of others, and that, usually with an obvious jealousy of
> other peoples accomplishments. Quite often, especially in these news
> groups, those who cant do something note worthy criticize the work of
> those who do. What's the old saw, "put up or shut up"?
> ---
> JL
>>
>> -Jason
>>
Ditto. I dont have to be a policeman to criticise a corrupt policeman. I
do not have to be a footballer to criticise bad play. Yours is just a
silly and immature argument in this case.
Carter
David Carter
That is pretty much the first time I have seen a reflective apology used
as a stick to try and beat someone. Dubious tactic at best.
Carter
Erwin Hessle
> It is worth bearing in mind that
> enlightenment only comes from assiduous practice of a single way for a
> long period of time.
Who told you this, Archie? Since you have clearly demonstrated that you
have no familiarity with any form of "assiduous practice" or
"enlightenment", it's unquestionably not from your own experience, so
who are you mindlessly parroting here?
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
David Carter
>>> ridiculous prejudice. skilled individuals should be
>>> adequately compensated for the enlisting of their
>>> time and expertise no matter their profession.
>> Unless, of course, what is promised is not delivered. The problem with
>> "services of a magical nature" is in the determination of results.
>
> Well, it's fairly straightforward. No results, no pay. If the person
> was paid in advance, there should be options for recourse.
yep, I can see that in cats catalogue fer sure. "Spells guaranteed to
work or your money back". Yep.
Carter
Joseph Littleshoes
> That is pretty much the first time I have seen a reflective apology used
> as a stick to try and beat someone. Dubious tactic at best.
>
> Carter
>
But reflective of Jason's inconsistency, one day cat is admirable and
without cat changing the next day she is a fraud. Says more about Jason
to me than it does cat.
---
JL
Joseph Littleshoes
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>>
>> And more power to her i say, what have you accomplished Jason, what
>> are the proofs that are the results of your life's work? Cat is very
>> accessible, easily found, and documented along with her work, who are
>> you Jason and what have you done?
>
>
> This is a spurious defence, attemting to divert the discussion to what
> the person criticising has done rather than addressing the points made.
"Success is your proof" what have you done, for yourself or anyone else?
And why are you so "recalcitrant" about providing information about
yourself?
>
>
>
>>
>> It seems to me that those who have done the least are the quickest to
>> judge the work of others, and that, usually with an obvious jealousy
>> of other peoples accomplishments. Quite often, especially in these
>> news groups, those who cant do something note worthy criticize the
>> work of those who do. What's the old saw, "put up or shut up"?
>> ---
>> JL
>>
>>>
>>> -Jason
>>>
>
>
> Ditto. I dont have to be a policeman to criticise a corrupt policeman. I
> do not have to be a footballer to criticise bad play. Yours is just a
> silly and immature argument in this case.
You have to know something about corruption and football to make a valid
judgement, something in the context of this thread (folk magick) you
obviously have no knowledge of.
Practitioners of many sorts of religious beliefs routinely experience
condemnation from people who know nothing about the subjects they critic
except that it offends their 'common sense'.
Atheists and sceptics tend to be very harsh in their condemnation of
things they maintain don't exist so don't know enough about to expect to
be taken seriously, except by their ilk.
If it weren't that you have demonstrated a closed mind on the subject i
would be willing to discuss sympathetic and associative magick but at
this point it seems to me it would be a waste of time.
---
JL
>
> Carter
>
LuckyH.
JL, If you haven't figured out by yet, I have accused you of being
immature and rather ignorant.
1.) I've never accused Cat of being a Fraud. Her interest in Hoodoo
and Magic is legit.
2.) The world is not "black and white" and neither are people's
personalities and behavior. I have both positive and negative opinions
of Cat. These opinions co-exist quite easily in my mind. Think of it
like a family member who truly pisses you off, but you love them anyway
because they are family.
Please don't confuse the complexity of existance with an inconsistancy
on my part
-Jason.
LuckyH.
Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> David Carter wrote:
>
> > Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> And more power to her i say, what have you accomplished Jason, what
> >> are the proofs that are the results of your life's work? Cat is very
> >> accessible, easily found, and documented along with her work, who are
> >> you Jason and what have you done?
> >
> >
> > This is a spurious defence, attemting to divert the discussion to what
> > the person criticising has done rather than addressing the points made.
>
> "Success is your proof" what have you done, for yourself or anyone else?
>
> And why are you so "recalcitrant" about providing information about
> yourself?
You just did it again, JL.
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> It seems to me that those who have done the least are the quickest to
> >> judge the work of others, and that, usually with an obvious jealousy
> >> of other peoples accomplishments. Quite often, especially in these
> >> news groups, those who cant do something note worthy criticize the
> >> work of those who do. What's the old saw, "put up or shut up"?
> >> ---
> >> JL
> >>
> >>>
> >>> -Jason
> >>>
> >
> >
> > Ditto. I dont have to be a policeman to criticise a corrupt policeman. I
> > do not have to be a footballer to criticise bad play. Yours is just a
> > silly and immature argument in this case.
>
> You have to know something about corruption and football to make a valid
> judgement, something in the context of this thread (folk magick) you
> obviously have no knowledge of.
How do you justify such a statement, JL? You are claiming this man has
no knowledge of folk magic. Please provide proof.
>
> Practitioners of many sorts of religious beliefs routinely experience
> condemnation from people who know nothing about the subjects they critic
> except that it offends their 'common sense'.
Spare us the "righteous" BS, please.
>
> Atheists and sceptics tend to be very harsh in their condemnation of
> things they maintain don't exist so don't know enough about to expect to
> be taken seriously, except by their ilk.
>
> If it weren't that you have demonstrated a closed mind on the subject i
> would be willing to discuss sympathetic and associative magick but at
> this point it seems to me it would be a waste of time.
I have not seen evidence of David expressing a "closed mind". I have
seen evidence that you possess one, however.
-Jason
> ---
> JL
> >
> > Carter
> >
Erwin Hessle
LuckyH. wrote:
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> > David Carter wrote:
> > > Ditto. I dont have to be a policeman to criticise a corrupt policeman. I
> > > do not have to be a footballer to criticise bad play. Yours is just a
> > > silly and immature argument in this case.
