101 Rules of True Satanism
Mark Barnett
Written by Mark Barnett (Infinity of Thought) and Alex Palomino
(Refusal of Penance)
1. Own all books written by Anton LaVey
2. Quote Nietzsche obsessively, but own none of his books.
3. Come up with long, evil sounding nick names like the grand high
exalted daemon magister templi rex of the third degree
4. Whenever greeting other Satanists, the only acceptable greeting is
Ave.
5. When feeling especially Satanic say Ave Satanas.
6. Pretend Ave Satanas is appropriate Latin.
7. Use Latin as much as possible. It is the Dark Lord's chosen
language.
8. Come up with evil sounding screen names for message boards, like
goatlord666, infernalbelial9, and Crucifier.
9. End all screen names with 666.
10. If you can't come up with an evil enough sounding screen name
placing Lord in front of your own name is acceptable.
11. Own all of Crowley's books and read exactly none of them.
12. Form an online Satanic org with you and your friends and declare
yourself the high priest.
13. Give your org a hellish sounding name like The Temple of Unholy
Sacrilege, The Evil Church of Satanic Divinity, or, if the name you
want is taken, The FIRST Evil Church of Satanic Divinity.
14. Offer members of your org an evil looking certificate or card.
15. Update your org's site once a year- no exceptions!
16. Turn all crosses you see up side down.
17. Make inverted crosses out of random objects.
18. Draw inverted pentagrams on your spiral notebook in math class.
19. Wear all black, all the time!
20. Paint your fingernails black, and don't repaint them until it has
all worn off.
21. If your parents let you, paint your room black.
22. Make a Satanic alter using your dresser.
23. Carry your Satanic Bible everywhere you go.
24. Stand up for originality and individualism, but look like every
other Satanist.
25. Wear outrageous looking clothes, and then complain when other
students make fun of you.
26. Wear Halloween cloaks and capes as your ritual attire.
27. Listen to heavy metal.
28. Make the sign of the horns and bang your head while listening to
heavy metal.
29. Make the sign of the horns while looking in the mirror to remind
yourself of just how evil you are.
30. Never smile for pictures, and make the sign of the horns.
31. Complain about real world actions with Satanism but spend all day
on message boards.
32. Leave your Halloween decorations up year round.
33. Celebrate all Satanic holidays even if you don't know what they
are for.
34. Get excited every time your sales receipt comes out to $6.66.
35. Instead of saying oh my god, say oh my Satan.
36. Repeat the Lord's Prayer backwards six times every night before
bed.
37. Make long boring posts on message boards that don't go anywhere.
38. Your signature should contain at least six lines not including
Hail Satan.
39. Join every online org you come across.
40. Join every e-group and message board you can, post at each one
approximately twice.
41. Create your own message board, and only allow your friends access.
42. Make your own Satanic website by ripping off everyone else's.
43. Declare yourself a Modern Satanist, wait a week, declare yourself
a traditional Satanist, then revert back to Modern Satanism.
44. When anyone asks you what the difference between traditional and
modern Satanism is, simply say: We are all sons of the Dark Lord.
45. Tell all your friends that you follow the Left Hand Path. When
asked what that means just stare at them blankly.
46. If it's a dark sounding religion or path, it must be linked to
Satanism. Examples include: Vampyrism, Demonolatry, and Chaos Magic.
47. Always spell vampire with a "Y".
48. Name your pets after the Infernal Names.
49. Hang out in cemeteries after dark.
50. Stir up trouble in Christian chat rooms.
51. Always spell Christian as Xtian.
52. I know what your altar is missing, a fake skull.
53. Cover your car's bumper with Satanic bumper stickers. Act
surprised when they get ripped off.
54. Own Satanic clothing and jewelry; only wear them indoors when your
parents are not home.
55. Start fights with other Satanic orgs because they are not true
enough.
56. Claim to have secret knowledge of ancient occult mysteries.
57. Offer viewing of these ancient secrets for a small, nonrefundable
fee.
58. Claim that you come from a long line of devil worshippers and that
LaVeyans are not true.
59. Get ordained at the Universal Life Church (ULC)
60. Attempt to gain tax exemption.
61. When passing Jehovah's Witnesses on the road, yell "God is dead"
out the window while giving the sign of the horns.
62. Post on message boards with more than one screen name. Use one
alias to back up the other's arguments.
63. Blame all your troubles on God. When something good happens yell
Hail Satan.
64. Pretend online curses are intimidating.
65. Dye your hair black.
666. Try to obtain a pet goat.
66. Rewrite the Nine Satanic Statements, Eleven Satanic Rules of the
Earth, and Nine Satanic sins.
67. Claim to be writing the next Satanic Bible.
68. Tell everyone you are the new "Black Pope".
69. Remember, Satanists are easy to make money off of. Sell Satanic
paraphernalia at ridiculous prices.
70. Cheap Halloween accessories are an inexpensive source of ritual
tools.
71. Bash Wiccans but own at least one Wiccan/Pagan book.
72. Read Harry Potter books.
73. When you have a strange dream, it must be significant, tell others
immediately.
74. Use white out to draw inverted pentagrams on your backpack straps.
75. Cast curses on the bullies at school.
76. When someone asks you what's the significance of the Baphomet,
tell them that it's a dark secret and cannot be revealed to outsiders.
77. Re-read The Satanic Bible, this time make sure to get past the
second page.
78. Master the Enochian language.
79. Read Might is Right and wonder why it seems so familiar.
80. End all emails with Shemhamphorash.
81. If asked what Shemhamphorash means, stare blankly.
82. Don't spell Satan as S8N.
83. Start yet another Satanic group in Canada.
84. Claim ruler ship over the city your group resides in.
85. "Misplace" bibles from motel rooms.
86. Hang an up-side-down cross from your rearview mirror.
87. Call your phone company and request a phone number beginning with
666.
88. Own a pet snake.
89. Black cats also make acceptable pets.
90. Create a website using lots of graphics from Hellishgraphics.com
91. Play role-playing games obsessively.
92. Make it your life's quest to uncover the secret occult meaning
behind "Yankee Rose".
93. Pretend the line between Thelema and Satanism does not exist.
94. Shave your head and grow a goatee.
95. Refer to your small collection of occult books as a library.
96. The only acceptable colors for your altar candles are black,
white, and if feeling especially grim - red.
97. All true Satanists collect fantasy weapons off of ebay.
98. Makes plans to build an actual Satanic church.
99. If that does not work out make plans to open an occult book/coffee
shop.
100. Hang out in the occult/new age section of the bookstore waiting
for other dark brethren to arrive.
101. You mean to tell me you read this whole thing when you could have
been jerking off in a cemetery while worshiping Satan somewhere?! For
shame!!!
aroque...@aol.com
> 101 rules of True Satanism
> Written by Mark Barnett (Infinity of Thought) and Alex Palomino
> (Refusal of Penance)
>
>
> been jerking off in a cemetery while worshiping Satan somewhere?! For
> shame!!!
Ave
LOL- Very amusing list. Actually I read it WHILE masturbating in a
cemetary worshiping Satan! You see, next to my snake cage I used my
four books to look like gravestones around my computer desk here so
that everytime I am online rollplaying I am entrenched in the land of
the Dead and often this makes me grow rather excited.
I am out of whiteout - Indulgence has lead me to inhaling it till it
is dry but I do find my moms red nailpolish works good (and is spooky
too) for the inverted pentagrams on my notebooks. These notebooks
(BTW) hold the mysteries given to me by the dark lord himself and I
shall one day make them available through the book store I am
starting...and the website for the TRUE Satanic Organization at
www.firstnoelapostleofthedrearilydamnedidiots.com
ARoquentin
Oh- and Hail Satan!
Lisa
102. Tell everyone near and far that yes, you are indeed a Satanist. However,
when you send out your personal pic to online friends, make certain it's one of
you standing in front of or next to a Christmas tree. Of all the pics of
yourself you have, this is definitely the best kind; it simply screams Left
Hand Path.
(great list, by the way.)
Cat Asstrophy
news:a4f56e58.02120...@posting.google.com...
> 101 rules of True Satanism
> Written by Mark Barnett (Infinity of Thought) and Alex Palomino
> (Refusal of Penance)
>
>
> 1. Own all books written by Anton LaVey
Actually, I think I have about 3 dozen of each of them. Is that enough?
> 2. Quote Nietzsche obsessively, but own none of his books.
I couldn't quote Nietzsche if my life depended upon it, but I own several of
his books - which I HAVE read, by the way. (Won't say that I understand
them, but?)
> 3. Come up with long, evil sounding nick names like the grand high
> exalted daemon magister templi rex of the third degree.
Is "Cat" evil enough for you? Would "Sinamon" be better? Those are my two.
> 4. Whenever greeting other Satanists, the only acceptable greeting is
> Ave.
Hell, all this time, I thought it was, "Yo, dude!"
> 5. When feeling especially Satanic say Ave Satanas.
Gee. I usually say, "Well, f*ck you, dude."
> 6. Pretend Ave Satanas is appropriate Latin.
It isn't. But "Le Messe Noir" isn't proper French either, and it's in The
Satanic Rituals.
> 7. Use Latin as much as possible. It is the Dark Lord's chosen
> language.
The only Latin I use is morphia.
> 8. Come up with evil sounding screen names for message boards, like
> goatlord666, infernalbelial9, and Crucifier.
Looks like Cat Ass Trophy isn't good enough. Pooh.
> 9. End all screen names with 666.
Can I be Catastrophy666? Really? You'll let me!
> 10. If you can't come up with an evil enough sounding screen name
> placing Lord in front of your own name is acceptable.
How about Lady CatAssTrophy? Will that work for you?
> 11. Own all of Crowley's books and read exactly none of them.
I own none of them, but I've read them all. They were stolen by my Satanic
friends.
> 12. Form an online Satanic org with you and your friends and declare
> yourself the high priest.
Naw. Don't have time. I'm already too busy with bullshit.
> 13. Give your org a hellish sounding name like The Temple of Unholy
> Sacrilege, The Evil Church of Satanic Divinity, or, if the name you
> want is taken, The FIRST Evil Church of Satanic Divinity.
Wow. You are close. Mine is called "The Guild of Saint Lucifer, Lord of
the Morning Light." Oh, goody. I've got that "Lord" word in there. That
should make you happy.
> 14. Offer members of your org an evil looking certificate or card.
They already all have their little red cards. Paid $100 a pop for them. I
didn't get a dime of it.
> 15. Update your org's site once a year- no exceptions!
Damn. We do it almost every day. Should I stop?
> 16. Turn all crosses you see up side down.
What crosses? I don't see any crosses.
> 17. Make inverted crosses out of random objects.
Do you mean like dead dogs?
> 18. Draw inverted pentagrams on your spiral notebook in math class.
Wow. I haven't had a spiral note book in about 30 years. I must run out to
WallyWorld and get one ASAP. Does a Satanist really have to have a spiral
note book? Is blue OK?
> 19. Wear all black, all the time!
Oh shit. I wear white almost all the time, except in the winter. Then I
wear hot pink. Do I need to dye all my clothes black?
> 20. Paint your fingernails black, and don't repaint them until it has
> all worn off.
The last time I painted my fingernails black, was in 1978, and it was with
model paint. Does that count?
> 21. If your parents let you, paint your room black.
Well, actually, my house is black. But I own it, not my parents. Is that
OK with you?
> 22. Make a Satanic alter using your dresser.
Altar, do you mean? Don't have one. I worship at the cash register. Dress
my alter ego, you bet your bottom dollar, I do.
> 23. Carry your Satanic Bible everywhere you go.
I used to do that, but people kept stealing them from me. I was making B
Dalton really rich.
> 24. Stand up for originality and individualism, but look like every
> other Satanist.
And what does "every other Satanist" look like? I must be the other one in
"every, other".
> 25. Wear outrageous looking clothes, and then complain when other
> students make fun of you.
Well, you might say that I wear outrageous clothes. Complain, no. As to
students, most of them take fashion lessons from me.
> 26. Wear Halloween cloaks and capes as your ritual attire.
My Halloween cloak cost about $500 to make back in 1976. 100% black wool,
red silk lining, antique trim, sterling clasp, really full with nice hood.
But I wear it once a year. Ritual stuff, I have real clerical garments,
that cost me upwards to a $1000.
> 27. Listen to heavy metal.
You mean like pots and pans banging? My kid grew out of that stage about 20
years ago. The only heavy metal I have is Caphalon cookware.
> 28. Make the sign of the horns and bang your head while listening to
> heavy metal.
Wow. You must really like this "heavy metal". I thought it was mercury or
something like heavy oxygen.
> 29. Make the sign of the horns while looking in the mirror to remind
> yourself of just how evil you are.
Oh, I don't need to make the sign of the horns. I KNOW how evil I really
am.
> 30. Never smile for pictures, and make the sign of the horns.
No one takes my picture. I'm too ugly. My hands are too arthritic to make
the sign of the horns. When I try, it comes out like "I Love You" in ASL.
> 31. Complain about real world actions with Satanism but spend all day
> on message boards.
Complain? No. I laugh. Well, I suppose I'm wasting time now, but your list
was just too tempting. But I have the night off.
> 32. Leave your Halloween decorations up year round.
Yea. I tend to do that. It really f*cks with the xians' minds come Xmess
time to see jack-o-lanterns in the yard when they have a crèche up next
door. Oh, we also have Satan's throne in the yard, so all the kiddies can
tell Satan what they want for Xmas. They are much more likely to get it
from Satan than from Santa. And we stand outside the post office with a
black cauldron saying, "Alms for Satan" and ringing a brass bell.
> 33. Celebrate all Satanic holidays even if you don't know what they
> are for.
The only day that I celebrate, is a day that I get to sleep late, have a
champagne breakfast in bed, and then get a good f*ck. I don't care what day
of the calendar it falls on. (I think it's tomorrow!)
> 34. Get excited every time your sales receipt comes out to $6.66.
Oh, that's funny. We bought a piece of lamb last night just because the
price was $6.66. Damn. I wish it was the lamb of god.
> 35. Instead of saying oh my god, say oh my Satan.
I say, "Oh, Lloyd." Will that work?
> 36. Repeat the Lord's Prayer backwards six times every night before
> bed.
Shit. I don't even know it front-wards. Do I have to learn it back-wards?
> 37. Make long boring posts on message boards that don't go anywhere.
Damn. Call me guilty. But you asked for it.
> 38. Your signature should contain at least six lines not including
> Hail Satan.
OK, I'll be sure to make it nice and long for you.
> 39. Join every online org you come across.
Sorry, not a one.
> 40. Join every e-group and message board you can, post at each one
> approximately twice.
Sorry. Only this one, occasionally.
> 41. Create your own message board, and only allow your friends access.
Weeeel. We did that about five years ago, but it was too much trouble. I
think someone else has hijacked it.
> 42. Make your own Satanic website by ripping off everyone else's.
Sorry. We make our own graphics. Most people steal ours.
> 43. Declare yourself a Modern Satanist, wait a week, declare yourself
> a traditional Satanist, then revert back to Modern Satanism.
I declare myself a bitch spelled with a "w". It doesn't matter. Same
difference.
> 44. When anyone asks you what the difference between traditional and
> modern Satanism is, simply say: We are all sons of the Dark Lord.
In my case, it would be a daughter of the devil. Is that good enough for
you? And if someone wants to know the difference, I tell them to read a
book.
> 45. Tell all your friends that you follow the Left Hand Path. When
> asked what that means just stare at them blankly.
I don't have any friends. I have a fan club. They follow me. They stare
at ME blankly. They do whatever I tell them to do. Such sheep.
> 46. If it's a dark sounding religion or path, it must be linked to
> Satanism. Examples include: Vampyrism, Demonolatry, and Chaos Magic.
Never been interested in any of the above. Sorry to burst your bubble.
> 47. Always spell vampire with a "Y".
Never do. Or magic with a "K". Not in the dictionary.
> 48. Name your pets after the Infernal Names.
My pet name themselves. Like Mungo, Belkin, Tambrin, Raki. Maybe they
really ARE demons?
> 49. Hang out in cemeteries after dark.
The last time I was in a cemetery after dark, I was 38, and I chained a
beautiful 18 year old guy to a cross and f*ucked his brains out in the
moon-lit fog. We had a roaring good time, but caught a death of a cold.
But it was worth it.
> 50. Stir up trouble in Christian chat rooms.
I did that once, back in 1997. Had a great time.
> 51. Always spell Christian as Xtian.
Actually, I spell it: xian. Is that OK with you? X is the abbreviation
for Christ, in case you don't know, so it's not really an insult. But most
stupid xains don't know that, and take it as an insult, so I'm happy.
> 52. I know what your altar is missing, a fake skull.
No. I have a real goat skull on my kitchen wall, over the stove. I have a
shelf full of boxed fake skulls. They are $16.99. How many would you like?
I'll bet what YOUR bathroom is missing, is a skull toilet cleaner brush.
Got those too.
> 53. Cover your car's bumper with Satanic bumper stickers. Act
> surprised when they get ripped off.
Sorry. I wouldn't desecrate my Mercedes with such garbage. I go around
putting "Jesus has a HUGE COCK" stickers on the ass end of church busses and
mini vans. It's lots of fun seeing them around town, before someone notices
the sticker.
> 54. Own Satanic clothing and jewelry; only wear them indoors when your
> parents are not home.
Sorry, dude. My parents live in their own home. And could you possibly
define "Satanic clothing and jewelry"? I'd expect it to be anything a
Satanist wears or owns. Thus, I guess I have to plead guilty.
> 55. Start fights with other Satanic orgs because they are not true
> enough.
Oh, oh. I better not answer this one. Plead the fifth.
> 56. Claim to have secret knowledge of ancient occult mysteries.
Like the contents of my basement?
> 57. Offer viewing of these ancient secrets for a small, nonrefundable
> fee.
Hell, anyone can have it if they'd carry it away.
> 58. Claim that you come from a long line of devil worshippers and that
> LaVeyans are not true.
Not me. I come from a long line of people born in Berkley. I'm fifth
generation, actually.
> 59. Get ordained at the Universal Life Church (ULC)
Oh, shit. I have to plead guilty to that one. I did that about 30 years
ago. Does it really count against me?
> 60. Attempt to gain tax exemption.
Damn tootin'. All my flights to Las Vegas are tax deductions. I'm trying
to save the city of sinners for Satan.
> 61. When passing Jehovah's Witnesses on the road, yell "God is dead"
> out the window while giving the sign of the horns.
No, what I do is pull up behind them, and let my hubby whop them on their
cute bubble butts. That's much more effective!
> 62. Post on message boards with more than one screen name. Use one
> alias to back up the other's arguments.
Oh dear. Are you talking about sock puppets? I don't have any socks.
Would silk stocking puppets be OK? I can go to another computer and try to
make one.
> 63. Blame all your troubles on God. When something good happens yell
> Hail Satan.
I blame all my troubles on myself. When something good happens, I yell,
"Hell-a-lulia!" That happens frequently.
> 64. Pretend online curses are intimidating.
Pretend? You mean they AREN'T? Thanks for telling me.
> 65. Dye your hair black.
Sorry, dear. I happen to like my natural blond hair just the way it is.
> 666. Try to obtain a pet goat.
Now why would I want a nasty goat? My neighbors are old goats as it is.
> 66. Rewrite the Nine Satanic Statements, Eleven Satanic Rules of the
> Earth, and Nine Satanic sins.
Hell, I couldn't even say them, let alone write them. That's why I have
them printed out to hand out to anyone who is interested. Why waste my
breath?
> 67. Claim to be writing the next Satanic Bible.
I don't think so. The first one is good enough for me.
> 68. Tell everyone you are the new "Black Pope".
Popess, maybe. But I don't aim that high. I know that the true power is
always behind the throne.
> 69. Remember, Satanists are easy to make money off of. Sell Satanic
> paraphernalia at ridiculous prices.
Wow! You got one right. Their money spends just as well as the xian money
does. Nobody makes anyone buy anything. Where there is a market, there
will be a supplier. It's like drugs. It's called CAPITALISM.
> 70. Cheap Halloween accessories are an inexpensive source of ritual
> tools.
Actually, I find my husband's penis to be the best ritual tool around.
> 71. Bash Wiccans but own at least one Wiccan/Pagan book.
I don't bash wiccans. They amuse me. And, yes, I do own quite a few wiccan
and pagan books. They have their uses. Like door stops.
> 72. Read Harry Potter books.
And who might Harry Potter be? What books did he write?
> 73. When you have a strange dream, it must be significant, tell others
> immediately.
Oh, my dreams are way to erotic to tell people. That's why I write them
down. I sell them to porno film makers, who use them to make movies. And I
never have to write dialog.
> 74. Use white out to draw inverted pentagrams on your backpack straps.
What? Backpack? I don't hike. I drive.
> 75. Cast curses on the bullies at school.
School? You must be in some remedial education program. The last time I
went to school was in 1979 when I graduated from college. Oh, wait a
minute. Does going to my kid's school to a parent-teacher conference count?
Bullies? There? No way. They were all afraid of her "momma that witch".
> 76. When someone asks you what's the significance of the Baphomet,
> tell them that it's a dark secret and cannot be revealed to outsiders.
I tell them it's a symbol to scare xians with, and that it works really
well.
> 77. Re-read The Satanic Bible, this time make sure to get past the
> second page.
Oh, I've read it about once a month since it was published in hard-cover
(which I still own). But I use the paper edition now to save the wear and
tear. I love to read it out loud to people. It's so poetic, so eloquent.
I even read some of it to the jury in a court case back in 1978 in the deep
South. Yes, we won the case.
> 78. Master the Enochian language.
No need to. I'd rather listen to my Rev chant it. It's so intoxicating
that way. I love the mystery. Let him 'master' it.
> 79. Read Might is Right and wonder why it seems so familiar.
I haven't had the time to read it yet.