> >
> > You have to know something about corruption and football to make a valid
> > judgement, something in the context of this thread (folk magick) you
> > obviously have no knowledge of.
>
> How do you justify such a statement, JL? You are claiming this man has
> no knowledge of folk magic. Please provide proof.
Archie has no knowledge of *any* kind of magic, by his own admission,
and by the evidence of his posts. No further proof is required here.
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
Cyli
<david...@barts.nhs.uk> wrote:
(snipped)
>I accept the point you make but it is a separate and unrelated point to
>the one I was making which is as follows: There are laws which govern
>fair advertising, and there are principles which govern fair behaviour.
>
>Cat violates both imho.
>1. Statements that a herb brings luck or prevents depression are subject
>to and probably violate advertising laws. The fact that no prosecution
>has been bought thus far probably says more about how important her
>business is than whether she may have violated the law.
>2. As a matter of principal, I believe it is repugnant to advertise
>these spurious claims in a manner which may well be designed to separate
>newbies and dupes from their money. The claims would not be necessary to
>'more experienced' people who have the belief that they are right since
>they already hold the belief. Either way, they should not be there.
>
If she put 'these are traditional hoodoo uses' on top of each page
would you still be upset?
My opinion is that anyone who's a real newbbie isn't going to be
finding the hoodoo page and buying stuff. If they're that dumb, they
probably don't have the money to do so, having been duped out of
everything but their underwear already.
--
r.bc: vixen
Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher, etc..
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless. Really.
catherine yronwode
I don't guarantee spells to work. Plase see my web page on that subject.
http://www.luckymojo.com/spells/real.html
Take a moment to read the page, especially the material under the headers:
* DO MAGICK SPELLS ALWAYS WORK?
* ARE MAGICK SPELLS GUARANTEED TO WORK?
* IS MAGICK WORTH TRYING IF IT IS NOT GUARANTEED?
* IS MAGICK REAL OR ARE THE RESULTS JUST COINCIDENCE?
* IF MAGICK SPELLS ARE REAL, WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE USE THEM?
Now, besides answering questions like that, what i do is make, import,
package, and sell items that are used in the practice of vaious
traditions of religion and magic, including Judaism, Christianity,
Buddhism, Paganism, Wicca, Asatru, Santeria, Palo, Obeah,
Zorooastrianism, Islam, Taoism, Spiritualism, New Thought, ceremonial
magic, hoodoo, conjure, Pow-Wow magic, brauch magic, stregheria, and so
forth.
When i sell a Jewish Mezuzah, i do not say of it, "Claimed by some to be
efficatious in protecting the home by means of connection to an ancient
Semitic thunder-sky god."
I just write, "Brass mezuzeh, made in Israel, for protection of the
doorposts."
Likewise, when i sell Esphand seed, i do not go into a long lecture
about Zoroastriansism and the adoption of many of its rites by Muslims
living in the territories formerly ruled by Persia.
I just write, "Aspand, for use against the Evil Eye."
The truth is simpler than some of you think: It is not illegal, nor is
it deceptive, to sell religo-magical goods for spiritual deployment
within the traditions in which they are used.
Finally, for those folloing this debate, but not with sufficient
intellectual curiousity to read our catalogue in situ, here is the
header at the top of the page on which the herbs are listed, whch Erwin
Hessle was too dishonest to include:
Here are the occult, spiritual, conjure, and magic
HERBS, ROOTS, MINERALS, and ZOOLOGICAL CURIOS you
have heard about, now available in generous packets
with FULL INSTRUCTIONS for use. We grow many of
these herbs ourselves, and while we sell them as
magickal curios only, we know you will be pleased
with the freshness, quality, and INSTRUCTIONS for
use that come with all our herbs, roots, minerals,
and zoological curios.
The "disclaimer" that was asserted to not be there is, of course, right
there, for the delectation of newbies, outsiders, nutters, Hessles, and
Carters of all kinds. Had they only the wits to READ it, they might save
themselves a lot of time playing the fool.
cat yronwode
http://luckymojocurio.com Lucky Mojo curio Co. Occult Shop
LuckyH.
Cyli wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:44:54 +0700, David Carter
> <david...@barts.nhs.uk> wrote:
>
>
> (snipped)
>
> >I accept the point you make but it is a separate and unrelated point to
> >the one I was making which is as follows: There are laws which govern
> >fair advertising, and there are principles which govern fair behaviour.
> >
> >Cat violates both imho.
> >1. Statements that a herb brings luck or prevents depression are subject
> >to and probably violate advertising laws. The fact that no prosecution
> >has been bought thus far probably says more about how important her
> >business is than whether she may have violated the law.
> >2. As a matter of principal, I believe it is repugnant to advertise
> >these spurious claims in a manner which may well be designed to separate
> >newbies and dupes from their money. The claims would not be necessary to
> >'more experienced' people who have the belief that they are right since
> >they already hold the belief. Either way, they should not be there.
> >
>
> If she put 'these are traditional hoodoo uses' on top of each page
> would you still be upset?
For the most part, Cat does imply that these are the reported "magical
reputation" of roots, herbs, etc., with the standard, "We make no claim
or guarentee.." However, every now and then she slips up, but mistakes
are bound to happen sometimes.
>
> My opinion is that anyone who's a real newbbie isn't going to be
> finding the hoodoo page and buying stuff. If they're that dumb, they
> probably don't have the money to do so, having been duped out of
> everything but their underwear already.
Well, believe it or not, that scenario does indeed happen. People
believe all kinds of weird stuff about magic, including what type of
results they might achieve. Do you not remember the gentlemen that was
haunting usenet, in search of a spell to turn him into a fully
operating woman?
-Jason
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>
>> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> And more power to her i say, what have you accomplished Jason, what
>>> are the proofs that are the results of your life's work? Cat is very
>>> accessible, easily found, and documented along with her work, who are
>>> you Jason and what have you done?
>>
>>
>> This is a spurious defence, attemting to divert the discussion to what
>> the person criticising has done rather than addressing the points made.
>
> "Success is your proof" what have you done, for yourself or anyone else?
>
> And why are you so "recalcitrant" about providing information about
> yourself?
I am not at all reluctant to provide information about myself that is
relevant. I am an occult student. I claim no Grades or experience. This
does not mean I have neither, it simply means I am not sure if it is
helpful to those who would criticise and disparage or those who would
support and contribute. Badges don't interest me very much, insights do.
>>> It seems to me that those who have done the least are the quickest to
>>> judge the work of others, and that, usually with an obvious jealousy
>>> of other peoples accomplishments. Quite often, especially in these
>>> news groups, those who cant do something note worthy criticize the
>>> work of those who do. What's the old saw, "put up or shut up"?
>>> ---
>>> JL
>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Jason
>>>>
>>
>>
>> Ditto. I dont have to be a policeman to criticise a corrupt policeman. I
>> do not have to be a footballer to criticise bad play. Yours is just a
>> silly and immature argument in this case.
>
> You have to know something about corruption and football to make a valid
> judgement, something in the context of this thread (folk magick) you
> obviously have no knowledge of.
Folk magic is imho, fairy stories and in some cases country pharmacology
(valid in its own right of course but not Magic). Anyone that lends
credence to 'folk magic' in the absence of any reasonable evidence that
it has merit is to my mind naive at best and perhaps downright gullible
and living in their own little world. I suppose it depends upon what you
expect from 'Magic' but I have known many people who profess 'folk
magic'. Most of them were rather quaint and sweet, nice people but not
altogether rooted in the real world.
>
> Practitioners of many sorts of religious beliefs routinely experience
> condemnation from people who know nothing about the subjects they critic
> except that it offends their 'common sense'.
I am sure this is correct but since I didnt say that it isnt really
relevant is it?
>
> Atheists and sceptics tend to be very harsh in their condemnation of
> things they maintain don't exist so don't know enough about to expect to
> be taken seriously, except by their ilk.
I also accept this but I didnt say it either.
>
> If it weren't that you have demonstrated a closed mind on the subject i
> would be willing to discuss sympathetic and associative magick but at
> this point it seems to me it would be a waste of time.
Feel free not to do anything you dont want to do but I should point out
that I have not expressed an opinion about sympathetic or associative
Magic, merely on fraudulent descriptions of the properties of some plants.
Up to you.
Carter
> ---
> JL
>>
>> Carter
>>
David Carter
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:44:54 +0700, David Carter
> <david...@barts.nhs.uk> wrote:
>
>
> (snipped)
>
>> I accept the point you make but it is a separate and unrelated point to
>> the one I was making which is as follows: There are laws which govern
>> fair advertising, and there are principles which govern fair behaviour.
>>
>> Cat violates both imho.
>> 1. Statements that a herb brings luck or prevents depression are subject
>> to and probably violate advertising laws. The fact that no prosecution
>> has been bought thus far probably says more about how important her
>> business is than whether she may have violated the law.
>> 2. As a matter of principal, I believe it is repugnant to advertise
>> these spurious claims in a manner which may well be designed to separate
>> newbies and dupes from their money. The claims would not be necessary to
>> 'more experienced' people who have the belief that they are right since
>> they already hold the belief. Either way, they should not be there.
>>
>
> If she put 'these are traditional hoodoo uses' on top of each page
> would you still be upset?
I am not upset. I would be more supportive if she simply put a caveat
before each of her unsupported and imho deceptive claims. The caveat may
be as simple as 'Some people believe that Star Anise..."
Thats all, the rest is froth and bubble by those with a vested interest.
>
> My opinion is that anyone who's a real newbbie isn't going to be
> finding the hoodoo page and buying stuff. If they're that dumb, they
> probably don't have the money to do so, having been duped out of
> everything but their underwear already.
I beg to differ. People who know what they are doing wont need Cats
descriptions anyway. The web site is geared to gaining new customers.
Nothing wrong with that but many will be naive newbs, and they could do
with sensible descriptions and not fantasy-world descriptions.
Carter
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>> Ludwig Prinn wrote:
>>>>> ridiculous prejudice. skilled individuals should be
>>>>> adequately compensated for the enlisting of their
>>>>> time and expertise no matter their profession.
>>>> Unless, of course, what is promised is not delivered. The problem with
>>>> "services of a magical nature" is in the determination of results.
>>> Well, it's fairly straightforward. No results, no pay. If the person
>>> was paid in advance, there should be options for recourse.
>> yep, I can see that in cats catalogue fer sure. "Spells guaranteed to
>> work or your money back". Yep.
>>
>> Carter
>
> I don't guarantee spells to work. Plase see my web page on that subject.
An irrelevant comment given what was actually said. Either this is a
failure to concentrate on what was actually said, or it is an attempt to
deflect the conversation.
>
> http://www.luckymojo.com/spells/real.html
>
> Take a moment to read the page, especially the material under the headers:
>
> * DO MAGICK SPELLS ALWAYS WORK?
> * ARE MAGICK SPELLS GUARANTEED TO WORK?
> * IS MAGICK WORTH TRYING IF IT IS NOT GUARANTEED?
> * IS MAGICK REAL OR ARE THE RESULTS JUST COINCIDENCE?
> * IF MAGICK SPELLS ARE REAL, WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE USE THEM?
>
> Now, besides answering questions like that, what i do is make, import,
> package, and sell items that are used in the practice of vaious
> traditions of religion and magic, including Judaism, Christianity,
> Buddhism, Paganism, Wicca, Asatru, Santeria, Palo, Obeah,
> Zorooastrianism, Islam, Taoism, Spiritualism, New Thought, ceremonial
> magic, hoodoo, conjure, Pow-Wow magic, brauch magic, stregheria, and so
> forth.
Pow-wow magick? All you have done here is to collect terms that have
little or no meaning and present them to suggest you have a
comprehensive range of products.
>
> When i sell a Jewish Mezuzah, i do not say of it, "Claimed by some to be
> efficatious in protecting the home by means of connection to an ancient
> Semitic thunder-sky god."