> 80. End all emails with Shemhamphorash.
Sorry. Could never remember how to spell it.
> 81. If asked what Shemhamphorash means, stare blankly.
Shit. You got me there. I wouldn't even know what they were saying.
> 82. Don't spell Satan as S8N.
That's a new one on me. I thought is was Natas.
> 83. Start yet another Satanic group in Canada.
Canada? Why there? I'm not in Canada.
> 84. Claim ruler ship over the city your group resides in.
I wouldn't want to rule the city I live in. They can have the garlicky
smelly place. But the Baptists DID blame me for the sink hole in the
parking lot behind the church. They said I was making a hole to hell that
was going to swallow up their church. Silly people.
> 85. "Misplace" bibles from motel rooms.
Oh, wow. Someone noticed! Every time we stay in a motel/hotel, we replace
the Gideon bible with The Satanic Bible. I'd say we've "placed" about a
hundred of them in the last five years. Been selling the Gideons on eBay to
pay for The Satanic Bibles. I kept the one from the Bellagio, though. It
was very impressive. Embossed gold, with "The Bellagio" stamped on the
cover.
> 86. Hang an up-side-down cross from your rearview mirror.
Naw. Would get in the way of watching the road.
> 87. Call your phone company and request a phone number beginning with
> 666.
If I'd wanted one, I'd have had one 22 years ago. Sorry. My phone doesn't
ring. It's a dial out only.
> 88. Own a pet snake.
Well, if you consider the trouser snake that my husband shares with
me.........might be considered a pet. I do really like it.
> 89. Black cats also make acceptable pets.
Yes. I do have one of those too. She's quite the hellish little bitch,
just like her owner.
> 90. Create a website using lots of graphics from Hellishgraphics.com.
Sorry. I told you, we make our own graphics, and take our own pictures.
Never heard of that site, but thanks for the tip. Will have the web master
check it out.
> 91. Play role-playing games obsessively.
Never in my life have I even played even ONE of them. Unless you consider
pretending to be sane every day in the business world a "role-playing game".
Then, I suppose that "obsessively" would be an accurate description. At
least I'm not flipping burgers - except on my own barbecue.
> 92. Make it your life's quest to uncover the secret occult meaning
> behind "Yankee Rose".
Well, I learned that secret at 16. That was many years ago.
> 93. Pretend the line between Thelema and Satanism does not exist.
Huh? Where did you get that crazy notion?
> 94. Shave your head and grow a goatee.
That would be a bit difficult, considering that I'm female.
> 95. Refer to your small collection of occult books as a library.
Well, based upon the "library" shown in "Satanis" and "Speak of the Devil",
mine is about 130 times as big. However, I haven't quite made it to the
status of the "Nine Gates" sort of libraries. That's my goal. But, I must
confess. Not all the books are "occult". I do read other material as well.
Tonight, I'm going to read "Little Red Ridding Hood Uncloaked: Sex,
Morality, and the Evolution of the Fairy Tale." Interesting.
> 96. The only acceptable colors for your altar candles are black,
> white, and if feeling especially grim - red.
I don't have an altar, unless you want to consider the cash register. And
the color there is GREEN GREEN GREEN.
> 97. All true Satanists collect fantasy weapons off of ebay.
No, dear. I sell "fantasy weapons" on eBay.
> 98. Makes plans to build an actual Satanic church.
Well, actually, once a CoS Rev and I were looking at an old church to buy as
a home. But it was a bit too expensive for us.
> 99. If that does not work out make plans to open an occult book/coffee
> shop.
Make plans? LOL. I did that in 1980, minus the coffee. Don't drink the
stuff. Love the smell though. Actually, books are only a part of what I
sell. I sell dreams.
> 100. Hang out in the occult/new age section of the bookstore waiting
> for other dark brethren to arrive.
They would be "sisteren" if that's a word. Cistern? Hum. No. I haven't
been in a book store in ages, unless you consider on-line sites to be "book
stores".
> 101. You mean to tell me you read this whole thing when you could have
> been jerking off in a cemetery while worshiping Satan somewhere?! For
> shame!!!
Not only did I read it, I responded to it. This is my form of "jerking
off". You got the cum. For shame, my ass. Your list was funny as all
hell.
Thanks for the amusement.
1. Ms Cat Ass Trophy
2. Sinamon
3. Bitch
4. Witch
5. Capitalisssssst
6. Satanisssst
(There you go. That's six for you!)
- wolf -
news:HtjI9.74$bV5.9...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> > 6. Pretend Ave Satanas is appropriate Latin.
>
> It isn't. But "Le Messe Noir" isn't proper French either, and it's in The
> Satanic Rituals.
Same for "Die elektrischen Vorspiele," which isn't proper German. I wonder
why Anton LaVey didn't bother to run the texts by someone who knew the
languages.
- wolf -
Kevin Filan
3df236eb$0$142$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk, "- wolf -"
<wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote:
My guess would be that he was using this stuff as props, and wasn't really
concerned with the "authenticity" or "correctness" of same. I don't think
the guys who designed sets for Hammer Films lay awake at night worrying
about how they had put 19th century furniture in what was purportedly an
18th century castle. They were more concerned about whether or not the set
established the proper Dark and Spooky mood. I think most of LaVey's
research in that regard was pretty cursory; if it looked good, he threw it
in for background.
If you want to learn more about Yezidi rituals, La Voisin, etc. you are
going to have to go beyond the confines of *The Satanic Bible* and start
researching primary documents. What LaVey gives in *TSB* is wallpaper, not
scholarship. I'm not saying this is right, or that this is an appropriate
scholarly technique. OTOH, I don't think LaVey ever tried to present *The
Satanic Bible* as peer-reviewed scholastic literature, or as the Authentic
Survival Of Some Ancient And Secret Tradition.
Peace
Kevin Filan
Axolotl2
Just like when you didn't bother to find out that the CoS was based on Anton LaVey's The
Satanic Bible and not Tani Jantsang's Dark Doctrines? Maybe your new name should be Rubels
or just plain Stupels.
Cat Asstrophy
Kevin Filan <mrha...@excite.SPAMBGONE.com> wrote in message
news:BA17A41C.8D20%mrha...@excite.SPAMBGONE.com...
> OTOH, I don't think LaVey ever tried to present *The
> Satanic Bible* as peer-reviewed scholastic literature, or as the Authentic
> Survival Of Some Ancient And Secret Tradition.
>
>
> Peace
> Kevin Filan
>
At the time it was published, if I remember correctly, the book had two
goals. To sell a lot of books - which it did, and still does, AND to
inflame the xtian masses. In that respect, it was incredibly successful,
and continues to do the same.
Purrrrrr......
Cat
Victor LeNettoyeur™
Glad to see you got the X-Mas card I sent. >8*P Please see below...
Lisa wrote:
In my understanding: The Left Hand Path, by necessity, is a hermetic
philosophy. A Satanist is what s/he is despite the best efforts of social
forces to mold them into a member of the mindless proletariat. He is Mao's
"Revolutionary who swims in the seas of the people"... though his revolution
is usually a personal conquest -- mastery of the self, rather than a
political one.
With this in mind; do you consider it a realistic expectation that Satanists
would abandon the traditions of friends and family (endangering close
relationships in the process)?
For example: Would I be closer to LHP philosophy if I quit my business, grew
my hair out shoulder length, donned a pseudo-spooky black cape full time,
and changed my name to "Lord Maleficient, high commander of the legions of
infernal darkness"? Personally, I don't think that would do much for me;
besides make people titter as I walked into various crowded rooms. With this
in mind, what good would it do to quit celebrating Hannukah/X-Mas?
Isn't it more coherent with the ideals of the LHP that an adherent might
take advantage of those customs and folkways which add joy to his life and
increase the happiness of those around him? Every holiday has it's origins
in some goofy superstitious nonsense from someplace.
I ask this with the knowledge that the Hannukah-XMas holiday(s) have been
completely co-opted by the establishment which uses it to increase profits
at the expense of the superstitious and gullible. I don't have much respect
for the spend-o-rama that the sheep are engaging in this month. The sheeple
exist only to be sheared, though this is a more fundamental question.
I debated this with Wolf's wife Amina several months ago. Personally, I
think it's somewhat silly for a Satanist (one who by necessity acknowledges
that he is "alien" to the world) to forego the social customs of his peers
-- losing relationships in the process.
Corax
"- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in message
news:3df236eb$0$142$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
I remember a few years back when a small CoS grotto published a magazine.
The publisher/grottomaster was so dyslectic (and not a bad word about that),
that is was almost impossible to understand a word. He made the magazine
himself without the help of any of the 20+ members he claimed to have. My
guess is that he was alone with the project, and that his claim of members
was a lie. If you have people near you who are able to correct the faults in
a official project made by the whole group, I can not imagine a person so
stubborn that he would want to keep his mistakes (unless we are dealing with
someone who should not have any kind of responsibilities).
- Corax
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
<snip your cuckold>
>
> I remember a few years back when a small CoS grotto published a magazine.
> The publisher/grottomaster was so dyslectic (and not a bad word about
that),
> that is was almost impossible to understand a word.
Wow! Leslie Masters was a Grotto Master? Who knew?
He made the magazine
> himself without the help of any of the 20+ members he claimed to have. My
> guess is that he was alone with the project, and that his claim of members
> was a lie. If you have people near you who are able to correct the faults
in
> a official project made by the whole group, I can not imagine a person so
> stubborn that he would want to keep his mistakes (unless we are dealing
with
> someone who should not have any kind of responsibilities).
Now you still haven't gotten over your axe to grind with the CoS, have you?
As an aside, why does -wolf- still have my private emails on his CoS Files
site without my permission?
Regards,
Harry Lime
http://www.harrylimetv.com/
>
> - Corax
>
>
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
<snip>
>
> In my understanding: The Left Hand Path, by necessity, is a hermetic
> philosophy. A Satanist is what s/he is despite the best efforts of social
> forces to mold them into a member of the mindless proletariat. He is Mao's
> "Revolutionary who swims in the seas of the people"... though his
revolution
> is usually a personal conquest -- mastery of the self, rather than a
> political one.
>
> With this in mind; do you consider it a realistic expectation that
Satanists
> would abandon the traditions of friends and family (endangering close
> relationships in the process)?
>
> For example: Would I be closer to LHP philosophy if I quit my business,
grew
> my hair out shoulder length, donned a pseudo-spooky black cape full time,
> and changed my name to "Lord Maleficient, high commander of the legions of
> infernal darkness"? Personally, I don't think that would do much for me;
> besides make people titter as I walked into various crowded rooms. With
this
> in mind, what good would it do to quit celebrating Hannukah/X-Mas?
Yeah, if you wanna avoid the holidays become a Jehova's Witless.
> Isn't it more coherent with the ideals of the LHP that an adherent might
> take advantage of those customs and folkways which add joy to his life and
> increase the happiness of those around him? Every holiday has it's origins
> in some goofy superstitious nonsense from someplace.
Good point. I don't get all up in arms about the holidays and do the usual
gift exchange with friends and relatives. Self-described Satanists who don't
participate are trying too hard in my opinion showing that they're
repressing a lot of hostility. I don't discuss my personal religious beliefs
either and usually avoid questions about those subjects.
> I ask this with the knowledge that the Hannukah-XMas holiday(s) have been
> completely co-opted by the establishment which uses it to increase profits
> at the expense of the superstitious and gullible. I don't have much
respect
> for the spend-o-rama that the sheep are engaging in this month. The
sheeple
> exist only to be sheared, though this is a more fundamental question.
>
> I debated this with Wolf's wife Amina several months ago. Personally, I
> think it's somewhat silly for a Satanist (one who by necessity
acknowledges
> that he is "alien" to the world) to forego the social customs of his peers
> -- losing relationships in the process.
I think it shows there's more going on besides wanting to be a good
Satanist. These people are either attention-starved or have more complicated
issues going on in their noodles. For example, I think the speed limit laws
here in the USA are silly, but I still obey the law and don't go on tirades
with people regarding how unfair these laws and speed regularly.
Regards,
Harry
http://www.harrylimetv.com/
Lisa
would abandon the traditions of friends and family (endangering close
relationships in the process)?>>
I advocate no such thing; I for one think Satanists should do whatever they're
happy with: if they want to enjoy the full paraphanalia of the holiday season,
who am I to say them nay? Satanism being about indulgence, etc.
I have known many "Satanists" in the past who would have coronaries at the mere
thought of strings of mini-lights or the exchange of gifts during this season;
I always thought that came perilously close to telling others what to do. If we
wanted to endure that sort of thing, we'd be xtians.
<<For example: Would I be closer to LHP philosophy if I quit my business, grew
my hair out shoulder length, donned a pseudo-spooky black cape full time, and
changed my name to "Lord Maleficient, high commander of the legions of infernal
darkness"?>>
But, this comes closer to my tongue-in-cheek "rule": don't have a screen or
nickname "LordBelial666Hell" and then be sending me some picture of
"LordBelial" in front of a Christmas tree. That just immediately ruptures that
picture of Satanic Bad-assitude "LordBelial" has went to such pains to
construct.
(Not that I take people who call themselves "Lord" that seriously - it just
looks inconsistent, that's all.) Perhaps this falls under the heading, "Just be
yourself."
"Ah, but your screen name is 'GUILLOTINA' !" you might say. True: but nowhere
on my profile or in my dealings with others online will you hear me proclaiming
myself the "Queen of Hell" or "Satan's Infernal Temptress" or "Leader of two
Satanic Legions of Demons - BEWARE!" My nick is strictly tongue-in-cheek.
<< Isn't it more coherent with the ideals of the LHP that an adherent might
take advantage of those customs and folkways which add joy to his life and
increase the happiness of those around him?>>
I must agree.
<< I debated this with Wolf's wife Amina several months ago.>>
Oh, boy..... I bet *that* was a fun one.
<<Personally, I think it's somewhat silly for a Satanist (one who by necessity
acknowledges that he is "alien" to the world) to forego the social customs of
his peers -- losing relationships in the process.>>
And really, unless one wants to "come out" as a Satanist, it is all but
impossible. Forego such social customs/gatherings and the questions begin to
fly thick and fast, and I speak from experience.
L.
Cat Asstrophy
tim jordan <timjo...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:YaMI9.165159$GR5....@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> Self-described Satanists who don't participate are trying too hard in my
opinion showing > that they're repressing a lot of hostility.
Hostility, yes. Being that I've been in retail since 1975, dealing with the
Xmess buying hysteria, and the stupidians who go along with that, I have a
lot of hostility. I can't get away to buy gifts for my own family. I don't
have time to decorate, bake, send cards, or wrap gifts. I absolutely DETEST
the season from Thakxgiving to Xmess day. I can't even find a place to park
my car to get to my own store to serve the stupid buyers of any piece of
shit that I show them.
But I solved the problem. I get a tree at a mini-mart on Xmess eve, when
they are giving them away (or for a few bucks). I spend Xmess day
decorating it, the house, cooking, wrapping what gifts I purchased in July.
When the after-Xmess sales hit, I buy my gifts then. I have a week to "get
in to the spirit". Then, I celebrate New Year's Eve/Day. That's when I
give gifts and have people over.
Thus, I avoid the hoopla with the music at the stores, the crowds, and the
entire Xmess/Xian association. If anyone doesn't like it, then they can
stuff it. My family has finally gotten used to getting New Year's gifts,
not Xmess gifts. I don't go there on the 25th, and I don't participate in
the games. The silly thing is that none of my family is xian either. They
just go through the motions, because it's "tradition". F*ck that. I
started my own tradition.
My kid was lucky. Our pagan friends celebrated the solstice. She got gifts
then. She got Xmess gifts from the grandparents, aunts, uncles, and had
that fun. Then, she got more gifts on New Year's Eve. Instead of feeling
"left out", she had triple the pleasure. Since we started it when she was a
baby (I'd been doing it 5 years before she was born) it was "normal" to her.
Yes, I detest the Xmess season. With a passion.
Victor LeNettoyeur™
Lisa wrote:
> <<With this in mind; do you consider it a realistic expectation that Satanists
> would abandon the traditions of friends and family (endangering close
> relationships in the process)?>>
>
> I advocate no such thing; I for one think Satanists should do whatever they're
> happy with: if they want to enjoy the full paraphanalia of the holiday season,
> who am I to say them nay? Satanism being about indulgence, etc.
>
> I have known many "Satanists" in the past who would have coronaries at the
mere
> thought of strings of mini-lights or the exchange of gifts during this season;
> I always thought that came perilously close to telling others what to do.
If we
> wanted to endure that sort of thing, we'd be xtians.
I did mean to specifically single you out after your response above, but
only because I didn't expect such an interjection from you. For most of the
jokers who post to alt.satanism, such a response would not only be par for
the course but I wouldn't find it worthwhile to debate the matter with them.
With this in mind, I'm honestly curious as to how you reconcile the above
paragraphs with the earlier post you made deriding those who get photos
taken in front of X-Mas trees. This isn't flame-bait and you are welcome to
your opinion, but I remain honestly curious as to what motivates your
earlier dismissal of those who indulge in the seasonal holidays.
>
> <<For example: Would I be closer to LHP philosophy if I quit my business, grew
> my hair out shoulder length, donned a pseudo-spooky black cape full time, and
> changed my name to "Lord Maleficient, high commander of the legions of
infernal
> darkness"?>>
>
> But, this comes closer to my tongue-in-cheek "rule": don't have a screen or
> nickname "LordBelial666Hell" and then be sending me some picture of
> "LordBelial" in front of a Christmas tree. That just immediately ruptures that
> picture of Satanic Bad-assitude "LordBelial" has went to such pains to
> construct.
LOL! That's an excellent point.
I had something of a mentor when I began my study of this philosophy. One of
the most lasting memories of my interactions with this fellow was my
surprise that he actually had a sense of humor, and my realization that he
was a funny, grounded, cool old guy. He had something of a "spooky" screen
name too (he was on another forum, and never participated in this pathetic
shitheap to the best of my knowledge, so various third parties can forget
about hassling him). After a first look one realized that behind the nym was
a cross between Harvard English professor and Groucho Marx.
I think that your contention (providing I'm not projecting too much into
your rebuttal) might be one which is critical of those who take themselves
and their various spooky personae too seriously, rather than derision toward
people who enjoy themselves at X-mas (or whatever religious holiday is en
vogue around one's locale).
>
> (Not that I take people who call themselves "Lord" that seriously - it just
> looks inconsistent, that's all.) Perhaps this falls under the heading,
"Just be
> yourself."
>
> "Ah, but your screen name is 'GUILLOTINA' !" you might say. True: but nowhere
> on my profile or in my dealings with others online will you hear me
proclaiming
> myself the "Queen of Hell" or "Satan's Infernal Temptress" or "Leader of two
> Satanic Legions of Demons - BEWARE!" My nick is strictly tongue-in-cheek.
>
> << Isn't it more coherent with the ideals of the LHP that an adherent might
> take advantage of those customs and folkways which add joy to his life and
> increase the happiness of those around him?>>
>
> I must agree.
>
> << I debated this with Wolf's wife Amina several months ago.>>
>
> Oh, boy..... I bet *that* was a fun one.
While -wolf-'s wife was something of a reactionary and struck me as a
"evangelical Satanist" of sorts, we actually had a pretty decent
conversation. She's a lot more thoughtful than her husband usually is. (Not
that this is any great accomplishment, but I digress).
Hail Larry
Hail Curly
Hail Moe
*nyuk nyuk nyuk*
Victor
Lisa
honestly curious as to what motivates your
earlier dismissal of those who indulge in the seasonal holidays.>>
Well, I'm not dismissing them out of hand - I'd be dismissing a lot of people,
even people here, were I to do so. I guesstimate 98-99% of people here will
celebrate the holidays in one way or another. Does this mean they're "bad"
Satanists? No. There are arguments pro and con, but I think the "protective
coloration" argument suffices nicely; no other need be made. As I remarked
earlier, stop celebrating the holidays and you'll be throughly questioned by
family members and friends. Observing the rites keeps one's camoflage nicely in
place.
Besides, presents are fun.
However, regarding my earlier statement, I'd think it was just as stupid to
have someone tell me, "I am a BORN-AGAIN Christian. I am at church 3 times a
week, the Lord and me are BEST FRIENDS. The Lord and I walk hand in hand every
day. I call on My Lord whenever I need him, and He always answers me. By the
way, I'm a virgin. Now wanna see these pics of me and my girlfriend at the
Fetish Ball last month?" and then they send over a picture of two people
wearing fetish-attire, one wearing a slave-collar, one with a whip and with all
attendant paraphanalia.
I mean, what does that really say?! ::laughs:: it's inconsistant. (And by the
way, the fetish picture thing actually happened once. I do not miss chat-rooms,
but I admit some very funny stuff can happen therein.)
L.
Victor LeNettoyeur™
> Good point. I don't get all up in arms about the holidays and do the usual
> gift exchange with friends and relatives. Self-described Satanists who don't
> participate are trying too hard in my opinion showing that they're
> repressing a lot of hostility. I don't discuss my personal religious beliefs
> either and usually avoid questions about those subjects.
That's my position as well. Christmas and Chanukah are both fun secular
holidays to me where I get to enjoy a good meal and the company of people I
admire. I'll even sing along and wear a Santa stocking cap as I sip
champagne. I'll also take in a cheap show with a good choir in a lovely
building around this time of year -- not a bad way to show respect to the
older generations.
I do tend to agree with CatAstrophy about the common mob who runs into debt
buying overpriced junk that will end up in the landfill, but as I practice
moderation in my own house, and don't work in the retail sector, my own
dislike of this season is probably not as intense as that of others.
Cheers...
Victor
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
> > Good point. I don't get all up in arms about the holidays and do the
usual
> > gift exchange with friends and relatives. Self-described Satanists who
don't
> > participate are trying too hard in my opinion showing that they're
> > repressing a lot of hostility. I don't discuss my personal religious
beliefs
> > either and usually avoid questions about those subjects.
>
> That's my position as well. Christmas and Chanukah are both fun secular
> holidays to me where I get to enjoy a good meal and the company of people
I
> admire. I'll even sing along and wear a Santa stocking cap as I sip
> champagne. I'll also take in a cheap show with a good choir in a lovely
> building around this time of year -- not a bad way to show respect to the
> older generations.
Well whatever suits your fancy. It's interesting how some Satanists are so
doctrinaire about such matters. I guess participating in Xmas could be seen
as a bit of an indulgence, no?
>
> I do tend to agree with CatAstrophy about the common mob who runs into
debt
> buying overpriced junk that will end up in the landfill, but as I practice
> moderation in my own house, and don't work in the retail sector, my own
> dislike of this season is probably not as intense as that of others.
Yeah, me too. Running into debt is a silly way to spend dough. I guess that
is what Walmarts and other mega retail outlets are for. I hate to admit it,
but I do most of my Xmas shopping in January for the next year. Just call
me niggardly (I can hardly wait for the response from the PC crowd).
Regards,
Harry
> Cheers...
>
> Victor
>
>
>
>
Corax
"Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:YWVvbg==.2dd5e4bf40158eb40d488c6b33d23c42@1039394705.cotse.net...
> While -wolf-'s wife was something of a reactionary and struck me as a
> "evangelical Satanist" of sorts,
I think you confuse "evangelical Satanist" with "a person from a more
secularized country". My friends and family does not have any problems
accepting my views on Christmas etc. and they are actually supportive. I am
not loosing any relationships because of Satanism. Not even my many media
appearances have scared anyone away. Maybe them being non-Christians and
non-conformists helps a bit (I was not baptised as a kid - maybe that is a
clue as to there views). In Denmark we also have a nice community of
peganists, Asatru, wiccas etc. etc. who are able to get together on social
occasions and to work together on projects (Halloween is a blast). In
reality, I think we are keeping less to our own "little cult" then most
Satanists (and yes, I do have Christian friends - I am a student of the
history of religion, so I could hardly avoid getting in contact with all
sorts of religious people). Danish culture differs more from American
culture then American Satanism differs from American Christianity. Without
knowing the culture, you are not able to know if my views differ from normal
Danish views or not.
- Corax
tim jordan
> > While -wolf-'s wife was something of a reactionary and struck me as a
> > "evangelical Satanist" of sorts,
>
> I think you confuse "evangelical Satanist" with "a person from a more
> secularized country".
Right. That's why the country you live in has adopted Christianity (calling
itself Lutheran) as its official religion and has voted in a conservative
government lately?
My friends and family does not have any problems
> accepting my views on Christmas etc. and they are actually supportive. I
am
> not loosing any relationships because of Satanism. Not even my many media
> appearances have scared anyone away. Maybe them being non-Christians and
> non-conformists helps a bit (I was not baptised as a kid - maybe that is a
> clue as to there views). In Denmark we also have a nice community of
> peganists, Asatru, wiccas etc. etc. who are able to get together on social
> occasions and to work together on projects (Halloween is a blast). In
> reality, I think we are keeping less to our own "little cult" then most
> Satanists (and yes, I do have Christian friends - I am a student of the
> history of religion, so I could hardly avoid getting in contact with all
> sorts of religious people). Danish culture differs more from American
> culture then American Satanism differs from American Christianity. Without
> knowing the culture, you are not able to know if my views differ from
normal
> Danish views or not.
Some might argue that not too many people care about that little Eurotrash
backwater country you and your hubby call "home." By the way, why
does -wolf- still have my private emails on his site, The CoS Files, without
my permission? Is this what you and the Satanic Retards consider Satanic?
Regards,
Harry
http://www.harrylimetv.com/
> - Corax
>
>
Victor LeNettoyeur™
news:3df46675$0$229$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk:
>
> "Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:YWVvbg==.2dd5e4bf40158eb40d488c6b33d23c42@1039394705.cotse.net...
>
>> While -wolf-'s wife was something of a reactionary and struck me as
>> a
>> "evangelical Satanist" of sorts,
>
> I think you confuse "evangelical Satanist" with "a person from a more
> secularized country".
Not at all. I'm speaking to someone who gets on national television programs
and "debates" Xian priests and ministers -- trying to "convert" people to
Satanism. (That simple fact alone casts doubt upon your status as even a
nominal Satanist. Most people would consider you little more than an
inversionist Xian).
I'm speaking to a Dane, someone who lives in a nation where Xianity (and a
specific brand of Xianity at that) is espoused by the political leaders and
is written into the constitution.
It seems I know you better than you know yourself.
> My friends and family does not have any problems
> accepting my views on Christmas etc. and they are actually supportive.
> I am not loosing any relationships because of Satanism. Not even my
> many media appearances have scared anyone away. Maybe them being
> non-Christians and non-conformists helps a bit (I was not baptised as
> a kid - maybe that is a clue as to there views). In Denmark we also
> have a nice community of peganists, Asatru, wiccas etc. etc. who are
> able to get together on social occasions and to work together on
> projects (Halloween is a blast).
The very fact that you think such things are worthy of mention shows just
how deeply Xianity and puritanism is ingrained into your own psyche. What's
amazing is that you don't even realize how you sound to someone from secular
America.
> In reality, I think we are keeping
> less to our own "little cult" then most Satanists (and yes, I do have
> Christian friends - I am a student of the history of religion, so I
> could hardly avoid getting in contact with all sorts of religious
> people).
You've mentioned this countless times, yet you stammer when you've been
asked where you are studying religion and when your last paper was
published. I'd still like to see it.
> Danish culture differs more from American culture then
> American Satanism differs from American Christianity.
How so? Be specific and back up your answer with references.
> Without knowing
> the culture, you are not able to know if my views differ from normal
> Danish views or not.
You're assuming I've not been to Denmark and am not acquainted with your
culture. What do you base this assumption on, I wonder?
Victor
Victor LeNettoyeur™
>
> Some might argue that not too many people care about that little
> Eurotrash backwater country you and your hubby call "home." By the
> way, why does -wolf- still have my private emails on his site, The CoS
> Files, without my permission? Is this what you and the Satanic
> Retards consider Satanic?
I'm of the personal opinion that neither -wolf- nor Amina/Corax have a clue
as to the real core meaning of Satanism. (Of the two, at least Amina/Corax
can argue intelligently).
Both of these jokers probably have cheap suits in the closet which they don
to annoy their neighbors door-to-door (dark doctrines in hand) in the best
Mormon Missionary style. Maybe I'll catch one of their soapbox sermons on
the evils of blowjobs when in downtown Copenhagen next.
People who get on television and make a big production about their religion
don't impress me much. It's only pimple-faced preteens and angry headcases
who get a charge out of "shocking the herd" anyway. The majority of people
in modern society consider such things little more than a boring display of
ego. Of course things are probably different in Xian Denmark, but where I
live it's strictly passe.
Victor
Victor LeNettoyeur™
> Dear Vic:
>
> Please see inside text:
>
> > > Good point. I don't get all up in arms about the holidays and do the
> usual
> > > gift exchange with friends and relatives. Self-described Satanists who
> don't
> > > participate are trying too hard in my opinion showing that they're
> > > repressing a lot of hostility. I don't discuss my personal religious
> beliefs
> > > either and usually avoid questions about those subjects.
> >
> > That's my position as well. Christmas and Chanukah are both fun secular
> > holidays to me where I get to enjoy a good meal and the company of people
> I
> > admire. I'll even sing along and wear a Santa stocking cap as I sip
> > champagne. I'll also take in a cheap show with a good choir in a lovely
> > building around this time of year -- not a bad way to show respect to the
> > older generations.
>
> Well whatever suits your fancy. It's interesting how some Satanists are so
> doctrinaire about such matters. I guess participating in Xmas could be seen
> as a bit of an indulgence, no?
>
Well, it is to me. Of course everyone has their own whims and biases against
this and that. One man's meat, etc...
Speaking generally: I honestly believe that quite a few people who frequent
this newsgroup do so in some subconscious attempt to "rebel" against their
parents and/or upbringing. When I first arrived on this illustrious forum I
saw several people full of irrational rage and I wondered where their anger
originated. Of course this was before I heard some delightful childhood
tales. With this in mind it's not hard to superimpose "Santa" with "Mama
coming with the enema bag".
Sorta makes you grateful for a normal family, doesn't it? One more thing to
celebrate this time of year I guess.
Good talking to ya...
Victor
Victor LeNettoyeur™
> <<This isn't flame-bait and you are welcome to your opinion, but I remain
> honestly curious as to what motivates your
> earlier dismissal of those who indulge in the seasonal holidays.>>
>
> Well, I'm not dismissing them out of hand - I'd be dismissing a lot of people,
> even people here, were I to do so. I guesstimate 98-99% of people here will
> celebrate the holidays in one way or another. Does this mean they're "bad"
> Satanists? No. There are arguments pro and con, but I think the "protective
> coloration" argument suffices nicely; no other need be made. As I remarked
> earlier, stop celebrating the holidays and you'll be throughly questioned by
> family members and friends. Observing the rites keeps one's camoflage
nicely in
> place.
>
> Besides, presents are fun.
I agree! Halowe'en to New Years is just a series of great parties to me.
Children (natural magicians that they are) tend to dig the season also.
>
> However, regarding my earlier statement, I'd think it was just as stupid to
> have someone tell me, "I am a BORN-AGAIN Christian. I am at church 3 times a
> week, the Lord and me are BEST FRIENDS. The Lord and I walk hand in hand every
> day. I call on My Lord whenever I need him, and He always answers me. By the
> way, I'm a virgin. Now wanna see these pics of me and my girlfriend at the
> Fetish Ball last month?" and then they send over a picture of two people
> wearing fetish-attire, one wearing a slave-collar, one with a whip and
with all
> attendant paraphanalia.
Hehe. That's quite a mental image.
On that note, I once knew an Xian minister who was a swinger/wife-swapper.
It's a shame I can't remember his name. He'd probably like your devout
submissives. Hell: We could get all these whackos together with -wolf- and
Corax and have them debate with Tani Jantsang on the Harry Lime show.
Victor
Lupo LeBoucher
Gee, I wonder if "the Call to Cthulhu" and the "Ceremony of the Nine
Angles" are grammatically correct Yugothian? Maybee Mikey will pipe up,
since it's supposedly his claim to fame and all that.
Poodles, muh boy: sometimes you give new meaning to the words, "missing
the concept."
-Lupo
"I know that I am mortal by nature and ephemeral; but when I trace, at my
pleasure, the windings to and fro of the heavenly bodies I no longer touch
earth with my feet; I stand in the presence of Zeus, himself, and take my
fill of ambrosia" -- Claudius Ptolemy <i...@fnord.io.com>
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
"Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:YWVvbg==.79122c77b6fa8cf9fad5027781a071c7@1039455167.cotse.net...
> Also sprach tim jordan...
>
> >
> > Some might argue that not too many people care about that little
> > Eurotrash backwater country you and your hubby call "home." By the
> > way, why does -wolf- still have my private emails on his site, The CoS
> > Files, without my permission? Is this what you and the Satanic
> > Retards consider Satanic?
>
> I'm of the personal opinion that neither -wolf- nor Amina/Corax have a
clue
> as to the real core meaning of Satanism. (Of the two, at least Amina/Corax
> can argue intelligently).
As to what -Wolf- knows or doesn't know about Satanism, difficult for me to
say. It seems that most people in this forum have their own definition of
the term which is as it should be, IMO. -Wolf- bothers me because he's
quite pretentious -- but delivers mostly bitchy comments to those who
question the SR's or the Dysfunctional Durga (kinda like Les used to be sans
dyslexia and cracker jokes). Funny, but he's never adequately explained
why he uses personal emails of mine without my permission. Just shows he
does pretty much as he's told like a good little castrati and has little in
the way of personal ethics.
> Both of these jokers probably have cheap suits in the closet which they
don
> to annoy their neighbors door-to-door (dark doctrines in hand) in the best
> Mormon Missionary style. Maybe I'll catch one of their soapbox sermons on
> the evils of blowjobs when in downtown Copenhagen next.
Hey now Victor, I come from a long line of Morons (sic) Mormons. Yeah, I got
a bunch of Tani's sold material sent to me from others and I think it might
be fun to read this stuff on my cable access program and claim it as my own
(after all it's mostly hilarously inaccurate and/or brazenly stolen anyway).
Maybe I can say I'm the Peoples' Cummissar of PDX!
> People who get on television and make a big production about their
religion
> don't impress me much. It's only pimple-faced preteens and angry headcases
> who get a charge out of "shocking the herd" anyway. The majority of people
> in modern society consider such things little more than a boring display
of
> ego. Of course things are probably different in Xian Denmark, but where I
> live it's strictly passe.
Yeah, but in Seattle there's always Mike Avaz's "Mike Hunt Loves Seattle,"
one of my personal favorites.
Regards,
Harry
> Victor
>
>
>
>
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
<snip>
> Well, it is to me. Of course everyone has their own whims and biases
against
> this and that. One man's meat, etc...
>
> Speaking generally: I honestly believe that quite a few people who
frequent
> this newsgroup do so in some subconscious attempt to "rebel" against their
> parents and/or upbringing. When I first arrived on this illustrious forum
I
> saw several people full of irrational rage and I wondered where their
anger
> originated. Of course this was before I heard some delightful childhood
> tales. With this in mind it's not hard to superimpose "Santa" with "Mama
> coming with the enema bag".
Yeah I didn't have the most normal childhood, but when I read about this
level of abuse it really makes me pity these types. On the other hand,
these folks can be quite irritating as well, but this goes with the
territory.
>
> Sorta makes you grateful for a normal family, doesn't it? One more thing
to
> celebrate this time of year I guess.
I think everybody that is attracted to the dark side has a story to tell of
one sort of another.
Regards,
Harry
cyfurious
> Yeah I didn't have the most normal childhood,
::sniff-sniff:: Oh really? Well who woulda know?! Perhaps this is why
you turned out to be a child pornagrapher you idiot. Quit feelin'
sorry for yourself you over grown baby, noone else does. Freak!
tim jordan
>
> > Yeah I didn't have the most normal childhood,
>
> ::sniff-sniff:: Oh really? Well who woulda know?! Perhaps this is why
> you turned out to be a child pornagrapher you idiot. Quit feelin'
> sorry for yourself you over grown baby, noone else does. Freak!
It's "pornographer" you moron. So how many accounts have you gotten yanked
this year, dearie? Despite your best efforts, you're still just a common
cunt-for-sale. Who's the one crying for attention?
Regards,
Harry
Victor LeNettoyeur™
>
> I think everybody that is attracted to the dark side has a story to tell of
> one sort of another.
I think you're right on that.
I was quite bitter about religion (and religious people) as a younger d00d;
and it would be silly to deny that I had my own rebellious stage -- though
mine ended relatively early (in my early-20s).
I think it's somewhat natural for one to feel betrayed and defrauded when he
finds out that he's bought into a lie... and in my case I had to finally
admit (to myself) that I had been something of a sucker before I moved on.
It was only after I'd let go of my personal attachments to mythology that I
was able to fully appreciate the myths for what they were. It was at this
stage I began embracing the shadow. >;-)
This phenomenon of continuous rebellion is something of an anomaly in modern
society but it certainly approaches the norm in this forum (and perhaps on
usenet as a whole to some extent). It's an easy trap to fall into, and
perhaps necessary in everyman's journey to individuation, but perpetuating
the cycle is less than productive in my opinion.
Victor
--
"This thing of darkness: I acknowledge, mine..."
-William Shakespeare
Victor LeNettoyeur™
Hi Nancy, It looks like you lost your account over at xganon.com. I'm sorry
to hear that, though in a puerile and silly sense it's quite an astounding
accomplishment in itself.
Glad to see you, by the way. How have you been?
Victor
Victor LeNettoyeur™
I should be working but this one can not go unanswered. Please see below...
"tim jordan" <timjo...@attbi.com> wrote in
news:00eJ9.307682$P31.117284@rwcrnsc53:
> Dear Victor:
>
> Please see inside text:
>
> "Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:YWVvbg==.79122c77b6fa8cf9fad5027781a071c7@1039455167.cotse.net...
>> Also sprach tim jordan...
>>
>> >
>> > Some might argue that not too many people care about that little
>> > Eurotrash backwater country you and your hubby call "home." By the
>> > way, why does -wolf- still have my private emails on his site, The
>> > CoS Files, without my permission? Is this what you and the Satanic
>> > Retards consider Satanic?
>>
>> I'm of the personal opinion that neither -wolf- nor Amina/Corax have
>> a
> clue
>> as to the real core meaning of Satanism. (Of the two, at least
>> Amina/Corax can argue intelligently).
>
> As to what -Wolf- knows or doesn't know about Satanism, difficult for
> me to say. It seems that most people in this forum have their own
> definition of the term which is as it should be, IMO.
Well, I don't know that I agree with you here. I think most healthy people
embrace the Satan archetype out of voluntary identification with some of
it's more accessible aspects. For example:
*A willingness to sacrifice oneself for truth
*A stubborn defiance of misguided authority
*A continuous drive for improvement, advancement and growth
This is a "stream-of-consciousness" post and as such I'm not giving it the
attention it merits. Be that as it may, you get my point I hope. Someone who
spends years of his life licking the boot of an insane woman, backing up her
nutty screeds on this newsgroup, furnishing the mentally and psychologically
defective with free computer equipment (so that she can propagate lies,
threats and hatred toward people she's never met), going on national
television and making a fool out of himself, etc. etc. ad infinitum: This is
not what I would call a "Satanist" by any stretch of the imagination.
Sycophancy simply is not compatible with the philosophy.
I have nothing against -wolf-. In fact, he seems like a swell guy. He's not
a Satanist though from my standpoint.
> -Wolf- bothers
> me because he's quite pretentious -- but delivers mostly bitchy
> comments to those who question the SR's or the Dysfunctional Durga
> (kinda like Les used to be sans dyslexia and cracker jokes). Funny,
> but he's never adequately explained why he uses personal emails of
> mine without my permission. Just shows he does pretty much as he's
> told like a good little castrati and has little in the way of personal
> ethics.
Well that's it too. These people are caught up in their own trap. Most
people would find rejection from a group like the Church of Satan something
they can get over in a relatively short time. It's these people with their
herd mentality who simply can't get over being rejected. This is not
Satanism in action.
(Wolf: move on dude. It's over already.)
>
>> Both of these jokers probably have cheap suits in the closet which
>> they
> don
>> to annoy their neighbors door-to-door (dark doctrines in hand) in the
>> best Mormon Missionary style. Maybe I'll catch one of their soapbox
>> sermons on the evils of blowjobs when in downtown Copenhagen next.
>
> Hey now Victor, I come from a long line of Morons (sic) Mormons. Yeah,
> I got a bunch of Tani's sold material sent to me from others and I
> think it might be fun to read this stuff on my cable access program
> and claim it as my own (after all it's mostly hilarously inaccurate
> and/or brazenly stolen anyway). Maybe I can say I'm the Peoples'
> Cummissar of PDX!
I've often wanted to ask you about this. Mormon cosmology is quite
fascinating to me (not unlike the way I'm fascinated by Setian cosmology).
I've had your missionaries drinking icewater in my back yard a couple of
times, though I never let them follow up (They always want to make an
appointment to sell you on their little religion).
Mormons are genuinely nice people, despite their predilection towards
pushing their religion on the public. Jehovah's Witnesses usually send out a
hatchet-faced old ex-whore and her illegitimate offspring to hassle you on
the porch, whereas Mormons have been decent looking younger people in
business attire. (In my experience, anyway).
As an aside: Did you ever get recruited to go out door-to-door and canvas
the neighborhoods? How was it?
Victor
buddy
> embrace the Satan archetype out of voluntary identification with some of
> it's more accessible aspects. For example:
>
> *A willingness to sacrifice oneself for truth
> *A stubborn defiance of misguided authority
> *A continuous drive for improvement, advancement and growth
You are deceived and/or are deceiving.
I don't embrace the Satan archetype. I embrace the Christ archetype and
practice those points you mention above.
And don't get foolish and tell my Christ was a "Satanist" either.
The gist of online C/S "Satanism" is mere Malignant Narcissism - there is no
improvement, advancement and growth just in the structure of lies embedded
in the personality and mind.
As usual, MNs mistake "Satan archetype" as an angel of light.
> This is a "stream-of-consciousness" post and as such I'm not giving it the
> attention it merits. Be that as it may, you get my point I hope.
Translation: I am in the process of a defence mechanism to protect my
personality. So at any hint of frustration you feel to a contradiction to
the gist of your post, you will rationalize that the person is too stupid
and misses the point because your paradigm and identity are threatened,
correct?
Progression is gotten by productive suffering, not hedonism.
You need the wisdom to know the difference between productive and
unproductive suffering.
> Someone who spends years of his life licking the boot of an insane woman,
backing up her
> nutty screeds on this newsgroup, furnishing the mentally and
psychologically
> defective with free computer equipment (so that she can propagate lies,
> threats and hatred toward people she's never met), going on national
> television and making a fool out of himself, etc. etc. ad infinitum: This
is
> not what I would call a "Satanist" by any stretch of the imagination.
> Sycophancy simply is not compatible with the philosophy.
This is where you became dyscognitive (above) and give yourself away.
> I have nothing against -wolf-. In fact, he seems like a swell guy. He's
not
> a Satanist though from my standpoint.
Maybe he does not suffer the same degree of Malignant Narcissism as you do.
> > -Wolf- bothers
> > me because he's quite pretentious -- but delivers mostly bitchy
> > comments to those who question the SR's or the Dysfunctional Durga
> > (kinda like Les used to be sans dyslexia and cracker jokes). Funny,
> > but he's never adequately explained why he uses personal emails of
> > mine without my permission. Just shows he does pretty much as he's
> > told like a good little castrati and has little in the way of personal
> > ethics.