>
> I just write, "Brass mezuzeh, made in Israel, for protection of the
> doorposts."
Which is true. Perhaps I will compare that with many of your website
claisms that are untrue? What you are doing is deceptin, you quote one
example of something that is true and seek by implication to extend that
truth across all the other areas. A tad transparent.
>
> Likewise, when i sell Esphand seed, i do not go into a long lecture
> about Zoroastriansism and the adoption of many of its rites by Muslims
> living in the territories formerly ruled by Persia.
Are you trying to impress? it didnt work. It is just bluster.
>
> I just write, "Aspand, for use against the Evil Eye."
Again, not the worst example. I will find some so I can get some
specific comments from you on examples of my choice not yours.
>
> The truth is simpler than some of you think: It is not illegal, nor is
> it deceptive, to sell religo-magical goods for spiritual deployment
> within the traditions in which they are used.
It is illegal to make claims that are unsupportable or untrue.
>
> Finally, for those folloing this debate, but not with sufficient
> intellectual curiousity to read our catalogue in situ, here is the
> header at the top of the page on which the herbs are listed, whch Erwin
> Hessle was too dishonest to include:
>
> Here are the occult, spiritual, conjure, and magic
> HERBS, ROOTS, MINERALS, and ZOOLOGICAL CURIOS you
> have heard about, now available in generous packets
> with FULL INSTRUCTIONS for use. We grow many of
> these herbs ourselves, and while we sell them as
> magickal curios only, we know you will be pleased
> with the freshness, quality, and INSTRUCTIONS for
> use that come with all our herbs, roots, minerals,
> and zoological curios.
>
> The "disclaimer" that was asserted to not be there is, of course, right
> there, for the delectation of newbies, outsiders, nutters, Hessles, and
> Carters of all kinds. Had they only the wits to READ it, they might save
> themselves a lot of time playing the fool.
The disclaimer is there and carefully worded specifically to encourage
people to ignore or disregard it. As you well know.
Come on cat, I am not a newb, I know about advertising and how you can
carefully circumvent the spirit of legislation at the same time as
pretending to comply with it.
Carter
Meltdarok
"David Carter" <david...@barts.nhs.uk> wrote in message
news:12evhp4...@corp.supernews.com...
Yeah Carter? Here is the blurb from their front page:
"Lucky Mojo is both an online magic shop and
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
a real magic store that you can visit.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We carry a full line of hand-made spiritual supplies, including occult
oils, incense, powders, candles, herbs, mojo bags, spiritual soaps, books,
and spell kits for those who cast magic spells, love spells, money spells,
and protection spells in the African-American hoodoo, Pagan magick, and
other Witchcraft traditions. We also import and distribute folkloric
magical, occult, herbal, and spiritual supplies from Asia, Latin America,
and the Middle East for those who work in Hindu, Buddhist, Catholic,
Protestant, Muslim, and Jewish religious and magical traditions. We sell
retail and wholesale, both on the internet and at our small-town occult
shop."
Heh.
> Come on cat, I am not a newb, I know about advertising and how you can
> carefully circumvent the spirit of legislation at the same time as
> pretending to comply with it.
>
I am starting here with this post.
Carter, the NAME of the company is:
LUCKY MOJO CURIO CO.
"The noun curio has one meaning:
Meaning #1: something unusual -- perhaps worthy of collecting
Synonyms: curiosity, oddity, oddment, peculiarity, rarity"
Now *you* Carter make me want to purchase from Cat.
They closed the store here that used to sell the item I want,
but Cat sells it.
> Carter
--
meltdarok
http://hometown.aol.com/meltdarok/
David Carter
So thank you for proving my point. Or isnt that what you thought you
were doing?
And so?
>
> "The noun curio has one meaning:
> Meaning #1: something unusual -- perhaps worthy of collecting
> Synonyms: curiosity, oddity, oddment, peculiarity, rarity"
>
and so?
>
> Now *you* Carter make me want to purchase from Cat.
> They closed the store here that used to sell the item I want,
> but Cat sells it.
>
>
>> Carter
>
>
I cant make you do anything, you are a free agent. If you want to buy
something from Cat then go ahead and buy something from Cat.
I am not sure what the problem is.
Carter
catherine yronwode
>
> I would be more supportive if she simply put a caveat
> before each of her unsupported and imho deceptive claims. The caveat may
> be as simple as 'Some people believe that Star Anise..."
In another post, you wrote, "Folk magic is imho, fairy stories and in
some cases country pharmacology (valid in its own right of course but
not Magic)." This indicates that you have a vested interest in a belief
structure that is so calcified and rigid that you really cannot or do
not see the information right before your face, namely that there is a
clear disclaimer of the top of our herb catalogue web page, as Cyli
noted, and as i reprinted here YESTERDAY. You obviously did not read
that post or, having read it, did not compehend it.
I find no reason to clutter the web page with the same repetious
disclaimer for 200 different herbs when the information is clearly given
ONCE in plus-size type at the top of the page.
By the way, there is a similar disclaimer on every package of herbs we
sell. The commonest form this takes is the decades-old, "Sold as a curio
only" tag-line, but depending on the amount of text on the label that is
deveoted to giving magical usages, the disclaimer may be as long as, "We
make no claims for the eficacy of this [name of herb] and sell it as a
genuine botanical curio only."
You may read the text of one of our labels here:
http://herb-magic.com/allspice-berries.html
(This is from a new web site i am developing which is nowhere close to
being workable yet, but i'll have it all functional within a month or
two. The text is an exact copy of what is on the package label for
Allspice Berries.)
You said in another post, "badges don't interest me very much, insights
do" -- but if your non-folkloric and thus non "fairy-tale" magick has
helped to engender any "insights" in your mind, it's not obvious to us
in usenet. So far we are seeing a typical display of unfounded
trash-talk based on a juvenile inability to read a web page. You'll need
a lot more going on in the "insight" department to convince me that your
claim to be "an occult student" means anything more than that your
parents bought you a laptop and you know how to push the buttons.
Because you are utterly unfamiliar with our products and have not
bothered to research them at all, you have made a series of foolish
errors in describing them.