Well...? I don't know who he is. If he does posts, the characteristics of
these did not attract my attention as yours do. You're on the list, lab
rat; pick a number. Number one, two and five are already taken. Oh, you
have the freedom to speak in way any you wish. God bless free agency. But
I have the freedom to contradict your opinions. You need not be reminded
that the norm of this ng is ad hominem attacks either.
> I've often wanted to ask you about this. Mormon cosmology is quite
> fascinating to me (not unlike the way I'm fascinated by Setian cosmology).
> I've had your missionaries drinking icewater in my back yard a couple of
> times, though I never let them follow up (They always want to make an
> appointment to sell you on their little religion).
Quite an effontery you have going on there.
> Mormons are genuinely nice people,
Damned straight. But you are toying, and giving certain onlookers what you
perceive they would not protest to. Deep down you do not care or even
really know. That comment is a sweeping generalization that contradicts the
original philosophy you indicated above. A transparent lie.
> despite their predilection towards
> pushing their religion on the public.
Something you did not even yield to a chance to consider because you are
threatened.
> Jehovah's Witnesses usually send out a
> hatchet-faced old ex-whore and her illegitimate offspring to hassle you on
> the porch, whereas Mormons have been decent looking younger people in
> business attire. (In my experience, anyway).
This is where you give yourself away again (above).
Your trying to appear honest and "noble" but you are doing a very crappy job
. . . because you are ill. Get help.
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
>
> >
> > I think everybody that is attracted to the dark side has a story to tell
of
> > one sort of another.
>
> I think you're right on that.
>
> I was quite bitter about religion (and religious people) as a younger
d00d;
> and it would be silly to deny that I had my own rebellious stage -- though
> mine ended relatively early (in my early-20s).
As was I. What Marx wrote about religion being the opiate of the people has
been proven to be accurate.
> I think it's somewhat natural for one to feel betrayed and defrauded when
he
> finds out that he's bought into a lie... and in my case I had to finally
> admit (to myself) that I had been something of a sucker before I moved on.
> It was only after I'd let go of my personal attachments to mythology that
I
> was able to fully appreciate the myths for what they were. It was at this
> stage I began embracing the shadow. >;-)
A lot of self-described Satanists haven't moved on yet, either. If you're a
strict Jungian, embracing your Shadow isn't the best way to get over crass
spiritualism -- I'll assume you're using metaphor here. (I know this sounds
like something Poodles would write, my apologies.)
> This phenomenon of continuous rebellion is something of an anomaly in
modern
> society but it certainly approaches the norm in this forum (and perhaps on
> usenet as a whole to some extent). It's an easy trap to fall into, and
> perhaps necessary in everyman's journey to individuation, but perpetuating
> the cycle is less than productive in my opinion.
Yes, this is true. Finding one's true self under all of the socially
constructed bullshit is what LaVey's legacy is for a lot of people. Many
others just never get it which is okay too I guess.
Regards,
Harry
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
>
> I should be working but this one can not go unanswered. Please see
below...
>
> >> >
> >> > Some might argue that not too many people care about that little
> >> > Eurotrash backwater country you and your hubby call "home." By the
> >> > way, why does -wolf- still have my private emails on his site, The
> >> > CoS Files, without my permission? Is this what you and the Satanic
> >> > Retards consider Satanic?
> >>
> >> I'm of the personal opinion that neither -wolf- nor Amina/Corax have
> >> a
> > clue
> >> as to the real core meaning of Satanism. (Of the two, at least
> >> Amina/Corax can argue intelligently).
> >
> > As to what -Wolf- knows or doesn't know about Satanism, difficult for
> > me to say. It seems that most people in this forum have their own
> > definition of the term which is as it should be, IMO.
>
> Well, I don't know that I agree with you here. I think most healthy people
> embrace the Satan archetype out of voluntary identification with some of
> it's more accessible aspects. For example:
>
> *A willingness to sacrifice oneself for truth
> *A stubborn defiance of misguided authority
> *A continuous drive for improvement, advancement and growth
Well I wasn't too clear here. "Satanism" is a rather nebulous commodity
here on alt.satanism. It's impossible for me to know what -wolf- knows or
doesn't know about his version of LHP and whether he generally acts
according to his belief system. It might be that his philosophy of life fits
perfectly within his ethos and that of the Satanic Reds. It could be that
being a Satanic Red includes posting private emails on a site without the
author's permission. (Which wouldn't surprise me given their fearless
leader.)
Personally, I see -wolf- as a bit of a naive youngster who hasn't had enough
of life to judge what Satanism is as I perceive it (which is where we
agree). In his own little Edamic world, I'm sure he's quite convinced he's
correct in his perception of the Boundless Darkness or whatever else he and
Tani call their evolving religion. It's his right to hold whatever tenets
he wants and that's okay by me unless he acts like a complete ass. I find
the differing opinions of Satanism interesting, but I don't think one
group's perspective is neither right or wrong. The free market of opinions
is what's most important to me -- whether one group is right or wrong is
something that's judged by the individual. (Granted this is a painfully
convoluted way of trying to explain that I judge people mostly by behavior,
not by belief. My apologies.)
> This is a "stream-of-consciousness" post and as such I'm not giving it the
> attention it merits. Be that as it may, you get my point I hope. Someone
who
> spends years of his life licking the boot of an insane woman, backing up
her
> nutty screeds on this newsgroup, furnishing the mentally and
psychologically
> defective with free computer equipment (so that she can propagate lies,
> threats and hatred toward people she's never met), going on national
> television and making a fool out of himself, etc. etc. ad infinitum: This
is
> not what I would call a "Satanist" by any stretch of the imagination.
> Sycophancy simply is not compatible with the philosophy.
For you, yes this is true (and I'm not being snide here). I could argue
that for most rational people this is accurate as well. Believe it or not,
despite my continued ragging on their organization, I get a lot out of the
Satanic Reds. This consists only in uncontrollable laughter I experience
they evoke from me when I see their ridiculous machinations.
> I have nothing against -wolf-. In fact, he seems like a swell guy. He's
not
> a Satanist though from my standpoint.
>
> > -Wolf- bothers
> > me because he's quite pretentious -- but delivers mostly bitchy
> > comments to those who question the SR's or the Dysfunctional Durga
> > (kinda like Les used to be sans dyslexia and cracker jokes). Funny,
> > but he's never adequately explained why he uses personal emails of
> > mine without my permission. Just shows he does pretty much as he's
> > told like a good little castrati and has little in the way of personal
> > ethics.
>
> Well that's it too. These people are caught up in their own trap. Most
> people would find rejection from a group like the Church of Satan
something
> they can get over in a relatively short time. It's these people with their
> herd mentality who simply can't get over being rejected. This is not
> Satanism in action.
True. But, it makes a good observation experiment in human behavior.
Hypocracy is nothing new. The Satanic Reds make quite a habit of indulging
in this sort of activity.
> (Wolf: move on dude. It's over already.)
>
> >
> >> Both of these jokers probably have cheap suits in the closet which
> >> they
> > don
> >> to annoy their neighbors door-to-door (dark doctrines in hand) in the
> >> best Mormon Missionary style. Maybe I'll catch one of their soapbox
> >> sermons on the evils of blowjobs when in downtown Copenhagen next.
> >
> > Hey now Victor, I come from a long line of Morons (sic) Mormons. Yeah,
> > I got a bunch of Tani's sold material sent to me from others and I
> > think it might be fun to read this stuff on my cable access program
> > and claim it as my own (after all it's mostly hilarously inaccurate
> > and/or brazenly stolen anyway). Maybe I can say I'm the Peoples'
> > Cummissar of PDX!
>
> I've often wanted to ask you about this. Mormon cosmology is quite
> fascinating to me (not unlike the way I'm fascinated by Setian cosmology).
> I've had your missionaries drinking icewater in my back yard a couple of
> times, though I never let them follow up (They always want to make an
> appointment to sell you on their little religion).
You bet they do. Mormons believe that if you play your cards right (going
on a mission, keeping the 'word of wisdom', and doing 'temple work') you'll
eventually get your own really groovy planet somewhere in the universe so
you can fuck it up just like Jehovah did kinda like SimCity. Within their
own logical framework they make perfect theological sense.
As I got older, I saw the downside of the religion. Like Jews, they
consider themselves superior to the 'gentiles' (a term they freely use in
their 'us' vs. 'them' ideology) and are generally racist. Until 1978 when
the Supreme Court decided it might take BYU's 501(c)3 status and put it in
the shitter, Mormons believed that Negros, Hispanics, Asians, and some
Indians (not all, BTW) were the 'Children of Cain' and had dark skin because
they descended from earth's original murderer and in the 'pre-existence'
they had rebelled against God.
Guess what happened? When the SC got close to yanking BYU's non-profit
status, the LSD (sic) profit (not so sic), Spencer Kimball had a 'vision'
that suddenly 'God' figured these colored people were actually not as bad as
originally thought and allowed them to become full fledged members of the
church. This is what got me started in getting myself excommunicated. I was
inactive pretty much in the church since my parents divorced when I was a
strapping lad of six. My mother joined the church to marry my father, but
never really bought into the whole LDS thing. My dad was the classic Jack
Mormon (one who's raised in the faith, but doesn't go to stake meetings
except for holidays with my grandmother who was devout).
> Mormons are genuinely nice people, despite their predilection towards
> pushing their religion on the public. Jehovah's Witnesses usually send out
a
> hatchet-faced old ex-whore and her illegitimate offspring to hassle you on
> the porch, whereas Mormons have been decent looking younger people in
> business attire. (In my experience, anyway).
Well Vic, Mormons are not too different from other people. They populate the
bell curve of personality, some are noble while a few are assholes and most
are somewhere in the middle. Mormons are typically a bit better off
financially then the unwashed masses due to the values of hard work and
capitalism that are inculcated in its adherents from an early age -- hence
the white shirt and short sleeved attire of Mormon 'Elders' (oddly the
missionaries who are in their early twenties). If you really want to fuck
with an LDS missionary, tell them you'll listen to their speech if you can
touch their garments. If you find a missionary that let's you do this say,
"Pay Lay Ale" while you touch the cloth -- it'll really confuse the hell out
of them.
> As an aside: Did you ever get recruited to go out door-to-door and canvas
> the neighborhoods? How was it?
No. The only poor chaps (and gals now too) that are forced to do this are
the missionaries. They do a two-year stint in the church where they get to
ride bikes and get e coli in third world countries. The furthest I got was
getting baptized, becoming a priest (not as grand as it sounds), and getting
dunked for my grandmother's dead relatives (yes, they really do this).
Regards,
Harry
> Victor
>
tim jordan
"buddy" <bu...@here.com> wrote in message
news:qmtJ9.42669$lj.9...@read1.cgocable.net...
Victor LeNettoyeur™
Hi buddy/Jason,
I always enjoy personal criticism on usenet, provided it's thoughtful and
insightful. Please see below...
"buddy" <bu...@here.com> wrote in message
news:qmtJ9.42669$lj.9...@read1.cgocable.net...
> > Well, I don't know that I agree with you here. I think most healthy people
> > embrace the Satan archetype out of voluntary identification with some of
> > it's more accessible aspects. For example:
> >
> > *A willingness to sacrifice oneself for truth
> > *A stubborn defiance of misguided authority
> > *A continuous drive for improvement, advancement and growth
>
> You are deceived and/or are deceiving.
> I don't embrace the Satan archetype. I embrace the Christ archetype and
> practice those points you mention above.
That's entirely possible and quite logical. I also think it's fantastic.
In my opinion, Satanists and Christians (the healthy adherents, anyway) are
using different vehicles on different roads to reach similar conclusions.
With that in mind, I respect your journey. There's more than one way to skin
a cat, as they say.
> And don't get foolish and tell my Christ was a "Satanist" either.
I don't see any evidence to suggest any such individual ever existed at all,
so you needn't worry about that.
> The gist of online C/S "Satanism" is mere Malignant Narcissism - there is no
> improvement, advancement and growth just in the structure of lies embedded
> in the personality and mind.
> As usual, MNs mistake "Satan archetype" as an angel of light.
Perhaps. I wouldn't know. I'm not even clear on what an "MN" [sic] is at
this point.
>
> > This is a "stream-of-consciousness" post and as such I'm not giving it the
> > attention it merits. Be that as it may, you get my point I hope.
>
> Translation: I am in the process of a defence mechanism to protect my
> personality. So at any hint of frustration you feel to a contradiction to
> the gist of your post, you will rationalize that the person is too stupid
> and misses the point because your paradigm and identity are threatened,
> correct?
Possibly. It's also possible that my logic is flawed. Unfortunately you
divulge little data and make no suggestions pro or con.
> Progression is gotten by productive suffering, not hedonism.
> You need the wisdom to know the difference between productive and
> unproductive suffering.
>
I agree!
> > Someone who spends years of his life licking the boot of an insane woman,
> backing up her
> > nutty screeds on this newsgroup, furnishing the mentally and
> psychologically
> > defective with free computer equipment (so that she can propagate lies,
> > threats and hatred toward people she's never met), going on national
> > television and making a fool out of himself, etc. etc. ad infinitum: This
> is
> > not what I would call a "Satanist" by any stretch of the imagination.
> > Sycophancy simply is not compatible with the philosophy.
>
> This is where you became dyscognitive (above) and give yourself away.
Expound if you can.
>
> > I have nothing against -wolf-. In fact, he seems like a swell guy. He's
> not
> > a Satanist though from my standpoint.
>
> Maybe he does not suffer the same degree of Malignant Narcissism as you do.
Maybe. Maybe he's stuck in a rut. Maybe I'd be happier if I joined him in
sucking the asshole of an elderly usenet kook and devoting my life to
running interference when she repeatedly makes an idiot of herself. Who knows?
>
> > > -Wolf- bothers
> > > me because he's quite pretentious -- but delivers mostly bitchy
> > > comments to those who question the SR's or the Dysfunctional Durga
> > > (kinda like Les used to be sans dyslexia and cracker jokes). Funny,
> > > but he's never adequately explained why he uses personal emails of
> > > mine without my permission. Just shows he does pretty much as he's
> > > told like a good little castrati and has little in the way of personal
> > > ethics.
>
> Well...? I don't know who he is. If he does posts, the characteristics of
> these did not attract my attention as yours do. You're on the list, lab
> rat; pick a number. Number one, two and five are already taken. Oh, you
> have the freedom to speak in way any you wish. God bless free agency. But
> I have the freedom to contradict your opinions. You need not be reminded
> that the norm of this ng is ad hominem attacks either.
*pssst*: That wasn't me who wrote the above.
>
> > I've often wanted to ask you about this. Mormon cosmology is quite
> > fascinating to me (not unlike the way I'm fascinated by Setian cosmology).
> > I've had your missionaries drinking icewater in my back yard a couple of
> > times, though I never let them follow up (They always want to make an
> > appointment to sell you on their little religion).
>
> Quite an effontery you have going on there.
>
> > Mormons are genuinely nice people,
>
> Damned straight. But you are toying, and giving certain onlookers what you
> perceive they would not protest to.
No, I'm just calling it as I see it. I've known my share of Mormons. They
seemed above par in nearly every respect: intelligence, courtesy, decency
and honor.
> Deep down you do not care or even
> really know. That comment is a sweeping generalization that contradicts the
> original philosophy you indicated above. A transparent lie.
Sure, it's a generalization. It's also subjective (that means: based upon my
own experience) so it's pretty difficult to label it a "lie" -- or do you
even know the definition of the word?
>
> > despite their predilection towards
> > pushing their religion on the public.
>
> Something you did not even yield to a chance to consider because you are
> threatened.
Threatened by a couple of nice looking, well spoken, good mannered fellows
drinking icewater in my lawn chairs? I don't see why.
>
> > Jehovah's Witnesses usually send out a
> > hatchet-faced old ex-whore and her illegitimate offspring to hassle you on
> > the porch, whereas Mormons have been decent looking younger people in
> > business attire. (In my experience, anyway).
>
> This is where you give yourself away again (above).
Sure. Personal experience dictates my opinion. Same as above.
>
> Your trying to appear honest and "noble" but you are doing a very crappy job
Really? Well we can't have anyone thinking I'm "honest and noble" now, can
we? Let me disabuse any onlookers of that silly notion immediately (one of a
great many preconceptions you seem to have).
I'm the biggest asshole on this newsgroup. Hope that helps.
> . . . because you are ill. Get help.
Coming from someone who posted (and I quote from message
<49uJ9.42678$lj.9...@read1.cgocable.net> here)...
"The demons visit me at night and touch my genitalia
and ass back and forth. There hands are warm and cold.
I can't move. I try to move my tongue so then I can
move the rest of my body. And then I elbow hard as
I can towards my back. They always attack from the back.
Too cowardly to attack from the
front. I hear whispers, but no words, only Jason, Jason,
Jaaaayssosson...."
It seems like the "physician" might consider "healing himself".
Before I leave you, I'll suggest you examine your failed attempts to curry
attention on this forum through trolling. You're having a good run for a
beginner, but you're fizzling out quite rapidly. (Hint: Most people of
average intelligence know that one doesn't "study" people by repeatedly
announcing such a study. You aren't here for any "observation". It looks
more like a plea for attention.)
I don't flame the truly sick. And you are sick, in a real and very physical
way. You've admitted it yourself and I respect that. You are also very
obviously lonely and socially isolated.
You're worthy of respect and compassion (far more worthy, in fact, than some
of the common jackasses that perpetually amuse me here.)
I do hope you'll find more productive avenues to social intercourse. If you
want to be a usenet troll, I wish you good luck in that endeavor as well.
(Lurk on the nose and the flonk for a while. You can pick up a lot of good
tips from the masters of usenet performance art.) Good luck and best wishes...
Victor
--
Vis consili expers, mole ruit sua...
Lupo LeBoucher
Corax <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote:
>
>"Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:YWVvbg==.2dd5e4bf40158eb40d488c6b33d23c42@1039394705.cotse.net...
>
>> While -wolf-'s wife was something of a reactionary and struck me as a
>> "evangelical Satanist" of sorts,
>
>I think you confuse "evangelical Satanist" with "a person from a more
>secularized country".
Denmark has a state religion, and probably will in 100 years from now.
By definition it is hardly a "more secularized country" than the U.S. is.
Also, by any definition of the term, you're pretty evangelical. Anyone
willing to make a fool of themselves on television by prattling about
their religious beliefs would fall into the "evangelical" category, unless
they're merely narcissists. Since you admit that you are porking Poodles,
I will assume the latter is not the case.
>Danish culture differs more from American
>culture then American Satanism differs from American Christianity. Without
>knowing the culture, you are not able to know if my views differ from normal
>Danish views or not.
How much time have you actually spent in the United States to make such a
sweeping statement? Let Brother Lupo make a guess.... You visited
the grand canyon, right?
American christianity encompasses snake-handlers, Jehovas Witnesses,
Catholics, Lutherans, Baptists, Calvinists, Mormons and Mennonites.
American culture encompasses Manhatten Island, Texas, Minnesota, Northern
California and Virginia. The entire population of Denmark could fit into
Minnesota and nobody here (or in Minnesota for that matter) would notice
any difference.
I won't bother pointing out that Danish Satanism is, in fact, an offshoot
of American Satanism.
I find it amusing that small minded provincial bigots are the same in
Europe as they are here in the U.S.
-Lupo
"Women sense my power, and they seek the life essence. I do not avoid
women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence." <i...@fnord.io.com>
buddy
"tim jordan" <timjo...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:2DzJ9.310156$NH2.21221@sccrnsc01...
> Gawd damn, look at Mr. DSM IV, wit his baadd self!
Damned Straight.
Naughty, Naughty. Dysfunctional family gave rise to Dyscognitive Timmy.
Had the priesthood under false pretenses.
Too cowardly to "speak the truth" beforehand.
Go to the temple too bud?
I still love ya Tim. You are made from the good stuff.
Unfortunately, Timmy you are chosen to be a lab rat. Pick a number and see
if it is taken.
You will be high up there in rank. Complex design of an effontery you have,
but your behaviour hasn't got the better of you.
Maybe, the old ghost still protects you. You will get special treatment ...
allowances for root beer; given your noble past.
Hope one day, you will come to terms with your MN.
buddy
> I always enjoy personal criticism on usenet, provided it's thoughtful and
> insightful. Please see below...
(emmm...there might be a pretext to this)
"buddy" <bu...@here.com> wrote in message
news:qmtJ9.42669$lj.9...@read1.cgocable.net...
> > >Well, I don't know that I agree with you here. I think most healthy
people
> > >embrace the Satan archetype out of voluntary identification with some
of
> >> it's more accessible aspects. For example:
> >
> > >*A willingness to sacrifice oneself for truth
> > >*A stubborn defiance of misguided authority
> > >*A continuous drive for improvement, advancement and growth
>
> >You are deceived and/or are deceiving.
> >I don't embrace the Satan archetype. I embrace the Christ archetype and
> >practice those points you mention above.
> That's entirely possible and quite logical. I also think it's fantastic.
I don't know if I believe that Vic.
> In my opinion, Satanists and Christians (the healthy adherents, anyway)
are
> using different vehicles on different roads to reach similar conclusions.
> With that in mind, I respect your journey. There's more than one way to
skin
> a cat, as they say.
I cannot counter that, but something bothers me about equating the two in
"reaching similar conclusions".
> > And don't get foolish and tell my Christ was a "Satanist" either.
> I don't see any evidence to suggest any such individual ever existed at
all,
> so you needn't worry about that.
I stereotyped. From reading other posts here I categorize people and tend
to forget each may have a uniqueness to themselves. I know you've heard this
before, but he is effective in making you think he doesn't exist. You're
looking for evidence from the standpoint of philosophy or rather perhaps
more so from the standpoint of empiricism. I don't think you or I may see
any empirical evidence of this anytime soon.
> > The gist of online C/S "Satanism" is mere Malignant Narcissism - there
is no
> > improvement, advancement and growth just in the structure of lies
embedded
> > in the personality and mind.
> > As usual, MNs mistake "Satan archetype" as an angel of light.
> Perhaps. I wouldn't know. I'm not even clear on what an "MN" [sic] is at
> this point.
Nobody really does, I think. It is very complex (Malignant Narcissism) and
elusive. I have a book of case studies. I'll post some simple ones first
and move to the more complex later.
> > > This is a "stream-of-consciousness" post and as such I'm not giving it
the
> > > attention it merits. Be that as it may, you get my point I hope.
> > Translation: I am in the process of a defence mechanism to protect my
> > personality. So at any hint of frustration [I] feel to a contradiction
to
> > the gist of [my] post, [I] will rationalize that the person is too
stupid
> > and misses the point because [my] paradigm and identity are threatened,
> > correct?
> Possibly. It's also possible that my logic is flawed. Unfortunately you
> divulge little data and make no suggestions pro or con.
Well, to start off, this is a stereotype of the regs here. _Probably_ does
not apply to you.
You say it is possible that your logic is flawed or what I said, which
leaves much to be desired in explanation, could be true.
But I do not know if you really believe and reflect upon that, or are just
conversing with yourself with the purpose of sliding off the idea because it
may threaten that all elusive personality.
When people converse with themselves inwardly, they either reach to
conclusions of "I don't know" and am satisfied with that, or the truth about
myself is wrong/right, or rationalize (force or ease into) incorrect
conclusions about being right or correct conclusions of being wrong. The
latter part is my focus. Everyone does it to a certain degree.
But a malignant narcissist, does it to a pathological degree; and everything
built upon this becomes a complex structure of lies, a stack of a card deck
that the MN will perceive on a ?subconcious level? If someone comes along
and threatens the stacked deck, especially the bottom card, all hell breaks
lose. Lies to placate the investigator are further designed adeptly with
much effort to protect and conceal their inward cognitive systems built (the
stacked deck). By lies, I do not mean the simple ones. I mean distortions,
omission, and commission. These are complex and intrically structured. And
only can be "reverse-engineered" and exposed with meticulous efforts and
time. But the investigator ( a qualified psychiatrist or psychotherapist
maybe) just knows that something does not feel just quite right - by an
intuition of sorts.
If you understand what I am getting at at least, then you must ask these
questions to yourself, no matter what the pain or threat you feel. ( I am
using the word "you" in the second person).
This is a painful process done with people you trust. Now question
yourself, "Who would I "trust" more with myself, a self-proclaimed Satanist,
or a genuine and intelligent mormon."
I also suggest, once I get my book back from my Malignant Narcissistic
business partner who feels he is a devout, giving Buddhist, to look at the
case studies and analyse the situations. These are fascinating. I really
believe you will believe that at least, if nothing else.
I have an anecdote: My business partner does not realize (he is a white
guy) that he joined Buddhism out of a hatred of Xtianity moreso than feeling
as he says "this is the right religion for him and they say all the same
things anyway". I asked him if he read the Bible. What do you think the
reply was? That is not what gave him away, however. What gave him away was
that he is not good with money.
This is where his behaviour gets bizarre:
He borrows a lot of money from people and lies to them saying he will pay
them back right away. Then with some of the money he borrows he _probably_
rents prostitutes, and gives exhorbitant money away on the streets to the
selectively to the "good-looking girl" pan handlers on the streets. This
guy is not poor by any means of not receiving enough income. Then he makes
sure everyone knows (similar to the regs on this ng) how good or noble he is
by keeping humble and his materialistic desires at a minimum and giving
money to people on the streets that they usually use to buy cigarettes
anyway. But he convinced himself they need it for food. This guy is like a
mentally disturbed Robin Hood. Do the people who lend him money get it
back? Not usually. There is always an excuse. He does not get it that, if
someone lends money that you pay it back on the terms you agreed upon, their
terms with some agreed beforehand compromise. He thinks he is totally legit
by not paying them back at all or years down the road. He doesn't even
flinch when you recount to him the usual expectations when people borrow and
lend money. Bizzarre to say the least, a problem with Malignant Narcisstic
behaviour to push it further.
I tried to plead to him, "you can't give away what you don't own". You got
to pay back the people you owe first before engaging in your other
"business".
He says, "I know" and goes on anyway.
One time he flipped at me and said, "I am sick and tired of giving my
knowledge and money and help to people, not getting thing back in return and
getting burned"
Delusional man.
The only con I suggest is that you do not relay any of your findings that
could put you under attack from some regs here. As I really believe some
really have this illness from studying this group for years.
Actually another con I suggest is to not get a religious psychotherapist or
similar. Keep Xtianity out of it at the beggining. The only problem here
is that counselling is a free service here in Canada and where you're at it
may cost an arm and a leg. Unfortunate.
> > Progression is gotten by productive suffering, not hedonism.
> > You need the wisdom to know the difference between productive and
> > unproductive suffering.
>
> I agree!
I believe you here - my intuition, I hope, is correct. I think people
usually see eye to eye on this point.
> > > Someone who spends years of his life licking the boot of an insane
woman, backing up her
> > > nutty screeds on this newsgroup, furnishing the mentally and
psychologically
> > > defective with free computer equipment (so that she can propagate
lies,
> > > threats and hatred toward people she's never met), going on national
> > > television and making a fool out of himself, etc. etc. ad infinitum:
This is
> > > not what I would call a "Satanist" by any stretch of the imagination.
> > > Sycophancy simply is not compatible with the philosophy.
>
> > This is where you became dyscognitive (above) and give yourself away.
>Expound if you can.
If someone only read this part of your post, what do you think they will
think of you, not knowing you from Adam?
Not a good first impression, unless you're doing an impression of Morton
Downey JR.
A normal person may get this surge of hostility and vitriol within
him/herself now and then, but does s/he automatically lets it out as is from
within?
Society has bad experiences with strangers exhibiting this behaviour "all of
a sudden". There is an ingrained intuition that the person could be a bomb
ready to explode. Generally, they could be deemed psychotic and
unpredictable. Or obsessive-compulsive/impulsive.
Unfortunately, when you exhibit such behaviour anything "intelligent" said
beforehand comes to nought and this sticks out. People become confused.
People judge that way. Why? There are probably good historical reasons for
this. It does not matter if their intuition are correct or not. People are
conservative when it comes to perceived danger.
Why is there a need for you to do as above?
Probably something like this would come across as being more credible:
Someone who spends years of his life supporting a contentious woman that has
made threats to people in the past on this ng, a woman who, on national
television, raised eyebrows with her radical and explosive antics
continuously; on a campaign of destruction recruiting radically-minded
people with computer equipment supplied by this person, etc. to spread
disorder with her contentious beliefs which may be deliberate lies, is not
what I call a credible advocate by any stretch of the imagination.
Sycophancy serves no good service to the public's education.
> > > I have nothing against -wolf-. In fact, he seems like a swell guy.
He's not
> > > a Satanist though from my standpoint.
> > Maybe he does not suffer the same degree of Malignant Narcissism as you
do.
> Maybe. Maybe he's stuck in a rut. Maybe I'd be happier if I joined him in
> sucking the asshole of an elderly usenet kook and devoting my life to
> running interference when she repeatedly makes an idiot of herself. Who
knows?
The above may be OK to say if I knew you. Especially, if I knew you were
adding adult humour.
> > > -Wolf- bothers
> > > me because he's quite pretentious -- but delivers mostly bitchy
> > > comments to those who question the SR's or the Dysfunctional Durga
> > > (kinda like Les used to be sans dyslexia and cracker jokes). Funny,
> > > but he's never adequately explained why he uses personal emails of
> > > mine without my permission. Just shows he does pretty much as he's
> > > told like a good little castrati and has little in the way of personal
> > > ethics.
>
> >Well...? I don't know who he is. If he does posts, the characteristics
of
> >these did not attract my attention as yours do. You're on the list, lab
> >rat; pick a number. Number one, two and five are already taken. Oh, you
> >have the freedom to speak in way any you wish. God bless free agency.
But
> > I have the freedom to contradict your opinions. You need not be
reminded
> >that the norm of this ng is ad hominem attacks either.
> *pssst*: That wasn't me who wrote the above.
Sorry, then it applies to whomever wrote it.
> > >I've often wanted to ask you about this. Mormon cosmology is quite
> > >fascinating to me (not unlike the way I'm fascinated by Setian
cosmology).
> > >I've had your missionaries drinking icewater in my back yard a couple
of
> > >times, though I never let them follow up (They always want to make an
> > >appointment to sell you on their little religion).
> >Quite an effontery you have going on there.
> > >Mormons are genuinely nice people,
> >Damned straight. But you are toying, and giving certain onlookers what
you
> >perceive they would not protest to.
>No, I'm just calling it as I see it. I've known my share of Mormons. They
>seemed above par in nearly every respect: intelligence, courtesy, decency
>and honor.
Why don't you join them?
> >Deep down you do not care or even
> >really know. That comment is a sweeping generalization that contradicts
the
> >original philosophy you indicated above. A transparent lie.
>Sure, it's a generalization. It's also subjective (that means: based upon
my
>own experience) so it's pretty difficult to label it a "lie" -- or do you
>even know the definition of the word?
It maybe or maybe not. It maybe a lie to not only me and others but to
yourself as well. That self that is lost somewhere if you do suffer from
MN.
So this will be very confusing to you. But still lies the possibility that
it is what you say it is. If it is not, than what you recently said after
my comment to yours is another lie built upon the previous one. Not a
simple lie, but a lie that includes a design of rationalization embedded, so
that it is more effective and invunerable against a certain part of yourself
that is heard but the location of the sound cannot be pinpointed and
placates/distracts the investigator.
On the surface what is actually said is sound in every respect. But is the
message what you actually believe with respect to yourself?
I'm glad you raised the issue of the difficulty of capturing the elusivity
of a lie. It is a complex and confusing subject. When we are adults,
things get more complex. I am not even sure myself if I completely grasp
the concept of a "lie". A denotation is not enough. I am going to my
required checkup to my shrink today. I noticed he had a book that caught my
interest. I think it was called, "Lies" or "The Lie" or something like
that.
The book was about 8" x 6" and 4" thick!
I am going to ask to have a loan of it.
>
> > >despite their predilection towards
> > >pushing their religion on the public.
>
> >Something you did not even yield to a chance to consider because you are
> >threatened.
>Threatened by a couple of nice looking, well spoken, good mannered fellows
>drinking icewater in my lawn chairs? I don't see why.
You either deliberately or accidentally or semi-subconciously (defense
mechansim) missed the point.
You should know the essence of the previous email!
I meant threatened that your inward carefully constructed house of cards of
cognitions that you operate your life by may come crashing down causing
psychic pain.
Especially, when they slap that "ONE TRUE CHURCH" concept.
And to a lesser extent, tithing.
And perhaps all this following the prophets business.
> > >Jehovah's Witnesses usually send out a
> > >hatchet-faced old ex-whore and her illegitimate offspring to hassle you
on
> > >the porch, whereas Mormons have been decent looking younger people in
> > >business attire. (In my experience, anyway).
>
> >This is where you give yourself away again (above).
>Sure. Personal experience dictates my opinion. Same as above.
Reeallly....!
> > Your trying to appear honest and "noble" but you are doing a very crappy
job
> Really? Well we can't have anyone thinking I'm "honest and noble" now, can
> we? Let me disabuse any onlookers of that silly notion immediately (one of
a
> great many preconceptions you seem to have).
> I'm the biggest asshole on this newsgroup. Hope that helps.
I do not think you are you Vic. There is stiff competition here, sorry ;)
> . . . because you are ill. Get help.
Now the resentment cannot be hidden or suppressed any longer (below)
Coming from someone who posted (and I quote from message
<49uJ9.42678$lj.9...@read1.cgocable.net> here)...
>> "The demons visit me at night and touch my genitalia
>> and ass back and forth. There hands are warm and cold.
>> I can't move. I try to move my tongue so then I can
>> move the rest of my body. And then I elbow hard as
>> I can towards my back. They always attack from the back.
>> Too cowardly to attack from the
>> front. I hear whispers, but no words, only Jason, Jason,
>> Jaaaayssosson...."
> It seems like the "physician" might consider "healing himself".
Yes Vic. These are called hallucinations. I am ill. You can choose to
listen to me or not.
Your risk.
One cannot be their own gawd and heal themselves. Each person depends on
other trustworthy _and_ effective people. Building a person is a group
effort. Destroying one can effectively be done in isolation or catalysed
with MNs.
>Before I leave you, I'll suggest you examine your failed attempts to curry
>attention on this forum through trolling. You're having a good run for a
>beginner, but you're fizzling out quite rapidly. (Hint: Most people of
>average intelligence know that one doesn't "study" people by repeatedly
>announcing such a study. You aren't here for any "observation". It looks
>more like a plea for attention.)
True colours beginning to show. I detect another MN inconsistency (those
things said which seem very off-reality and therefore bizarre and
interesting)... you mention "failed attempts". One idiot jumped in
immediately and start calling me all these strange people, and timmy did
too. Am I missing something? Lupo jumped in right away to my comment. I
was drinking that night and did a foolish thing, because I was mischeivious
and do have some MN myself. Just what the hell are you talking about. Yet
another MN inconsistency, your "hint" in parenthesis above. Posting does
not preclude me from a study. Remember I've been here for over 10 years. I
hardly post anything in that time compared to the likes of Lupo, Filan,
Ygraine, etc. This is virtually their life. In those lull periods, my
studies are more revealing. And since I really believe that most here are
MNs, whatever I say or do would not fizz a spark of anything only vitriol
anyway; they have deeply ingrained habits, usually inpenetrable, to
"self-delusionalize" it out.
Are you going to do the same Vic?
Are you going to truly "leave" me and not explore MN and yourself any
longer?
Do you really believe what you've just said above?
You do not need to answer here on a public forum, but I ask you to consider
them and keep them to yourself.
I'm not here for attention just for the sake of attention. I do appreciate
what you mentioned at the beginning of your post provided you are genuine.
I am in a secured building under a kind of house arrest for a short while.
I got my beer from a delivery service. Goes to show understaffing of the
government heh.
I did not hurt anybody, only the cops arm. I really have no interest in
that. I am under control with medication. But I got to keep away from the
alki.
>I don't flame the truly sick. And you are sick, in a real and very physical
>way. You've admitted it yourself and I respect that. You are also very
>obviously lonely and socially isolated.
That is a good observation Vic, if it really is one in your case and not a
projected fantasy.
It is absolutely correct. See, Brass Balls.
I do not think there is a need to flame anyone too badly, Vic. If they do
take offense, they should have the brass balls to say so. No one here
really does, they just respond with silly childish vitriol that has been
given to them. The flamer should take the compassionate route and say
something like, "Relax, .... but you did say or did such and such."
>You're worthy of respect and compassion (***************
********************************************.)
Well thank you Vic. But I hope you are not employing another defense
mechanism. I'll won't pay attention to the last part in parenthesis
> I do hope you'll find more productive avenues to social intercourse.
Unlikely Vic, but thank you anyways. I am a good-looking guy and
well-built. I have nice supportive women every now and then and a good
support system. Bars are a no no, though. The women don't stick around
long though. They come for there bit and that's it. They are a bit
intimidated, but do relax and enjoy themselves in bed -- and I'm gentle,
it's hard work to please em, but when I hear the huffs and puffs and moans
and groans and grinding of teeth, I know my mission is accomplished. I am
trying to stay away from the sex bit though, and am trying to build a
long-term relationship with someone who will keep me warm in bed every
night, instead of those darn pesky demons. ;)
> If you want to be a usenet troll, I wish you good luck in that endeavor as
well.
> (Lurk on the nose and the flonk for a while. You can pick up a lot of good
> tips from the masters of usenet performance art.) Good luck and best
wishes...
That's my nature. But there is more to the equation. And I hope you
consider a study into MN.
> Victor
> --
> Vis consili expers, mole ruit sua...
- Brass Balls Buddy
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
> > Gawd damn, look at Mr. DSM IV, wit his baadd self!
>
> Damned Straight.
>
> Naughty, Naughty. Dysfunctional family gave rise to Dyscognitive Timmy.
> Had the priesthood under false pretenses.
> Too cowardly to "speak the truth" beforehand.
> Go to the temple too bud?
Priesthood under false pretenses? Whatever do you mean? If you know
anything about Mormonism, you'll know you become a priest at an early age.
People don't usually start thinking for themselves until their much older
(at least in my case). You don't expect a 12-year-old to be able to make
legitimate decisions regarding faith, do you?
Funny thing happened when I was baptized for some of my dead relatives.
Just before you're dunked the bishop asked me if I "masturbated." Not
knowing what this was, I went to the local library and stepped into a
bright, new, world. Probably not his original intent.
> I still love ya Tim. You are made from the good stuff.
>
> Unfortunately, Timmy you are chosen to be a lab rat. Pick a number and
see
> if it is taken.
> You will be high up there in rank. Complex design of an effontery you
have,
> but your behaviour hasn't got the better of you.
> Maybe, the old ghost still protects you. You will get special treatment
...
> allowances for root beer; given your noble past.
Well, we're all lab rats here, if you know what I mean.
Right. So
> Hope one day, you will come to terms with your MN.
Sure. Funny, I've never seen the term "MN" in the DSM -- do you have the
catalog number that corresponds to this? I'm interested in psychology, but
hardly pretend to be any sort of expert. Imagine what I've been missing.
Regards,
Harry
>
- wolf -
news:K2Gdnd0J_MH...@news.io.com...
> Gee, I wonder if "the Call to Cthulhu" and the "Ceremony of the Nine
> Angles" are grammatically correct Yugothian? Maybee Mikey will pipe up,
> since it's supposedly his claim to fame and all that.
>
> Poodles, muh boy: sometimes you give new meaning to the words, "missing
> the concept."
Explain how the rituals actualize Satanic ideology, then.
- wolf -
- wolf -
> Denmark has a state religion, and probably will in 100 years from now.
> By definition it is hardly a "more secularized country" than the U.S. is.
The US is known as "The American Exception" in the secularization debate,
which is a way of saying that the US is all but secularized. In Denmark, we
formally have a state church, yes. And in the US, *formally* religion and
politics are separated. Well, are they *really* separated, Loopy? They're
no more separated than the Danish state & church connection are connected.
> Also, by any definition of the term, you're pretty evangelical. Anyone
> willing to make a fool of themselves on television by prattling about
> their religious beliefs would fall into the "evangelical" category, unless
> they're merely narcissists.
OK, LaVey was an evangelist then, by any definition of the term. As are
Peggy Nadramia, Peter Gilmore, Boyd Rice, and Blanche Barton. The list goes
on.
> >Danish culture differs more from American
> >culture then American Satanism differs from American Christianity.
Without
> >knowing the culture, you are not able to know if my views differ from
normal
> >Danish views or not.
>
> How much time have you actually spent in the United States to make such a
> sweeping statement?
Religious practices in the US are well documented by people that did spend
their lives in the US. Unlike you, Corax has the advantage that this is her
field of study; your statements to her are as uninformed as one would expect
hers to be if she were to debate physics with you. Corax has direct access
to Danish culture and has access to strong documentation of US culture, but
your statements are based on direct access to US culture but no
documentation of Danish culture (the latter documentation is not readily
available, especially not when it comes to religoius practices). In short,
you're making an ass out of yourself here.
> I won't bother pointing out that Danish Satanism is, in fact, an offshoot
> of American Satanism.
Nor will I bother pointing out that American Satanism is, in fact, a product
of its time that is neither novel nor profound. (The ideas that LaVey "came
up with" were already widespread at that time.)
> I find it amusing that small minded provincial bigots are the same in
> Europe as they are here in the U.S.
Yes, you're indeed a familiar face.
- wolf -
- wolf -
news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
> The US is known as "The American Exception" in the secularization debate,
> which is a way of saying that the US is all but secularized.
Gah. That should of course have read, "... that the US isn't secularized at
all."
Anyway, Denmark also happens to have a queen who, in principle, is leads the
country. But, the fact that there's such a formality in place doesn't imply
that the Danish queen has any real such power. Stating that the existence of
a Danish state church implies religous behavior among Danes is just as
ridiculous as stating that the Danish queen is ruling Denmark.
- wolf -
RyanS2
> catalog number that corresponds to this? I'm interested in psychology, but
> hardly pretend to be any sort of expert. Imagine what I've been missing.
My guess is that whomever Buddy is has just stumbled across a cool
buzzword to brandy about for however long, sort of like a toddler
saying one word they like over and over again. Malignant Narcissism
is used to define a specific type of Narcissism, one where there is "a
prevailing condition which gets worse, categorized by a complete lack
of remorse, growing paranoia, and sadistic cruelty." (That's from the
Penguin Dictionary of Psychology). It's pretty rare to find because
people with it are typically occupying the prison system of our
country. To talk about messageboard theatrics in context with
something usually used as a typology for mass-murderers and rapists
seems a gross distortion of evidence and terminology. Hence, my
theory that whomever this is has little training in the field, and is
probably parroting whatever his/her search engine turns up on the
search word.
Victor LeNettoyeur™
> Unlike you, Corax has the advantage that this is her
> field of study; your statements to her are as uninformed as one would
> expect hers to be if she were to debate physics with you.
Isn't it interesting that whenever you or Amina/Corax show up here you make
a huge production about what an "expert" she is in the field of religion.
Even more interesting is the fact that whenever people ask for some
specifics (where she is "studying" or when her last paper was published,
among others) you both suddenly clam up, change the subject or whatever.
Little wonder you have such an affinity for John H. Shaw(spank). Perhaps
Amina can deliver her scholarly dissertation in a future meeting of the
(thousands and thousands strong) New Church of Satan -- you know: next to
the 10,000 kg marble altar and all that.