When you said that "anyone that lends credence to 'folk magic' in the
absence of any reasonable evidence that it has merit is to my mind naive
at best and perhaps downright gullible and living in their own little
world." you implied that as "an occult student" you were on to some
better, less gullible, less naive form of magic replete with "reasonabke
evidence" of efficacy -- but what do you show the world?
You show an anonymized persona who, to throw your own words back at you,
"would criticise and disparage," and would not "support and contribute"
to a discussion of magic. Because, face it, it is really dumb to try to
prove a point when one is completely completely in the dark about what
one is describing.
If insights mean anything to you except a way to puff yourself up for
being "insightful," then for starters, try looking within. Ask yourself,
"Why am i makin an ass of myself in usenet by neglecting to actually
READ THE DISCLAIMER IN LARGE TYPE AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE that i claim
has no disclaimer?"
You might also want to work on your grammar. In English, people are
referred to as "who" not "that" -- as in, "Anyone *who* lends credence
to 'folk magic' and also has a better command of English than you do may
well be worthy of your respect and emulation."
Think about it, for real. What's your ego leading you into --
"insights" or idiocy?
Good luck,
cat yronwode
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>> I would be more supportive if she simply put a caveat
>> before each of her unsupported and imho deceptive claims. The caveat may
>> be as simple as 'Some people believe that Star Anise..."
>
> In another post, you wrote, "Folk magic is imho, fairy stories and in
> some cases country pharmacology (valid in its own right of course but
> not Magic)."
This is true.
> This indicates that you have a vested interest in a belief
> structure that is so calcified and rigid that you really cannot or do
> not see the information right before your face, namely that there is a
> clear disclaimer of the top of our herb catalogue web page, as Cyli
> noted, and as i reprinted here YESTERDAY. You obviously did not read
> that post or, having read it, did not compehend it.
I compehended it just fine thanks.
I do not believe the caveat to adequately counter he impression of
magical efficacy that you set out to create areas of your catalog
deliberately closer to the products you sell.
Ergo I believe that whilst the law may be satisfied, the requirements of
ethical trading are not.
Why do you persist in using the overblown and somewhat pompous phrasing
that you do and which I referred to as over-analysis in a different post?
Above is a fine example to whch I append a more reasonable statement:
"This indicates that you have a vested interest in a belief structure"
Which really means "You think that"
See? Strive for simplicity wherever possible.
>
> I find no reason to clutter the web page with the same repetious
> disclaimer for 200 different herbs when the information is clearly given
> ONCE in plus-size type at the top of the page.
>
> By the way, there is a similar disclaimer on every package of herbs we
> sell. The commonest form this takes is the decades-old, "Sold as a curio
> only" tag-line, but depending on the amount of text on the label that is
> deveoted to giving magical usages, the disclaimer may be as long as, "We
> make no claims for the eficacy of this [name of herb] and sell it as a
> genuine botanical curio only."
I see. So you say "this has magical properties and will < insert
spurious claim here > and then you say "This has no magical properties
of any kind.
Right?
After they sent the money presumably?
>
> You may read the text of one of our labels here:
>
> http://herb-magic.com/allspice-berries.html
>
> (This is from a new web site i am developing which is nowhere close to
> being workable yet, but i'll have it all functional within a month or
> two. The text is an exact copy of what is on the package label for
> Allspice Berries.)
>
> You said in another post, "badges don't interest me very much, insights
> do" -- but if your non-folkloric and thus non "fairy-tale" magick has
> helped to engender any "insights" in your mind, it's not obvious to us
> in usenet.
I dont expect you would understand string theory either. Your failure to
recognise the value of what is said by someone doesnt necessarily mean
there is none. It may jut mean ou dont understand it.
Your use of the words 'us on usenet' is exactly what I am talking about
in your advertisements. Words carefully crated to create an impression
that you can neither substantiate but which you can later claim not to
have been intentional or 'not what you meant'. Clearly this is habitual
with you. If you mean you, Nagasiva and your loyal friends, then tell me
what you dont understand and I will be happy to explain in simpler
terms. probably not in folk-magic terms though... nothing quite that simple.
> So far we are seeing a typical display of unfounded
> trash-talk based on a juvenile inability to read a web page. You'll need
> a lot more going on in the "insight" department to convince me that your
> claim to be "an occult student" means anything more than that your
> parents bought you a laptop and you know how to push the buttons.
>
What unfounded trash-talk is that Cat? or is this just another of your
'creative' statements? Your resentment is showing.
> Because you are utterly unfamiliar with our products and have not
> bothered to research them at all, you have made a series of foolish
> errors in describing them.
>
> When you said that "anyone that lends credence to 'folk magic' in the
> absence of any reasonable evidence that it has merit is to my mind naive
> at best and perhaps downright gullible and living in their own little
> world." you implied that as "an occult student" you were on to some
> better, less gullible, less naive form of magic replete with "reasonabke
> evidence" of
yes.
I have explored both, I have my opinion. Am I less entitled to express
it that you are yours?
>
> You show an anonymized persona who, to throw your own words back at you,
> "would criticise and disparage," and would not "support and contribute"
> to a discussion of magic. Because, face it, it is really dumb to try to
> prove a point when one is completely completely in the dark about what
> one is describing.
This is an interesting conclusion. What do you base it on?
<more resentful blah and a bit of pompous grammar analysis snipped
(check your own spelling above)>
> Think about it, for real. What's your ego leading you into --
> "insights" or idiocy?
>
> Good luck,
>
> cat yronwode
It is idiocy because I criticise you on what is a sound basis?
I wonder where the problem really lies? me for pointing out (to your
evident discomfort) that you are misleading people, or you for doing it?
carter
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>
> You show an anonymized persona who, <blah>
is David Carter any more or less anonymous that some silly attempt to
appear olde worlde? At least David Carter is my real name Cat, not some
reinvention of myself.
Carter
>
> Good luck,
>
> cat yronwode
Cyli
(snipped)
>Cyli wrote:
>>
>> My opinion is that anyone who's a real newbbie isn't going to be
>> finding the hoodoo page and buying stuff. If they're that dumb, they
>> probably don't have the money to do so, having been duped out of
>> everything but their underwear already.
>
>Well, believe it or not, that scenario does indeed happen. People
>believe all kinds of weird stuff about magic, including what type of
>results they might achieve. Do you not remember the gentlemen that was
>haunting usenet, in search of a spell to turn him into a fully
>operating woman?
>
>-Jason
>
Oh, yeah, but any real newbbies who are naive (not necessarily the
same thing) won't know enough about hoodoo to use it properly and
won't have anything resembling personal power (assuming it exists) to
put the oomph behind it to make it work. The following week they'll
be off to take a course in Yoga, assuming that in two weeks they'll be
the equal of someone who's sat on a mountain for 20 years practicing
and meditating.
Been there, got the T-shirt, it fell apart right away. I know some of
it from a lot of angles, including stuff that sometimes seems to work
well enough.
Worst is when it works a little bit (or a coincidence happens) and
something seems to work properly. Take a luck charm or spell, for
instance. So they win something at poker or on the lottery and go big
the next week, win some more and then go utterly wild, risking
everything they've got and find out their spell / luck wasn't that
good or they weren't, or they were only due a little bit from what
they'd put into the mystical or it was all coincidence.
Only a vague memory of that guy. Too weird for me to bother thinking
about much.
Joseph Littleshoes
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>>hieronymous707:
>
>
>>Thank you for your contribution Hiero, but please recall that this all
>>started with kkkarlins claim of possessing the "Truth" of the tarot.
>
>
> You're very welcome, of course. I hope you take the opportunity to
> peruse the site.
>
> http://www.truthpizza.org/
Interesting site, but the statement in the "nature of truth" section
about Caesar being the first emperor of rome is odd.
Rome did not have an Emperor, it did have a number of military leaders
whose title, imperator iirc, is what the english word emperor is based
on. It also had dictators, and what ever the local language equivalent
of King was at the time, Rex?
---
JL
>
> I think you'll find it worthwhile. Frankly, I don't recall or care how
> "this all started". I can't even tell you why I was apparently
> compelled to chime in here and now. I'm certainly in no position
> comment knowledgeably on, much less settle any argument between the two
> of you, so I'll be shutting the fuck up very, very soon.
>
>
>>Since then, my statement regarding the nature of this particular
>>assertion has, by kkkarlins & his ilk & myrmidons, become wrapped up in
>>a discussion of science, this is merely kkkarlins way of obsfucating the
>>discussion and trying to wiggle out of an untenable position he was
>>foolish enough to get himself into, it is, IMO more indicative of his
>>own hubris than anything else.
>
>
> I suppose we see what we want to see
>
> -hi-
>
catherine yronwode
>
> I do not believe the caveat to adequately counter he impression of
> magical efficacy that you set out to create areas of your catalog
> deliberately closer to the products you sell.
>
> Ergo I believe that whilst the law may be satisfied, the requirements of
> ethical trading are not.
Actually, there is no "law" to be "satisfied" by virtue of publishing
such a disclaimer. This is an error on your part -- one of MANY errors
on your part.
> Why do you persist in using the overblown and somewhat pompous phrasing
> that you do and which I referred to as over-analysis in a different post?
>
> Above is a fine example to whch I append a more reasonable statement:
>
> "This indicates that you have a vested interest in a belief structure"
>
> Which really means "You think that"
Nope, it does not "really" mean that. To describe what you think is one
thing, to describe your vested interest in MAINTAIING IN AN UNALTERBLE
CONDITION what you think is something else.
> See? Strive for simplicity wherever possible.
Your kind of "simplicity" would result in my inability to describe what
i wish to describe. Since you cannot tell the difference between a
belief and a vested interest in a belief structure, the barest
simoplicity of speech may be all that you can understand. I will stry to
put things on such a level for you, then:
"Your mind is closed to viewpoints other than your own. It is important
to you to keep your mind closed in this way."
> > I find no reason to clutter the web page with the same repetious
> > disclaimer for 200 different herbs when the information is clearly given
> > ONCE in plus-size type at the top of the page.
> >
> > By the way, there is a similar disclaimer on every package of herbs we
> > sell. The commonest form this takes is the decades-old, "Sold as a curio
> > only" tag-line, but depending on the amount of text on the label that is
> > deveoted to giving magical usages, the disclaimer may be as long as, "We
> > make no claims for the eficacy of this [name of herb] and sell it as a
> > genuine botanical curio only."
>
> I see. So you say "this has magical properties and will < insert
> spurious claim here > and then you say "This has no magical properties
> of any kind.
>
> Right?
Wrong. Read the web page again. This is he third time i have explained
this to you. You are verging on sub-par intellect at this point.
> After they sent the money presumably?
Nope. See below. The herb-magic.com page is readable BEFORE purchases
are made.
> > You may read the text of one of our labels here:
> >
> > http://herb-magic.com/allspice-berries.html
See? No purchase necessary to READ THE WEB SITE.
> Your resentment is showing.
No, my impatience is showing.
> I wonder where the problem really lies? me for pointing out (to your
> evident discomfort) that you are misleading people, or you for doing it?
I am not discomfitted by your baseless charges, but i am frustrated by
your bizarre inability to read simple English.
This is going nowhere, and i have had enough of your silly bleating.
Adios.
cat yronwode
catherine yronwode
Tilt.
cat yronwode
catherine yronwode
>
cat yronwode wrote:
> > http://www.luckymojo.com/spells/real.html
> >
> > Take a moment to read the page, especially the material under the headers:
> >
> > * DO MAGICK SPELLS ALWAYS WORK?
> > * ARE MAGICK SPELLS GUARANTEED TO WORK?
> > * IS MAGICK WORTH TRYING IF IT IS NOT GUARANTEED?
> > * IS MAGICK REAL OR ARE THE RESULTS JUST COINCIDENCE?
> > * IF MAGICK SPELLS ARE REAL, WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE USE THEM?