Corax
news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
> > I won't bother pointing out that Danish Satanism is, in fact, an
offshoot
> > of American Satanism.
>
> Nor will I bother pointing out that American Satanism is, in fact, a
product
> of its time that is neither novel nor profound. (The ideas that LaVey
"came
> up with" were already widespread at that time.)
Lupo is one of the old guys on my ignore list, but I want to add something
to your reply to him:
Danish Satanism is of course influenced by American Satanism (among other
things), but not more then American Satanism is influenced by German
philosophy and anti-Catholicism. Does this make American Satanism a
German/European phenomenon? At least the German philosophers came up with
new ideas. LaVey was a showman, but he is not to be found among the great
philosophers. His ideas were too shallow and too ambiguous to qualify as
philosophy.
- Corax
Corax
> "- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in
> news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk:
>
> > Unlike you, Corax has the advantage that this is her
> > field of study; your statements to her are as uninformed as one would
> > expect hers to be if she were to debate physics with you.
>
> Isn't it interesting that whenever you or Amina/Corax show up here you
make
> a huge production about what an "expert" she is in the field of religion.
I am not an expert, nor did Ole say I was - but it is not hard to know more
than someone who never studied the subject. By virtue of my education, my
words simply carry more weight in the field of religion than Lupo's words
do. If you happen to have scientific training, you'll be well aware of this
fact.
> Even more interesting is the fact that whenever people ask for some
> specifics (where she is "studying" or when her last paper was published,
> among others) you both suddenly clam up, change the subject or whatever.
I do not remember any of us being asked. I have never tried to hide the fact
that I am still a student and that I am a university student. I am a student
at the University of Aarhus in the department of the study of religion.
Students usually do not publish papers although I have collaborated on a
few. I'll be sure to let you know when I publish an article in English (I
guess you are not going to learn danish any day soon).
- Corax
cyfurious
> I'm interested in psychology, but
But...who are ya gonna study, yourself? Before you start delving into
other peoples actions you should examine your own first you ignorant,
"kiddie porn", fat-ass freak!
>
> Regards,
>
> Harry
> >
Lupo LeBoucher
Corax <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote:
>"- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in message
>news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
>
>> > I won't bother pointing out that Danish Satanism is, in fact, an
>offshoot
>> > of American Satanism.
>>
>> Nor will I bother pointing out that American Satanism is, in fact, a
>product
>> of its time that is neither novel nor profound. (The ideas that LaVey
>"came
>> up with" were already widespread at that time.)
>
>Lupo is one of the old guys on my ignore list, but I want to add something
>to your reply to him:
>Danish Satanism is of course influenced by American Satanism (among other
>things), but not more then American Satanism is influenced by German
>philosophy and anti-Catholicism.
Danish satanism is a religion that is directly imported from Northern
California: "Danish Satanism" is as american as Levis blue jeans which
happen to be on Danish asses.
You're still a clueless provincial twitling who knows absolutely nothing
of american religion or culture beyond what you may have watched on your
television screen. At least poodles took the time to visit the place
before spouting off his ignorance.
-Lupo
"One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that, no
ordinary man could be such a fool." -George Orwell <i...@io.com>
Lupo LeBoucher
*watches point fly past poodles, again*
They don't, you fucking idiot. Satanic Rituals no more actualize
Satanic ideology than "psychotherapy actualizes logical positivism." I
suppose if you're an idiot who anthropologizes such things in worthless
liberal arts courses, you might write essays on such things for your
schoolteachers. If you actually knew something you'd realize the phrase is
words strung together without meaning.
So poodles, getting back to the point, why does it matter if LaVey can
conjugate verbs in Latin when several of the other rituals in the book
are in invented languages or nonsense words, hmmm? Maybee you can ask
your "expert" girlfriend that one.
-Lupo
"Love is what happens to a man and a woman who don't know each other."
-W. Somerset Maugham <i...@fnord.io.com>
Lupo LeBoucher
- wolf - <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote:
>news:FS6dnb2Al8p...@news.io.com...
>> Denmark has a state religion, and probably will in 100 years from now.
>> By definition it is hardly a "more secularized country" than the U.S. is.
>
>The US is known as "The American Exception" in the secularization debate,
>which is a way of saying that the US is all but secularized. In Denmark, we
>formally have a state church, yes. And in the US, *formally* religion and
>politics are separated. Well, are they *really* separated, Loopy?
Well, yes, in fact they are.
As I have pointed out to you Nordic hayseeds in the past, we americans
have had a rigorous seperation of church and state for the last 215 years.
Denmark is at least that far behind, culturally speaking. That's one of
the reasons america was/is such a popular place for immigrants; nobody
gave a shit how you worshipped in this country, or if you didn't at all.
>They're no more separated than the Danish state & church connection are
>connected.
How is the Danish state church funded again? What is that? It is funded by
your tax krones, taken from you, whether you like it or not, by the state?
Why, that sounds like a pretty serious connection to me.
None of Brother Lupo's hard earned americano dollars go to any religious
quacks what so ever, unless he should decide to do so of his own free
will. Your Danish populace is plundered of their wealth by the Danish
government; literally at gunpoint, and the money is given to *christians.*
>> Also, by any definition of the term, you're pretty evangelical. Anyone
>> willing to make a fool of themselves on television by prattling about
>> their religious beliefs would fall into the "evangelical" category, unless
>> they're merely narcissists.
>
>OK, LaVey was an evangelist then, by any definition of the term. As are
>Peggy Nadramia, Peter Gilmore, Boyd Rice, and Blanche Barton. The list goes
>on.
So, what is your point, poddles?
Whether or not those people are evangelists is irrelevant to anyone who
does not have an obsession with the Church of Satan. None of those people
are involved in this conversation, and as far as I know, none of those
people are stupid or provincial enough to assert the things that Corax did
about American versus Danish culture.
>> >Danish culture differs more from American
>> >culture then American Satanism differs from American Christianity.
>Without
>> >knowing the culture, you are not able to know if my views differ from
>normal
>> >Danish views or not.
>>
>> How much time have you actually spent in the United States to make such a
>> sweeping statement?
>
>Religious practices in the US are well documented by people that did spend
>their lives in the US. Unlike you, Corax has the advantage that this is her
>field of study; your statements to her are as uninformed as one would expect
>hers to be if she were to debate physics with you. Corax has direct access
>to Danish culture and has access to strong documentation of US culture, but
>your statements are based on direct access to US culture but no
>documentation of Danish culture (the latter documentation is not readily
>available, especially not when it comes to religoius practices). In short,
>you're making an ass out of yourself here.
I take it you are admitting that Corax has never set foot in the United
States of America.
Wow; we knew she was an idiot, but she's quite an *arrogant* idiot to make
such broad sweeping assertions about Danish Culture, American Culture,
American Christianity and American Satanism when she only knows the Danish
side of things. Only a truely provincial idiot, loafing in the stygian
night of sheer ignorance, would make such a foolishly chauvinistic
assertion.
She sounds like some small-town Rufus, chomping a hay-seed, and yammering
on about how, "All thems thar Germans iz natzies, and all thems thar
Frenchies is wife-swappin' faggits, and all thems thar nips jest sit
around makin' cameras and eatin' rice." At least your average americano
hayseed knows he is a hayseed.
Tell me poodles; you actually lived here -how many christians did you meet
while you were here? How many times did christian religion intrude on your
life in even the smallest fashion?
>> I won't bother pointing out that Danish Satanism is, in fact, an offshoot
>> of American Satanism.
>
>Nor will I bother pointing out that American Satanism is, in fact, a product
>of its time that is neither novel nor profound. (The ideas that LaVey "came
>up with" were already widespread at that time.)
Yes, they were widespread *in america.*
I find it hysterically funny that a couple of bigoted Danish jingos
prattle on and on about how wonderfully superior your allegedly
secular Danish culture is, and how awfully Christian those American
Satanists are, yet, you both practise and even *evangelize* for a
religion which is as American as baseball, mom, apple pie and Chevrolet.
I suppose anti-americanism is supposed to be rooted in guilt and
ressentiment, but you're such a textbook example, it's ludicrous.
-Lupo
"METROPOLIS, n. A stronghold of provincialism." -Ambrose Bierce <i...@io.com>
Lupo LeBoucher
Corax <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote:
>
>"Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:YWVvbg==.d209cd1f77fbcf7efc004ae45d64f825@1039638944.cotse.net...
>> "- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in
>> news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk:
>>
>> > Unlike you, Corax has the advantage that this is her
>> > field of study; your statements to her are as uninformed as one would
>> > expect hers to be if she were to debate physics with you.
>>
>> Isn't it interesting that whenever you or Amina/Corax show up here you
>make
>> a huge production about what an "expert" she is in the field of religion.
>
>I am not an expert, nor did Ole say I was - but it is not hard to know more
>than someone who never studied the subject.
Apparently, it is not hard to know more than someone who asserts that they
have studied the subject.
> By virtue of my education, my
>words simply carry more weight in the field of religion than Lupo's words
>do.
You've yet to show any evidence of having any education which would make
your words worth a pair of foetid dingoes kidneys, toots. A couple of
classes in the local community college don't mean a thing, even if you
have done that much.
All you've done thus far is make an assertion which is preposterously
wrong in every possible way. That doesn't present any evidence, pro or
con, that you may be a credentialed "expert" in "religious studies" of
course; such an expert might be expected to be wrong most of the time.
As for the very topic of "religious studies" -it's pretty widely
recognized that most of the liberal arts are not remotely scientific in
their worldviews, nor is credentialled "expert" status in such typically a
sign of much intellectual authority in the matters they pertain to.
http://www.aldaily.com/hangingjudge.htm
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
Well not being too learned on the subject, I thought I'd ask 'Buddy' to
belly up to the bar and show me where MN is a term recognized by the APA.
Hey you never know he/she might have come up with some legit term I'm not
familiar with. I'd doubt that anyone with any real psych training would
make any sort of assertion in this ng that they are an expert. I'd guess a
few have training here but are slumming with the rest of us pschological
neophytes
Regards,
harry
tim jordan
lose this account. So were you a truck stop whore there in Ohio?
Regards,
Harry
"cyfurious" <cyfu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eac59a64.02121...@posting.google.com...
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
>
> > > I won't bother pointing out that Danish Satanism is, in fact, an
> offshoot
> > > of American Satanism.
> >
> > Nor will I bother pointing out that American Satanism is, in fact, a
> product
> > of its time that is neither novel nor profound. (The ideas that LaVey
> "came
> > up with" were already widespread at that time.)
>
> Lupo is one of the old guys on my ignore list, but I want to add something
> to your reply to him:
> Danish Satanism is of course influenced by American Satanism (among other
> things), but not more then American Satanism is influenced by German
> philosophy and anti-Catholicism.
So if you're so superior, why did you and your former spouse, Pie Man (or
whatever his name was), get stuff thrown at you after you appeared on
Edam-TV talking about Satanism? Rumor has it that you had rocks thrown at
you in your little berg after this 15 minutes of fame. Is that what they do
in a "secular" country where the official religion is Lutheranism? Who are
you trying to kid?
By the way, why does cuckold Poodles still have emails on his little
anti-CoS site without my permission? Now you know and I know that you got
these from Tani and are using them without my permission. Is this the
Satanic Retard way?
Regards,
Harry Lime
http://www.harrylimetv.com/
Cat Asstrophy
immigrants; nobody
> gave a shit how you worshipped in this country, or if you didn't at all.
Unfortunately, since the WTC, the Homeland Security, and our President
Shrub, the above is no longer true.
Find a sign that DOESN'T have "God Bless America" on it, and I'll kiss your
virtual ass.
Jason@Neskoreni!
"Cat Asstrophy" <sata...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xVUJ9.3603$vz3.10...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
The US has about 40% regular church going xians .... about 80% identify as
such.
We're second only to Poland in % practicing xians.
the UK was 80% baptized but only 2 - 12 % practicing
We also have the most religious freedom, tho. Signs may be annoying, but I
doubt they enfringe on your "practicing your religion".
Would depend who owns the property, imo.
J@N
Victor LeNettoyeur™
news:3df7a388$0$172$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
> "- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in message
> news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
>
> > > I won't bother pointing out that Danish Satanism is, in fact, an
> offshoot
> > > of American Satanism.
> >
> > Nor will I bother pointing out that American Satanism is, in fact, a
> product
> > of its time that is neither novel nor profound. (The ideas that LaVey
> "came
> > up with" were already widespread at that time.)
>
> Lupo is one of the old guys on my ignore list, but I want to add something
> to your reply to him:
Wow! Nice passive-agressive defense mechanism. (I'm taking a cue from
Jason/Buddy here and playing unqualified armchair psychotherapist). Not that
I blame you. I don't relish the thought of debating Lupo either. lol
> Danish Satanism is of course influenced by American Satanism (among other
> things), but not more then American Satanism is influenced by German
> philosophy and anti-Catholicism.
Actually, American Satanism (of the traditional variety) probably has more
roots in Spanish/Portugese anti-Catholicism which came to Harlem, Virginia
and New England via The Netherlands, along with a hodgepodge of
banned-cum-underground Celtic mythological rites brought over by Scots-Irish
slaves working various plantations.
(I've heard Voudon described as almost as Celtic as African, and always
wanted to ask Kevin Filan about this, but never got the chance... though
that's neither here nor there).
I could refer to Spinoza, among others, though I don't want to bore you.
> Does this make American Satanism a
> German/European phenomenon?
Benjamin Franklin, American revolutionary, was a Satanist (one of the
founders of Dashwood's infamous hellfire club there in London). He also
lived in Paris for several years. Does that make Paris an American city? Or
perhaps it makes every Satanist in Paris a direct philosophical descendant
of Benjamin Franklin. What do you think?
If that question sounds absurd on it's face, it's because it's the same type
of question you're asking.
If you knew anything at all about religion you'd realize that what we are
discussing didn't "start" anywhere but the dawn of man. "Satan" is little
more than a collection of low-level symbols, existing in the brain of every
human being since birth.
> At least the German philosophers came up with
> new ideas. LaVey was a showman, but he is not to be found among the great
> philosophers. His ideas were too shallow and too ambiguous to qualify as
> philosophy.
>
Really? I can remember when your husband -wolf- used to lick LaVey's boots
with seemingly endless tenacity and gusto. He was, in fact, alt.satanism's
foremost "CoS Suckup". In this regard he even beat out Tani "People's
Commissar" Phyllis Rose Radu Shundenko One Darkness Queen Sheromay Jantsang,
Andre Schlesinger and many others. You're not telling the newsgroup that Ole
Wolf was a chump are you? If not, then it's fair to conclude that he was
full of shit. Then as now perhaps?
Incidentally: when are you going to answer Harry's question concerning his
private correspondence with various third parties which now finds itself on
your web page? I'm interested to know whether whining endlessly about one's
life failures and rejections to the world is an accepted rite in the "Danish
Satanic Tradition" you hold so dear.
Victor LeNettoyeur™
news:3df7ae66$0$183$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk:
>
> "Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:YWVvbg==.d209cd1f77fbcf7efc004ae45d64f825@1039638944.cotse.net...
>> "- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in
>> news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk:
>>
>> > Unlike you, Corax has the advantage that this is her
>> > field of study; your statements to her are as uninformed as one
>> > would expect hers to be if she were to debate physics with you.
>>
>> Isn't it interesting that whenever you or Amina/Corax show up here
>> you
> make
>> a huge production about what an "expert" she is in the field of
>> religion.
>
> I am not an expert, nor did Ole say I was -
Sure. "expert" is difficult to put into context. (Now I'm calling out RyanS2
and Harry Lime for a little post-structuralism).
What -wolf- implied was that your level of knowledge in regards to religion
and theology was roughly proportional to Lupo's grasp on Physics. When I try
to quantify such a statement, I realize that Lupo probably knows more about,
say: Kaluza-Klein or general relativity than I do, and less than Michio Kaku
or Julian Barbour. Of course within the discipline Lupo would be expected to
have a sub-specialty in which he is probably better acquainted with his
chosen material than the nominal "experts" since the human brain is finite
(one can't be an expert on *everything*, after all).
With this in mind, if what -wolf- and Amina/Corax constantly assert is true
(re the above) then Amnia/Corax would be expected to be something of an
expert on a roughly equivalent level as Lupo.
> but it is not hard to know
> more than someone who never studied the subject.
Whoops! You just gave yourself away.
No one with a classical education (of any appreciable quality) will ever
assume that his opponent has "never" done this or that. Such a thing is
unprovable.
Not that this is any different from your previous assumption that I had
never been to Denmark. But here I digress...
> By virtue of my
> education, my words simply carry more weight in the field of religion
> than Lupo's words do.
As of right now, I doubt you have any appreciable education at all. That's
not an insult, just an extrapolation based upon your defensive posture.
> If you happen to have scientific training,
> you'll be well aware of this fact.
Ole Victor happens to be an uneducated dropout who resides under various
American bridges and posts to alt.satanism with a grubby stolen laptop. He
does have a good nose for the horse-cakes though; which is why he's singled
you out for some more special attention.
>
>> Even more interesting is the fact that whenever people ask for some
>> specifics (where she is "studying" or when her last paper was
>> published, among others) you both suddenly clam up, change the
>> subject or whatever.
>
> I do not remember any of us being asked.
I remember asking you and having you suddenly disappear from the
conversation. Be that as it may...
> I have never tried to hide
> the fact that I am still a student and that I am a university student.
> I am a student at the University of Aarhus in the department of the
> study of religion. Students usually do not publish papers although I
> have collaborated on a few. I'll be sure to let you know when I
> publish an article in English (I guess you are not going to learn
> danish any day soon).
Why would I? The average Dane speaks English around the dinner table.
>
> - Corax
Cat Asstrophy
government should NOT be connected in any way. NOW it is, thanks to the
topics I mentioned.
Jason@Neskoreni! <ja...@neskoreni.ua> wrote in message
news:WrVJ9.1688$MV5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Jason@Neskoreni!
> The only point I was trying to make, was that the religion and the
> government should NOT be connected in any way. NOW it is, thanks to the
> topics I mentioned.
That's true.
I think it is a grave error, politically. Religion is not a binding ideology
in this country.
They should frame the debate in terms of the US as infidels in the eyes of
the "enemy".
J@N
Victor LeNettoyeur™
(Do you prefer Tim or Harry these days, anyway?)
Please see below...
"tim jordan" <timjo...@attbi.com> wrote in
news:IAzJ9.313752$QZ.46936@sccrnsc02:
>> > Hey now Victor, I come from a long line of Morons (sic) Mormons.
>> > Yeah, I got a bunch of Tani's sold material sent to me from others
>> > and I think it might be fun to read this stuff on my cable access
>> > program and claim it as my own (after all it's mostly hilarously
>> > inaccurate and/or brazenly stolen anyway). Maybe I can say I'm the
>> > Peoples' Cummissar of PDX!
>>
>> I've often wanted to ask you about this. Mormon cosmology is quite
>> fascinating to me (not unlike the way I'm fascinated by Setian
>> cosmology). I've had your missionaries drinking icewater in my back
>> yard a couple of times, though I never let them follow up (They
>> always want to make an appointment to sell you on their little
>> religion).
>
> You bet they do. Mormons believe that if you play your cards right
> (going on a mission, keeping the 'word of wisdom', and doing 'temple
> work') you'll eventually get your own really groovy planet somewhere
> in the universe so you can fuck it up just like Jehovah did kinda like
> SimCity. Within their own logical framework they make perfect
> theological sense.
Well, now that I've trolled you into the open I'll admit that I've done a
little research of my own on the religion in question. When Lupo wanted to
know specific opinions concerning Setian philosophy he sorta "caught me out"
as I hadn't done my homework (a lot of that stuff ain't public, after all).
Hopefully a discussion concerning Mormonism will have me stammering a little
less often.
The doctrine of eternal progression is fascinating in itself. In fact, I
think it's one of the grooviest parts of Mormon cosmology. In many ways it
directly corresponds to some classical Gnostic ideals concerning equality
between God and Man. (Man the Divine).
Likewise there's a very interesting incorporation of Arian philosophy where
the trinity does not in fact exist, and Jesus Christ is seen as separate
from God the father (translation for our "expert" Amina: the big G. and J.C.
ain't the same dude to Mormon's -- and neither is the holy spook. They're
all different peeps. HTH.). It all again harkens back to classical thought
before the purges. Whether it was conscious or accidental, it seems like
Valentinian Gnosis suddenly sprang up on the American frontier.
>
> As I got older, I saw the downside of the religion. Like Jews, they
> consider themselves superior to the 'gentiles' (a term they freely use
> in their 'us' vs. 'them' ideology) and are generally racist. Until
> 1978 when the Supreme Court decided it might take BYU's 501(c)3 status
> and put it in the shitter, Mormons believed that Negros, Hispanics,
> Asians, and some Indians (not all, BTW) were the 'Children of Cain'
> and had dark skin because they descended from earth's original
> murderer and in the 'pre-existence' they had rebelled against God.
>
The idea of the Mormon "spirit world" or pre-existence is also quite
interesting.
Your analogy to Jews is also fascinating and quite accurate. Both groups
became quite insular when they were being kicked around (nothing like
persecution to promote paranoia). Parts of your "Doctrine And Covenants"
read like a modern Talmud in fact.
I've often thought that had Joseph Smith not died in the gunbattle there in
Carthage, he may have spiked the punch Jim Jones style (or the nineteenth
century equivalent). Here I digress.
> Guess what happened? When the SC got close to yanking BYU's
> non-profit status, the LSD (sic) profit (not so sic), Spencer Kimball
> had a 'vision' that suddenly 'God' figured these colored people were
> actually not as bad as originally thought and allowed them to become
> full fledged members of the church. This is what got me started in
> getting myself excommunicated.