> >
> > Now, besides answering questions like that, what i do is make, import,
> > package, and sell items that are used in the practice of vaious
> > traditions of religion and magic, including Judaism, Christianity,
> > Buddhism, Paganism, Wicca, Asatru, Santeria, Palo, Obeah,
> > Zorooastrianism, Islam, Taoism, Spiritualism, New Thought, ceremonial
> > magic, hoodoo, conjure, Pow-Wow magic, brauch magic, stregheria, and so
> > forth.
>
> Pow-wow magick? All you have done here is to collect terms that have
> little or no meaning and present them to suggest you have a
> comprehensive range of products.
Cute. Because Pow Wow magic is an unknown subject to YOU, you say it has
"litle or no meaning."
Google the term and/or rent the movie "Apprentice to Murder" with Donald
Sutherland.
And while you're at it, strive for those "insights" you claim to be
seeking, David!
Insight number one: Your unfamiliarity with a topic is not a masure of
its lack of "meaning."
> It is illegal to make claims that are unsupportable or untrue.
There is no governmental body in the USA that that seeks to determine
whether the beliefs and practices associated with religion,
spirituality, occultism, prayer, and magic are "unsupportable or
untrue," therefore the claims made for religion, spirituality,
occultism, prayer, and magic ARE legal unless they violate other state
or federal laws.
> The disclaimer is there and carefully worded specifically to encourage
> people to ignore or disregard it. As you well know.
It is in plus-size type at the head of the page, thus your claim that it
was "carefully worded specifically to encourage people to ignore or
disregard it" is irrational.
> Come on cat, I am not a newb, I know about advertising and how you can
> carefully circumvent the spirit of legislation at the same time as
> pretending to comply with it.
Your argument is based on a false premise: there is no "legislation"
that limits the sale of spiritual and religious goods in interstate
commerce, hence there is no legislation to "circumvent."
cat yronwode
David Carter
No then.
Carter
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
>> I do not believe the caveat to adequately counter he impression of
>> magical efficacy that you set out to create areas of your catalog
>> deliberately closer to the products you sell.
>>
>> Ergo I believe that whilst the law may be satisfied, the requirements of
>> ethical trading are not.
>
> Actually, there is no "law" to be "satisfied" by virtue of publishing
> such a disclaimer. This is an error on your part -- one of MANY errors
> on your part.
An error it seems on the part of the government of USA. In all societies
where misleading advertising is recognised to be odious, there is
legislation which advertisers must abide by.
You seem to be saying that either there is none on the USA or you dont
know about it or you do know about it but ignore it. Since I believe
there *is* such legislation n the USA...
If there were none, why did you write a disclaimer? To establish your
ethical trading credentials one assumes...
>
>> Why do you persist in using the overblown and somewhat pompous phrasing
>> that you do and which I referred to as over-analysis in a different post?
>>
>> Above is a fine example to whch I append a more reasonable statement:
>>
>> "This indicates that you have a vested interest in a belief structure"
>>
>> Which really means "You think that"
>
> Nope, it does not "really" mean that. To describe what you think is one
> thing, to describe your vested interest in MAINTAIING IN AN UNALTERBLE
> CONDITION what you think is something else.
You assume it is unalterable, actually, it isnt. However it does require
a better argument to alter it than you have come up with so far.
>
>> See? Strive for simplicity wherever possible.
>
> Your kind of "simplicity" would result in my inability to describe what
> i wish to describe. Since you cannot tell the difference between a
> belief and a vested interest in a belief structure, the barest
> simoplicity of speech may be all that you can understand. I will stry to
> put things on such a level for you, then:
>
> "Your mind is closed to viewpoints other than your own. It is important
> to you to keep your mind closed in this way."
Thank you for strying to do that. It wasnt entirely successful, but
lease do keep on strying.
>
>>> I find no reason to clutter the web page with the same repetious
>>> disclaimer for 200 different herbs when the information is clearly given
>>> ONCE in plus-size type at the top of the page.
>>>
>>> By the way, there is a similar disclaimer on every package of herbs we
>>> sell. The commonest form this takes is the decades-old, "Sold as a curio
>>> only" tag-line, but depending on the amount of text on the label that is
>>> deveoted to giving magical usages, the disclaimer may be as long as, "We
>>> make no claims for the eficacy of this [name of herb] and sell it as a
>>> genuine botanical curio only."
>> I see. So you say "this has magical properties and will < insert
>> spurious claim here > and then you say "This has no magical properties
>> of any kind.
>>
>> Right?
>
> Wrong. Read the web page again. This is he third time i have explained
> this to you. You are verging on sub-par intellect at this point.
lol. I doubt you are well placed to estimate my IQ.
>
>> After they sent the money presumably?
>
> Nope. See below. The herb-magic.com page is readable BEFORE purchases
> are made.
Yes, but far away from descriptions of the actual products and their
alleged 'magical' properties.
You are on a hiding to nothing about this Cat. No herbs have Magical
properties. End of story really.
>
>>> You may read the text of one of our labels here:
>>>
>>> http://herb-magic.com/allspice-berries.html
>
> See? No purchase necessary to READ THE WEB SITE.
>
>> Your resentment is showing.
>
> No, my impatience is showing.
Your inability to be objective is actually what is showing. But then you
have a vested interest in your belief structure - dont you?
>
>> I wonder where the problem really lies? me for pointing out (to your
>> evident discomfort) that you are misleading people, or you for doing it?
>
> I am not discomfitted by your baseless charges, but i am frustrated by
> your bizarre inability to read simple English.
I can read it fine thanks, and I can spell most of it better than you.
What I cant do is actually believe it. Because it seems you are unable
to understand why I dont.
>
> This is going nowhere, and i have had enough of your silly bleating.
>
> Adios.
>
> cat yronwode
Yep, argument lost, you wander off to concentrate on separating more
gullibles from their cash.
Enjoy.
Carter
David Carter
> David Carter wrote:
> cat yronwode wrote:
>
>>> http://www.luckymojo.com/spells/real.html
>>>
>>> Take a moment to read the page, especially the material under the headers:
>>>
>>> * DO MAGICK SPELLS ALWAYS WORK?
>>> * ARE MAGICK SPELLS GUARANTEED TO WORK?
>>> * IS MAGICK WORTH TRYING IF IT IS NOT GUARANTEED?
>>> * IS MAGICK REAL OR ARE THE RESULTS JUST COINCIDENCE?
>>> * IF MAGICK SPELLS ARE REAL, WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE USE THEM?
>>>
>>> Now, besides answering questions like that, what i do is make, import,
>>> package, and sell items that are used in the practice of vaious
>>> traditions of religion and magic, including Judaism, Christianity,
>>> Buddhism, Paganism, Wicca, Asatru, Santeria, Palo, Obeah,
>>> Zorooastrianism, Islam, Taoism, Spiritualism, New Thought, ceremonial
>>> magic, hoodoo, conjure, Pow-Wow magic, brauch magic, stregheria, and so
>>> forth.
>> Pow-wow magick? All you have done here is to collect terms that have
>> little or no meaning and present them to suggest you have a
>> comprehensive range of products.
>
> Cute. Because Pow Wow magic is an unknown subject to YOU, you say it has
> "litle or no meaning."
feel free to explain. I havent had a good laugh since Erwhine stopped
posting.
>
> Google the term and/or rent the movie "Apprentice to Murder" with Donald
> Sutherland.
>
> And while you're at it, strive for those "insights" you claim to be
> seeking, David!
>
> Insight number one: Your unfamiliarity with a topic is not a masure of
> its lack of "meaning."
neither is your support for it a resounding endorsement as to its being
more than just a new fad.
>
>> It is illegal to make claims that are unsupportable or untrue.
>
> There is no governmental body in the USA that that seeks to determine
> whether the beliefs and practices associated with religion,
> spirituality, occultism, prayer, and magic are "unsupportable or
> untrue," therefore the claims made for religion, spirituality,
> occultism, prayer, and magic ARE legal unless they violate other state
> or federal laws.
Sadly, belief that it *might* be true is no defence in an action brought
for any merchant making unsupportable and bogus advertising claims.
>
>> The disclaimer is there and carefully worded specifically to encourage
>> people to ignore or disregard it. As you well know.
>
> It is in plus-size type at the head of the page, thus your claim that it
> was "carefully worded specifically to encourage people to ignore or
> disregard it" is irrational.
The font size means the wording want carefully crafted? OK if you are
sure. I am sure my poor intellect prevents me from seeing what relevance
the size of type has to its meaning, but I am happy to accept your
better knowledge.
>
>> Come on cat, I am not a newb, I know about advertising and how you can
>> carefully circumvent the spirit of legislation at the same time as
>> pretending to comply with it.
>
> Your argument is based on a false premise: there is no "legislation"
> that limits the sale of spiritual and religious goods in interstate
> commerce, hence there is no legislation to "circumvent."
You continue to try and redefine what I said. There is legislation
governing fraudulent or misleading advertising in the USA, despite you
saying otherwise in a previous post. And your belief that miracles may
happen if you eat star anise or something would be unlikely to prevent a
false advertising prosecution I expect.
Still, You probably dont sell very much so I am sure the relevant body
isnt much concerned. Small frauds hardly register in USA.
Carter
>
> cat yronwode
hierony...@my-deja.com
> Interesting site, but the statement in the "nature of truth" section
> about Caesar being the first emperor of rome is odd.
> Rome did not have an Emperor,
The word "emperor" is often used by historians to refer to rulers of
Rome. I think Augustus/Octavius was actually the first "princeps" of
Rome.
If you read further down the page, you'll come to the section titled,
"Philosophical attacks on the idea of truth." I'd be interested in
reading your comments on that.
-hi-
Karipidu Marianna
<hierony...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1156680379.4...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
> http://www.truthpizza.org/
>
> > Interesting site, but the statement in the "nature of truth" section
> > about Caesar being the first emperor of rome is odd.
>
> > Rome did not have an Emperor,
>
> The word "emperor" is often used by historians to refer to rulers of
> Rome. I think Augustus/Octavius was actually the first "princeps" of
> Rome.
If you want to learn what the words Romios or
Romiosene mean or what Byzantine Empire
means, take a look at this:
Byzantine Empire Byzantine Empire ( Greek: Βασιλεία Ῥωμαίων) is the term
conventionally used ... This reference article is mainly selected from the English
Wikipedia with ...
fixedreference.org/2006-Wikipedia-CD-Selection/wp/b/Byzantine_Empire.htm - 91k -
Cached - Similar pages
autocracy, autocrator
autocratoria= empire
autocrator, autocratoras= emperor
autocrateira= empress
Byzantine aristocracy and bureaucracy - Wikipedia, the free ... Autocrator
(Αυτοκράτωρ) — "Emperor," this title was originally equivalent to ... The vast
Byzantine bureaucracy had many titles, and varied more than ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_aristocracy_and_bureaucracy - 43k - Cached -
Similar pages
Byzantine aristocracy and bureaucracy: Information From Answers.com Byzantine
aristocracy and bureaucracy The Byzantine Empire had a complex system of ... Example
(with more context): Constantine VII; Autocrator (Αυτοκράτωρ) ...
www.answers.com/topic/byzantine-aristocracy-and-bureaucracy - 68k - Cached -
Similar pages
cheyne
On 27-Aug-2006, "Karipidu Marianna" <kari...@comcast.net> wrote:
> If you want to learn what the words Romios or
> Romiosene mean or what Byzantine Empire
> means,
Hands up anyone who wants to learn what these words mean?
...See? Nobody.
How do they say "go away" in Greek?
cheyne
Karipidu Marianna
"cheyne" <cheyne01@spamless_btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:Q7adnSEgJ-KLf2zZ...@bt.com...
Ooooooooooh, I step on grandpa's (=Karlin's)
tail! Gee, Cheyne, I didn't know that you are
Karlin's tail...What happened to Asiya?
Joseph Littleshoes
Your probly familiar with the phenomena where one dog starts barking for
whatever reason, and then all of a sudden any other dogs in the
neighbourhood take up its refrain and start barking also?
Similar phenomena here don't you think?
---
JL