You have a unique perspective on this matter. When I was in school I did a
bit of talking to various Mormons. They were all my age, though. When my
generation lived through the 1978 "revelation" I and my peers were between
three and nine years old.
I'm curious as to how this change affected the Mormon community? Was there a
large sense of herdlike obedience to the change? Or were there splinter
groups and rebels in your immediate vicinity?
> I was inactive pretty much in the
> church since my parents divorced when I was a strapping lad of six.
> My mother joined the church to marry my father, but never really
> bought into the whole LDS thing. My dad was the classic Jack Mormon
> (one who's raised in the faith, but doesn't go to stake meetings
> except for holidays with my grandmother who was devout).
In many ways, Mormonism is as much an ethnicity as a religion to people I
talk to. (Another parallel to Judaism in a weird way). In that regard, do
you view your own "excommunication" as anything more than a severance to the
literal belief in the mythology?
>
>> Mormons are genuinely nice people, despite their predilection towards
>> pushing their religion on the public. Jehovah's Witnesses usually
>> send out
> a
>> hatchet-faced old ex-whore and her illegitimate offspring to hassle
>> you on the porch, whereas Mormons have been decent looking younger
>> people in business attire. (In my experience, anyway).
>
> Well Vic, Mormons are not too different from other people. They
> populate the bell curve of personality, some are noble while a few are
> assholes and most are somewhere in the middle. Mormons are typically a
> bit better off financially then the unwashed masses due to the values
> of hard work and capitalism
Whoa there chief. Ever hear of _Orderville_ Utah? Brigham Young's own little
pre-bolshevik experiment in communism?
(I wrote a paper on that town and the whole "United Order" philosophy in
college. I'll post it someday if I run across it).
I do know what you refer to, but I've always wanted to get hold of a
Socialist/Communist Mormon and shoot the shit about such things. Sadly, you
are right about the modern capitalist aspect.
> that are inculcated in its adherents from
> an early age -- hence the white shirt and short sleeved attire of
> Mormon 'Elders' (oddly the missionaries who are in their early
> twenties). If you really want to fuck with an LDS missionary, tell
> them you'll listen to their speech if you can touch their garments. If
> you find a missionary that let's you do this say, "Pay Lay Ale" while
> you touch the cloth -- it'll really confuse the hell out of them.
>
Well that's an amusing thought, Harry. You sure I should be touching the
garments though? Shouldn't I bring my hands from upraised to 90 degrees to
my side as I say it? >;-)
Cheers,
Lupo LeBoucher
Cat Asstrophy <sata...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Lupo LeBoucher <i...@io.com> wrote in message >
>> That's one of the reasons America was/is such a popular place for
>immigrants; nobody
>> gave a shit how you worshipped in this country, or if you didn't at all.
>
>Unfortunately, since the WTC, the Homeland Security, and our President
>Shrub, the above is no longer true.
Er, actually, if you look at the INS numbers, it is as true as ever.
We do seem to have less Yemeni and Saudi immigrants, but I don't think
most people are complaining about that.
-Lupo
"Wit is well educated insolence" -Aristotle <i...@dillenger.io.com>
Corax
> "Corax" <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote in
> news:3df7ae66$0$183$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk:
> I remember asking you and having you suddenly disappear from the
> conversation. Be that as it may...
I do not post to alt.satanism very often, and with you being one of the
people who have been on my ignore list more then once (I can't imagine what
any of us gain by talking to each other, so I guess I'll add you after
reading your latest posts), answering questions from you is not on the top
of my to do list.
- Corax
Corax
> "Corax" <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote in message
> news:3df7a388$0$172$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
> > "- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in message
> > news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
>
type
> of question you're asking.
> If you knew anything at all about religion you'd realize that what we are
> discussing didn't "start" anywhere but the dawn of man. "Satan" is little
> more than a collection of low-level symbols, existing in the brain of
every
> human being since birth.
I was trying to show the absurdity of Lupos question - but hey, thank you
for adding to my point.
> Really? I can remember when your husband -wolf-
I am not married.
> with seemingly endless tenacity and gusto. He was, in fact, alt.satanism's
> foremost "CoS Suckup". In this regard he even beat out Tani "People's
> Commissar" Phyllis Rose Radu Shundenko One Darkness Queen Sheromay
Jantsang,
> Andre Schlesinger and many others. You're not telling the newsgroup that
Ole
> Wolf was a chump are you? If not, then it's fair to conclude that he was
> full of shit. Then as now perhaps?
Everything is politics.
> Incidentally: when are you going to answer Harry's question concerning his
> private correspondence with various third parties which now finds itself
on
> your web page? I'm interested to know whether whining endlessly about
one's
> life failures and rejections to the world is an accepted rite in the
"Danish
> Satanic Tradition" you hold so dear.
Is that a question for me? I have Harry on my ignorelist, and I do not have
a webpage with anything on it written by him. I don't think my personal
webpage has anything on it about any American organisations (90% of the page
is not about satanism), but you can see for yourself when your have learned
how to read Danish.
And now: Welcome back to my ignorelist.
- Corax
Lisa
field of religion than Lupo's words do. >>
I tell you, you really have to watch where you step out here: the b.s. can get
really deep just when you least expect it.
Wrong, "Corax." We know almost nothing about your "education," other than the
fact that you appear to be a professional student. Are you possessed of a
Master's Degree, or the Danish equivalent? Where is your dissertation?
(Ah, we're about to hear a version of that favorite SR excuse, "The DOCUMENTS
are in a LANGUAGE YOU don't UNDERSTAND. Showing them would be MEANINGLESS.")
I would view "My words outweigh his just because I say so!" with the same
amount of distrust. You say so, we say, "Show us the money." Or the degree. I
trust this Americanism will not fly over your head with the speed of the
Concorde breaking the sound barrier on a Transatlantic run.
<< If you happen to have scientific training, you'll be well aware of this
fact.>>
Scientific training tells us that we should ask you to "Show us the money." How
stupid do you dolts think we are? You'd think from watching the batterings
Phyllis takes on an almost daily basis that you lot'd know we don't take "TAKE
my WORD for it!" very seriously.
Scientists = a bunch of people who accept nothing on blind faith. Your lack of
knowledge on basic scientific attitudes is truly laughable.
<< Even more interesting is the fact that whenever people ask for some
specifics (where she is "studying" or when her last paper was published, among
others) you both suddenly clam up, change the subject or whatever. >>
<< I do not remember any of us being asked. >>
SR dodge #2: "The dog ate my homework!"
No doubt they don't remember Harry's repeated requests to have his private
emails taken down, either.
<< I'll be sure to let you know when I publish an article in English (I guess
you are not going to learn danish any day soon). >>
(Well, well..... what did I say earlier...?)
<<Why would I? The average Dane speaks English around the dinner table. >>
Only when it's convenient for 'em, Vic. When they get feel threatened, suddenly
they forget everything they ever knew about it.
These people claim to be highly educated; perhaps they are. They are, however,
remarkably stupid in other areas. I thought everyone knew "It's so, because I
SAY its so" stopped being a valid excuse after about age 6.
L.
Lisa
people who have been on my ignore list more then once (I can't imagine what any
of us gain by talking to each other, so I guess I'll add you after reading your
latest posts), answering questions from you is not on the top of my to do
list.>>
::SHOUT OF LAUGHTER!::
Good girl. Tuck your tail between your hind legs and scurry off.
So much for the mighty Danish intellect.
Kevin Filan
YWVvbg==.ac47a052c300c22e...@1039672953.cotse.net, "Victor
LeNettoyeur™" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I wouldn't say "Celtic" but there is definitely a strong Western influence.
Martinism (a Christian mystical tradition popular throughout the Caribbean)
is very influential in many houses. So is Freemasonry: a number of the lwa
are believed to be Masons and some of the secret handshakes and gestures
come right out of the F.A.M. There's also a strong albeit frequently
downplayed influence from Roman Catholicism. It isn't the Pope's
Catholicism... indeed, many Haitian Catholic churches regularly rail against
"folly and superstition" ... but more Vodouisants than not identify as Roman
Catholics in my experience.
After the Haitian Revolution of 1804 the White people of St. Dominique were
by and large dead. When the slaughter started, they didn't draw
distinctions between poor Whites and rich Whites; if you were White, you
were machete fodder. This may not jibe with some of the things you hear
from those trying to sell Vodou on the Internet, but the historical record
backs it up. Any Celtic influence which remained was dimly remembered if at
all. (Besides, I'm not sure there *were* many indentured servants on St.
Dominique: I believe the model there was more typically the massive
plantation, with a few overseers and many slaves who were worked to death
only to be replaced by fresh slaves). Most of the Whites were middle-class
or upper-class.
> I could refer to Spinoza, among others, though I don't want to bore you.
Since Corax is a Danish scholar of religions, I'd be interested to hear her
thoughts on Soren Kierkegaard (sorry about the misspelling: my keyboard
isn't equipped for Scandinavian characters). He's one of my favorite
writers and philosophers; I have always been impressed by his concept of the
"Leap of Faith" as well as his deeply detailed studies of the internal lives
of religious thinkers.
Peace
Kevin Filan
GOD
"Lisa" <exec...@aol.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:20021208134346...@mb-ci.aol.com...
> <<With this in mind; do you consider it a realistic expectation that
Satanists
> would abandon the traditions of friends and family (endangering close
> relationships in the process)?>>
>
> I advocate no such thing; I for one think Satanists should do whatever
they're
> happy with: if they want to enjoy the full paraphanalia of the holiday
season,
> who am I to say them nay? Satanism being about indulgence, etc.
The Christmas tree is nothing more then an evolution of the Yule log. They
started to burn a log...time went on...the log was no longer burnt, but held
candles in it...time went on, only to present a tree in its place adorning
candles, itself (that must have went over well, eh?), as well as
decorations, ornaments, etc...time went on and electricity was invented,
only to have candles turn into lights (much more safer). Yule (which
started on Dec 21 -22) was the celebration of the Winter Solstice, really,
with the hint of a celebration of the turning of the great wheel toward the
end of the year and the start of anew with the exchanging of gifts. It's
still a Pagan celebration to me, personally. Plus, you get to exchange
gifts with friends and family. Yes, I mean exchanging of gifts, because,
let's face it...if you give a gift and do not get one in return, you will
most likely NOT get that person another next year...lol. Happy Holidays
everyone!
RyanS2
> to Danish culture and has access to strong documentation of US culture, but
> your statements are based on direct access to US culture but no
> documentation of Danish culture (the latter documentation is not readily
> available, especially not when it comes to religoius practices). In short,
> you're making an ass out of yourself here.
Hate to say this Wolf, but we do have a pretty good supply of
literature about Danish religion. For example:
"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion" 33(3): pp. 205-16.
Again in the same issue, pp. 230-52.
"Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion", March 95, Vol. 34
Issue 1, pp. 1-17.
"Sociology of Religion", Fall 97, Vol. 58, Issue 3, pp. 261-266
Martin, "A general theory of secularization"
Bainbridge and Stark, "The future of religion: Secularization,
revival, and cult formation" and "A theory of religion."
Wilson, "Secularization: The inherited model." In "The Sacred in a
Secular Age", ed. P. E. Hammond
Lechner, "The case against secularization: A rebuttal". Social Forces
69(4): 1103-19.
Those are the studies that I know of, and most of the books and
magazine articles can be requested via your local library and obtained
through internet loan.
buddy
Please see inside text:
"tim jordan" <timjo...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:BmUJ9.322313$QZ.47753@sccrnsc02...
> Dear Ryan:
>
> Please see inside text:
>
>
> > > Sure. Funny, I've never seen the term "MN" in the DSM -- do you have
> the
> > > catalog number that corresponds to this? I'm interested in
psychology,
> but
> > > hardly pretend to be any sort of expert. Imagine what I've been
> missing.
> >
> > My guess is that whomever Buddy is has just stumbled across a cool
> > buzzword to brandy about for however long, sort of like a toddler
> > saying one word they like over and over again. Malignant Narcissism
> > is used to define a specific type of Narcissism, one where there is "a
> > prevailing condition which gets worse, categorized by a complete lack
> > of remorse, growing paranoia, and sadistic cruelty." (That's from the
> > Penguin Dictionary of Psychology). It's pretty rare to find because
> > people with it are typically occupying the prison system of our
> > country. To talk about messageboard theatrics in context with
> > something usually used as a typology for mass-murderers and rapists
> > seems a gross distortion of evidence and terminology. Hence, my
> > theory that whomever this is has little training in the field, and is
> > probably parroting whatever his/her search engine turns up on the
> > search word.
You are one of the few people I have respect for Tim. And I mean that in a
relative way. I am not going to comment on your TV show and website because
I am sure you heard it all before anyway. IMHO, Vic seems to be a bit of a
bootlicker.
> Well not being too learned on the subject, I thought I'd ask 'Buddy' to
> belly up to the bar and show me where MN is a term recognized by the APA.
Give me a week or so Tim. This is fiscal year end for my business. And I
am busy with all the details of getting together info for my taxes.
It's my first time doing it, but I'd really want to do this myself. Lots of
reading and cross-referencing. All on the net. I got publications here too
What to claim as much as possible. Then I'll play an accounting firm to
check it all over and sign-off.
Like I mentioned before, it is in its birthing stages. Psycotherapists and
the like are scared to touch the subject with a 10ft pole. And one
"born-again Christian" had the brass balls to do so as an appeal so that
others could follow suit. No, not in the Born again Christianity. He
admitted his biases.
Even though he had this flaw with respect to his taking on this slippery
venture, he recounted case studies with pseudonyms of those involved.
He was objective, and just state a progression of his obversations in a
non-Christian influenced way. And made sure he took down, the exact words
these people used to explain what seemed to be behaviour that had raised a
red-flag to him. But one must judge this for themselves.
These cases are fascinating.
Here is a less than sastisfactory tidbit of reviews:
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a657596.htm
I restate, to consider the case studies in this book, analyse them.
> Hey you never know he/she might have come up with some legit term I'm not
> familiar with.
It is about two pages long. You will have to wait.
> I'd doubt that anyone with any real psych training would
> make any sort of assertion in this ng that they are an expert.
When did I say, "I A-M A-N E-X-P-E-R-T"
> I'd guess a
> few have training here but are slumming with the rest of us pschological
[sic]
> neophytes
Yep.
> Regards,
>
> harry
****************
I'll like to respond to a previous reply of yours
Dear "buddy":
Please see inside text:
> > >Gawd damn, look at Mr. DSM IV, wit his baadd self!
>
> >Damned Straight.
>
> >Naughty, Naughty. Dysfunctional family gave rise to Dyscognitive Timmy.
> >Had the priesthood under false pretenses.
> >Too cowardly to "speak the truth" beforehand.
> >Go to the temple too bud?
>Priesthood under false pretenses? Whatever do you mean? If you know
>anything about Mormonism, you'll know you become a priest at an early age.
I really didn't consider deacons and teachers to be officially part of the
priesthood. Only the Aaronic, where the person gets the title of "priest",
and the Melchizedek. I know however, to save you some time that deacons and
teachers fall under the umbrella of the Aaronic priesthood.
>People don't usually start thinking for themselves until their much older
>(at least in my case). You don't expect a 12-year-old to be able to make
>legitimate decisions regarding faith, do you?
No. I agree with you
>Funny thing happened when I was baptized for some of my dead relatives.
>Just before you're dunked the bishop asked me if I "masturbated." Not
>knowing what this was, I went to the local library and stepped into a
>bright, new, world. Probably not his original intent.
We come from two different cultures here, Tim. I don't believe you.
Sorry. In my primary school, all the kids had the somehow "self-learned"
knowledge of what a dk and a pssy was. In grade two and three, all the
males use to accuse each other of wanking off, and gave the gesture, and
using the word faggot, queer, etc. Everyone knew what a "hand job" was.
Just wasn't clear on orgasm. A male does not usually get one back then. I
am assuming you were 12 years old when you were "being dunked" (aheem...
baptized) for your dead relatives. At 12, I was humping the couch after
school at the thought of the cutest girl in my grade six class. One day I
had an orgasm. Did not know what it was at the time and nothing came out.
But it felt frightening and painful. I immediately got up ran around the
house in terror and was thinking about calling 911 because I thought my dk
was going to explode and I was going to die or something. It seemed to last
for 2 minutes. Then after I had it, when the fright dissapated; I realized
it felt pretty good. I was hooked. I knew that this was masturbation and
it got better with time. I heard the term many times and knew what it
meant. But I thought that you (second person) "officially" needed your own
hand for that to happen. What a surprise!
Back then I was terrified at the idea of someone finding out. Now I am here
talking about it on usenet. I would have no problem telling a bishop or
authority if they asked me. At 12, I was well-educated outside of the
curriculum and inside on the basics of sex and all its offshoots.
I think Tim, that you -probably- masturbated but repressed the thought of
telling the bishop in that precarious situation. I hardly believe a bishop
would ask you that right before you are being dunked. And if he did, no
wonder you are all f'd up ;)
> >I still love ya Tim. You are made from the good stuff.
> >
> >Unfortunately, Timmy you are chosen to be a lab rat. Pick a number and
see
> >if it is taken.
> >You will be high up there in rank. Complex design of an effontery you
have,
> >but your behaviour hasn't got the better of you.
> >Maybe, the old ghost still protects you. You will get special treatment
...
> >allowances for root beer; given your noble past.
>Well, we're all lab rats here, if you know what I mean.
Yep, I know what you mean.
>Right. So
> >Hope one day, you will come to terms with your MN.
>Sure. Funny, I've never seen the term "MN" in the DSM -- do you have the
>catalog number that corresponds to this?
Why do you find that funny ;)?
Usually, things are co-ordinated, collected, analyzed, organized, studied,
peer reviewed, committee-ized, approved, reviewed, re-approved, voted, etc.
etc. Membership licences and fees, Board of Directors - polictical crap,
taxpayer money wasted, debated, people fall asleep, people take stress
leave, etc.etc. drafted, drafted, drafted, circulated, gets losts,
uncoordinated, drafted, drafted, drafted, drafted, final-drafted, approved,
aggreement with the printers and publishers, things get prolonged and f'd up
at the printers and/or publishers. People leave, new ignorant people have to
take their place and pace immediately, etc, etc. and one day 10 fold longer
than the deadline people say it is published and catalogued.
Remember the formula, premises--->conclusions.
Similar to the formula, crap above--->catalogued.
Not: catalogued ---> crap above
1) It is possible that: not-catalogued ---> crap above exists but not yet
codified (or may never be).
2) It is also possible that: not-catalogued ---> crap above does not exist
and therefore be never codified.
Your decision.
To finally answer your question. Nope. You're gonna have to take the risk
of your time to investigate it by reading and some case studies I _may_ post
here in the future.
>I'm interested in psychology, but
>hardly pretend to be any sort of expert.
Are you intimating that I have?
It is a very interesting subject. But it has its fringe element. More
fruitful and credible than that C/S crap. But C/S is the most credible
institution out there for associating itself with the S word.
For reasons here I won't let on why. And I learn from some of its online
stuff now and then. It should exist and its right to exist should be
protected. But it should be watched also and am sure it is. It will never
get my $100 though. There is enough crap in the world without me
contributing to its cause.
>Imagine what I've been missing.
LOL. Tim, I find you saying that very funny.
>Regards,
>Harry
Regards, your 6rass6alls6uddy wannabe.
Victor LeNettoyeur™
"Corax" <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote in message
news:3df85067$0$220$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
>
> "Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:YWVvbg==.ac47a052c300c22e632c426679fd2865@1039672953.cotse.net...
> > "Corax" <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote in message
> > news:3df7a388$0$172$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
> > > "- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in message
> > > news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
> >
> > If that question sounds absurd on it's face, it's because it's the same
> type
> > of question you're asking.
>
> > If you knew anything at all about religion you'd realize that what we are
> > discussing didn't "start" anywhere but the dawn of man. "Satan" is little
> > more than a collection of low-level symbols, existing in the brain of
> every
> > human being since birth.
>
> I was trying to show the absurdity of Lupos question - but hey, thank you
> for adding to my point.
No, you were trying to pretend you were an expert in a field which you
clearly lack understanding. While this seems to be par for the course among
the phonies of the Satanic Reds, many outside your little cult think it's
pretty ridiculous.
At this point I suppose you should say hello to your comrades. You know,
Kari Nevala the "expert in Finnich linguistics", Doctor (of mail-order
divinity from the ULC) Miles Slayton, Tani "People's Commissar of
Sockpuppetry" Jantsang the New Jersey "Turanian" among others.
>
> > Really? I can remember when your husband -wolf-
>
> I am not married.
Apology and retraction. Do you prefer "Common-law husband" or "rent-boy"?
>
> > with seemingly endless tenacity and gusto. He was, in fact, alt.satanism's
> > foremost "CoS Suckup". In this regard he even beat out Tani "People's
> > Commissar" Phyllis Rose Radu Shundenko One Darkness Queen Sheromay
> Jantsang,
> > Andre Schlesinger and many others. You're not telling the newsgroup that
> Ole
> > Wolf was a chump are you? If not, then it's fair to conclude that he was
> > full of shit. Then as now perhaps?
>
> Everything is politics.
Oh? In politics one necessarily ventures in search of conquest. (Politics is
merely war by other means, you know). Perhaps you could tell us all what
-wolf- gained by spending countless hours sucking Anton LaVey's pecker on
this newsgroup.
For all his trouble, the only result I can discern is a whining, sniveling,
pathetic screed on the same web-page he used to vilify the enemies of the
Church of Satan with. It really must crack the poor boy's nuts to know that
the CoS threw him out. Has he been to therapy yet?
>
> > Incidentally: when are you going to answer Harry's question concerning his
> > private correspondence with various third parties which now finds itself
> on
> > your web page? I'm interested to know whether whining endlessly about
> one's
> > life failures and rejections to the world is an accepted rite in the
> "Danish
> > Satanic Tradition" you hold so dear.
>
> Is that a question for me? I have Harry on my ignorelist, and I do not have
> a webpage with anything on it written by him.
Sure. Another retraction is forthcoming and an apology made. Since -wolf- is
not your husband (and that's an honest mistake, as I truly thought you two
were married) I guess you can't be held accountable for the miserable
whining he's doing on the www concerning his dismissal from the Church of Satan.
I don't think my personal
> webpage has anything on it about any American organisations (90% of the page
> is not about satanism), but you can see for yourself when your have learned
> how to read Danish.
>
> And now: Welcome back to my ignorelist.
If you can't stand the heat, I don't blame you for beating a hasty retreat
out of the reactor-core.
>
> - Corax
Victor LeNettoyeur™
"Kevin Filan" <mrha...@excite.SPAMBGONE.com> wrote in message
news:BA1DE9E6.9C45%mrha...@excite.SPAMBGONE.com...
[snip]
> >
> > (I've heard Voudon described as almost as Celtic as African, and always
> > wanted to ask Kevin Filan about this, but never got the chance... though
> > that's neither here nor there).
>
> I wouldn't say "Celtic" but there is definitely a strong Western influence.
> Martinism (a Christian mystical tradition popular throughout the Caribbean)
> is very influential in many houses. So is Freemasonry: a number of the lwa
> are believed to be Masons and some of the secret handshakes and gestures
> come right out of the F.A.M. There's also a strong albeit frequently
> downplayed influence from Roman Catholicism. It isn't the Pope's
> Catholicism... indeed, many Haitian Catholic churches regularly rail against
> "folly and superstition" ... but more Vodouisants than not identify as Roman
> Catholics in my experience.
Is Voudon (in your opinion) mostly specific to Haiti or is there a broader
reach to the religion?
Having seen various American curio shops full of "traditional" material I
wonder if we aren't talking apples and oranges here. Perhaps what I'm
calling "Voudon" is only related in a very peripheral way. Never having been
to Haiti, I don't really know the specific differences between the culture
specific to that island and the broader African-influenced cultural religions.
In the early days of American slavery, the servile population was made up of
a sizeable number of children from Ulster. English vagrants and pickpockets
were quite common as were various other Europeans. For the most part though,
the poor Irish were seen as easy pickings for the colonial ruling class and
treated accordingly.
(They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the Enslavement
of Whites in Early America; Michael Hoffman II)
(The Untold Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade: 1440-1870; H. Thomas)
The descendants of African slaves in the American South clearly show the
genetic influence of their fellow slaves from Europe. Few people would fail
to pick out an African tourist from Ghana or Zambia no matter how many
African-Americans he surrounded himself with in downtown Atlanta. I've
always wondered whether or how much of that creole Voodoo came across from
Derry and Dublin as opposed to West Africa.
There are certain Voudon-like traditions (or I'm told there are) in the
southern Brazilian states as well where Slaves from the Amazon meet up with
Patagonian Celts I guess.
>
> After the Haitian Revolution of 1804 the White people of St. Dominique were
> by and large dead. When the slaughter started, they didn't draw
> distinctions between poor Whites and rich Whites; if you were White, you
> were machete fodder. This may not jibe with some of the things you hear
> from those trying to sell Vodou on the Internet, but the historical record
> backs it up. Any Celtic influence which remained was dimly remembered if at
> all. (Besides, I'm not sure there *were* many indentured servants on St.
> Dominique: I believe the model there was more typically the massive
> plantation, with a few overseers and many slaves who were worked to death
> only to be replaced by fresh slaves). Most of the Whites were middle-class
> or upper-class.
No disagreement there. Haiti was clearly an anomaly though, situated at the
bloody end of the scale. In most parts of the Caribbean, people chose to get
married and meld rather than butcher one another en masse. There are still
towns full of blonde people in Cuba, and most of Haiti is as African as
Ghana, but for the most part it's been more of a peaceful amalgamation.
Corax
news:BA1DE9E6.9C45%mrha...@excite.SPAMBGONE.com...
her
> thoughts on Soren Kierkegaard (sorry about the misspelling: my keyboard
> isn't equipped for Scandinavian characters). He's one of my favorite
> writers and philosophers; I have always been impressed by his concept of
the
> "Leap of Faith" as well as his deeply detailed studies of the internal
lives
> of religious thinkers.
Søren Kirkegaard is covered only briefly in our course in "Philosophy of
religion", but as our professor put it, Kirkegaard is included mainly
because he is the best known Danish philosopher. Kirkegaard is not very
useful in the modern study of religion, and is therefore only covered very
superficially (the study as a whole focuses on interpretation of religious
texts and rituals).
I think Kirkegaard's notion of the tree first personality types are useful,
but I think his theory that the Christian religion is the only real
salvation from angst is a bit far-fetched (even if one agreed that religion
was the answer, his argumentation why the Christian religion is superior
isn't really convincing - especially not from a historical point of view).
His ideas about the "human soul" are also a bit too religious for my taste.
In his own life, Kirkeggard was never able to choose the life of the
religious man as he imagined it to be, so his theory is not even built on
personal experience. One also has to remember that Kirkegaard writes his
philosophy by the use of characters he invents. He is not trying to say that
he has the ultimative answer to anything. Everything is seen from a fictive
person's perspective, and the person is only able to see a part of the
answer. This makes it difficult to determine what Kirkegaard himself really
meant, and leaves a lot to interpretation. The "Leap of Faith" has to do
with the fact that you cannot choose to believe by the use of your
intellect.
I think Kirkegaard is primarily interesting because he happened to be the
first existentialist, but uninteresting from a Satanic point of view in his
insistence on faith as an ultimate goal. His theories cannot be used to
describe how religious people think and behave, because his personality
types only cover certain kinds of religious people. His focus on faith
applies quite well to Christianity, but not to so-called primitive
religions.
- Corax
Cat Asstrophy
I was "raised" on Kirkegaard, as my mother got her Master's in Philosophy,
and English Lit. She was always going off to seminars on existentialism for
her degree. Never quite understood the man. You've helped tremendously.
Well done.
Cat.
Corax <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote in message
news:3df8f685$0$140$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
Axolotl2
Johnny Cat wrote:
>
> The Christmas tree is nothing more then an evolution of the Yule log.
Once again John Shawspank proves that he doesn't know what he's talking about, unless of
course Martin Luther was engaged in some holiday season back engineering. Perhaps Danish
"religious expert" Corax can help you out on this one.
By the way John, I noticed that Satanic Supplies is still out of commission. Yeah I know,
"coming soon".
Victor LeNettoyeur™
How goes? Please see below...
Axolotl2 wrote:
> Johnny Cat wrote:
> >
> > The Christmas tree is nothing more then an evolution of the Yule log.
>
> Once again John Shawspank proves that he doesn't know what he's talking
about, unless of
> course Martin Luther was engaged in some holiday season back engineering.
I can't pretend to have any sort of expertise on the matter, but I thought
John Shaw/GOD did a pretty good job of explaining the origins of the
Christmas tree. Can you be specific as to where he was mistaken? I'm
particularly unfamiliar with Martin Luther's role in it's inception. The
Yule log tradition predated Protestantism by a good while.
I've heard different variations on this theme depending upon the locale.
Candles on pine trees symbolized the stars on the nights that the sun never
rose (we're talking Northern Europe here). This supposedly predated Luther
and Christianity by several hundred years. I can't be specific as to why
this happened or any details; just one of them things I heard someplace and
wondered about.
in the nordic countries the sun, hung on the cross of the zodiac, set (died)
for three days and was reborn after the solstice. Gives a whole new meaning
to the Christ myth, don't it? ;-)
Perhaps Danish
> "religious expert" Corax can help you out on this one.
While by her own admission she finally came clean about her status, her post
on Kierkegaard was quite interesting and thorough. Corax/Amina does have it
in her to argue intelligently once in a while. I suppose I should learn from
Kevin Filan which buttons to push in the event she removes me from her
"ignorelist" in the future.
Happy Holidays and all that good stuff...
Victor LeNettoyeur™
Dear buddy/Jason,
I've read and re-read this rebuttal you've posted. There are several things
I admire about it. It's my opinion that you're sincere in your belief that
many of the regs on alt.satanism need help; and you've also convinced me
that you truly believe that you are in a position to help some of the
alt.satanism regulars. In this and subsequent posts you express a fervent
desire to be taken seriously, simultaneously doubting the sincerity of those
around you (somewhat inconsistent on your part, but it may be attributable
to the illness you indicated you suffer from).
If you re-read our thread carefully you'll see that it's thoughtful but
somewhat disjointed. It's long and rambling as well, and goes off track
quite a bit. Since I'm the type of writer that shares these traits with
you(to an absolute fault) there's a real danger of the conversation
devolving into meaninglessness. With this in mind, I'm going to heavily trim
your post and try to stay in the basic ballpark of our collective Narcissism.
"buddy" <bu...@here.com> wrote in
news:LBHJ9.34954$L47.4...@read2.cgocable.net:
>
> Nobody really does, I think. It is very complex (Malignant
> Narcissism) and elusive. I have a book of case studies. I'll post
> some simple ones first and move to the more complex later.
>
I think that would be advisable. While you might truly believe that we all
suffer from some newly documented but dangerous psychological disorder, the
rest of us will take some convincing.
> This is a painful process done with people you trust. Now question
> yourself, "Who would I "trust" more with myself, a self-proclaimed
> Satanist, or a genuine and intelligent mormon."
Well buddy/Jason, here's the thing: I trust people who are consistent and
honorable. It makes little difference to me what particular mythological
trappings they find themselves allied with -- if any. I've always been a
pretty good judge of character, and I've not had occasion to let religious
matters enter into the equation (at least on a conscious level).
>
> I also suggest, once I get my book back from my Malignant Narcissistic
> business partner who feels he is a devout, giving Buddhist, to look at
> the case studies and analyse the situations. These are fascinating.
> I really believe you will believe that at least, if nothing else.
>
Can you do me a personal favor and give us a title and author, so that those
of us who find your contentions interesting can do some investigating while
you wait?
Having a sort of group book debate/reading room might be one of the better
uses this newsgroup has served since it's inception.
[snip story of a third-party]
> Delusional man.
Well, the obvious question presents itself: why are you in business with
this fellow if he is not responsible?
Assuming this is accurate, it's little wonder you are experiencing stress.
Maybe you should consider cutting him out of the loop, or perhaps dissolving
the partnership altogether if that's not possible? Tough decision, and only
you can make it.
> If someone only read this part of your post, what do you think they
> will think of you, not knowing you from Adam?
> Not a good first impression, unless you're doing an impression of
> Morton Downey JR.
> A normal person may get this surge of hostility and vitriol within
> him/herself now and then, but does s/he automatically lets it out as
> is from within?
> Society has bad experiences with strangers exhibiting this behaviour
> "all of a sudden". There is an ingrained intuition that the person
> could be a bomb ready to explode. Generally, they could be deemed
> psychotic and unpredictable. Or obsessive-compulsive/impulsive.
> Unfortunately, when you exhibit such behaviour anything "intelligent"
> said beforehand comes to nought and this sticks out. People become
> confused. People judge that way. Why? There are probably good
> historical reasons for this. It does not matter if their intuition are
> correct or not. People are conservative when it comes to perceived
> danger. Why is there a need for you to do as above?
Actually that's a good point. Tani Jantsang and I have been less than
cordial with one another (to put it mildly) in the past. It's been as much
my fault as hers -- at least my part in it. I probably do need to chill out
over the whole thing.
>>No, I'm just calling it as I see it. I've known my share of Mormons.
>>They seemed above par in nearly every respect: intelligence, courtesy,
>>decency and honor.
>
> Why don't you join them?
That's a fair question. As I understand things, and as I told Harry last
night, the Mormons I've talked to have shown traits not only of belonging to
a religious group -- but also certain ethnocentric qualities. The easy
answer to your question is that I don't join the Mormons because I don't
follow their mythology seriously (and that is one of the requirements). A
more detailed answer would include the fact that as a "convert" I would
never fit in no matter what I believed as per their spirituality.
>
>>Threatened by a couple of nice looking, well spoken, good mannered
>>fellows drinking icewater in my lawn chairs? I don't see why.
>
> You either deliberately or accidentally or semi-subconciously (defense
> mechansim) missed the point.
No, that was my asshole nature coming out and I was injecting a simplistic
answer in response to what I saw as a simplistic question.
> You should know the essence of the previous email!
> I meant threatened that your inward carefully constructed house of
> cards of cognitions that you operate your life by may come crashing
> down causing psychic pain.
> Especially, when they slap that "ONE TRUE CHURCH" concept.
> And to a lesser extent, tithing.
> And perhaps all this following the prophets business.
All very true. I also wouldn't be very honest if I pretended to go along
with their mythological trappings just to enjoy the company, would I?
>
>> It seems like the "physician" might consider "healing himself".
>
> Yes Vic. These are called hallucinations. I am ill. You can choose
> to listen to me or not.
> Your risk.
>
I'm listening to you now.
> One cannot be their own gawd and heal themselves. Each person depends
> on other trustworthy _and_ effective people. Building a person is a
> group effort. Destroying one can effectively be done in isolation or
> catalysed with MNs.
>
I don't know if I agree with this. Many of the greatest men in history were
raised in near total solitude.
> True colours beginning to show. I detect another MN inconsistency
> (those things said which seem very off-reality and therefore bizarre
> and interesting)... you mention "failed attempts". One idiot jumped
> in immediately and start calling me all these strange people, and
> timmy did too. Am I missing something? Lupo jumped in right away to
> my comment. I was drinking that night and did a foolish thing,
> because I was mischeivious and do have some MN myself. Just what the
> hell are you talking about. Yet another MN inconsistency, your "hint"
> in parenthesis above. Posting does not preclude me from a study.
> Remember I've been here for over 10 years.
Sorry buddy. At this point I think it's possible you might have been present
around the time of the xganon troll-flood (not an accusation, and I have no
proof either way, just something that crossed my mind). You haven't been
engaged in any study for the past ten years though. Everything you post is
indicative of a new arrival.
I hardly post anything in
> that time compared to the likes of Lupo, Filan, Ygraine, etc. This is
> virtually their life. In those lull periods, my studies are more
> revealing. And since I really believe that most here are MNs,
> whatever I say or do would not fizz a spark of anything only vitriol
> anyway; they have deeply ingrained habits, usually inpenetrable, to
> "self-delusionalize" it out.
>
> Are you going to do the same Vic?
> Are you going to truly "leave" me and not explore MN and yourself any
> longer?
Are you frightened of abandonment? Or do you really believe you are some
sort of a savior that has some knowledge that the rest of us truly need to know?
Either way, I don't think you are going about business in the most effective
way possible. Just my opinion.
> Do you really believe what you've just said above?
>
> You do not need to answer here on a public forum, but I ask you to
> consider them and keep them to yourself.
This has been a brief response but I want to thank you for a thoughtful
post. Your insights are as valuable as the next fellow's. I can assure you
that I will continue to consider your questions and comments carefully. I
might not agree with your theories, but you're an interesting fellow and I
look forward to talking with you in the future.
Cheers,
Kevin Filan
8O6K9.136$DC1.14...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com, "Cat Asstrophy"
<sata...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you, Corax, for a most eloquent post.
>
> I was "raised" on Kirkegaard, as my mother got her Master's in Philosophy,
> and English Lit. She was always going off to seminars on existentialism for
> her degree. Never quite understood the man. You've helped tremendously.
>
> Well done.
>
> Cat.
I would respond to Corax directly, but her post hasn't yet made it to my
newsreader. Thus...
>
>
> Corax <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote in message
> news:3df8f685$0$140$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk...
>> Søren Kirkegaard is covered only briefly in our course in "Philosophy of
>> religion", but as our professor put it, Kirkegaard is included mainly
>> because he is the best known Danish philosopher.
He's not just the best-known Danish philosopher; he's arguably the most
important modern Christian philosopher.
>>Kirkegaard is not very
>> useful in the modern study of religion, and is therefore only covered very
>> superficially (the study as a whole focuses on interpretation of religious
>> texts and rituals).
Who are some of the other philosophers whom you are studying? I'd hazard a
guess at
>> I think Kirkegaard's notion of the tree first personality types are
> useful,
>> but I think his theory that the Christian religion is the only real
>> salvation from angst is a bit far-fetched (even if one agreed that
> religion
>> was the answer, his argumentation why the Christian religion is superior
>> isn't really convincing - especially not from a historical point of view).
Well, yeah: even HE wasn't particularly convinced that Christianity would
save you from angst. (Read *Fear and Trembling* for more on this... ).
Kierkegaard's grasp of Christianity was like a drowning man's grasp on a
piece of flotsam. He spent much of his life besieged by terror; the
thought of rejecting Christianity filled him with utter terror. In one of
his books (*Sickness Unto Death* I believe, although I don't have it handy
right now) he goes into enormous detail about the varying sins of omission
wrt faith; how one can have faith for the wrong reasons, misplaced faith,
etc. Then, in the last few paragraphs of the book, he begins to touch upon
the rejection of God and of faith... and closes a book of intricately
detailed internal meditations with "but this is the sin against the Holy
Ghost and the greatest failing." The end. All his writings are, in the
end, a desperate attempt to shut out endless nagging doubts about his
Christian faith... and the blind terror he felt at the idea that gee, maybe
there's nothing out there but the endless empty night.
If you don't find the idea of a blind, mechanical universe disturbing, you
haven't really thought about it enough. Thinking enough/too much was
Kierkegaard's greatest gift; it was also his greatest failing. (He realized
that other people didn't spend nearly as much time as he worrying about
these things; this is one of the reasons why he spent the last part of his
life railing against the complacency of the Danish state church).
>> His ideas about the "human soul" are also a bit too religious for my
>> taste.
See above. His writings are not so much an attempt to convince you as an
attempt to convince himself.
>> In his own life, Kirkeggard was never able to choose the life of the
>> religious man as he imagined it to be, so his theory is not even built on
>> personal experience. One also has to remember that Kirkegaard writes his
>> philosophy by the use of characters he invents. He is not trying to say
> that
>> he has the ultimative answer to anything. Everything is seen from a
> fictive
>> person's perspective, and the person is only able to see a part of the
>> answer. This makes it difficult to determine what Kirkegaard himself
> really
>> meant, and leaves a lot to interpretation.
Did Kierkegaard believe in an individual delineated Self ... or did he see
the Self as a mutable thing, which could vary based on circumstance? Think
about that, then see if you can understand his use of personas. Consider
also that he considered God to be something which was utterly beyond human
comprehension; for him, personas were a way of playing "Five Blind Men and
an Elephant." His personas were also a way of showing various ways by which
others dealt with the nagging questions which so haunted him.
>>The "Leap of Faith" has to do
>> with the fact that you cannot choose to believe by the use of your
>> intellect.
It has to do with the fact that your ability to rely on your intellect is
limited, and that sooner or later you have to take a "leap of faith" in one
direction or the other. His point was not that you cannot choose to
believe: it was that you MUST choose to believe. :)
>> I think Kirkegaard is primarily interesting because he happened to be the
>> first existentialist,
I would dispute this, as would many Kierkegaard scholars. I'd say that
Kierkegaard was like Nietzsche or Dostoyevski; a brilliant and utterly
original thinker who gets pigeonholed in with the Existentialists because of
a few surface similarities.
> >but uninteresting from a Satanic point of view in
> his
>> insistence on faith as an ultimate goal. His theories cannot be used to
>> describe how religious people think and behave, because his personality
>> types only cover certain kinds of religious people. His focus on faith
>> applies quite well to Christianity, but not to so-called primitive
>> religions.
That's a good point. "Primitive religions" typically don't rely on faith at
all, but rather demand some "bang for their buck." In primitive religions
you don't just praise your deity/deities: you expect Him/Her/Them to do
things for you in exchange for your service.
Peace
Kevin Filan
Kevin Filan
YWVvbg==.5bfacd636d1690c2...@1039716256.cotse.net, "Victor
LeNettoyeur™" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't say "Celtic" but there is definitely a strong Western influence.
>> Martinism (a Christian mystical tradition popular throughout the Caribbean)
>> is very influential in many houses. So is Freemasonry: a number of the lwa
>> are believed to be Masons and some of the secret handshakes and gestures
>> come right out of the F.A.M. There's also a strong albeit frequently
>> downplayed influence from Roman Catholicism. It isn't the Pope's
>> Catholicism... indeed, many Haitian Catholic churches regularly rail against
>> "folly and superstition" ... but more Vodouisants than not identify as Roman
>> Catholics in my experience.
>
> Is Voudon (in your opinion) mostly specific to Haiti or is there a broader
> reach to the religion?
There are thriving Vodou communities in the Dominican Republic, Brazil,
Cuba, the United States and Canada. (This was mostly brought there by
Haitian migrant workers, although in each country there are non-Haitian
practitioners). There are also a large number of Vodoun practitioners
remaining in Benin. What we call "Vodou" today was largely influenced by
Fon tribes from what is today Benin... although Haitian Vodou is
considerably different than Beninois Vodou. (Not surprising, given they've
been separated for almost four centuries now).
> Having seen various American curio shops full of "traditional" material I
> wonder if we aren't talking apples and oranges here. Perhaps what I'm
> calling "Voudon" is only related in a very peripheral way. Never having been
> to Haiti, I don't really know the specific differences between the culture
> specific to that island and the broader African-influenced cultural religions.
Here's an interesting one: Haitian Vodou has a pretty pervasive Christian
influence. They don't just use the Saints as "masks" (the common
explanation among Afrocentric anti-Christian types); rather, they see
nothing wrong with honoring the saints alongside the Lwa, or with making
regular attendance at Mass an obligation on a "good Vodouisant."
> In the early days of American slavery, the servile population was made up of
> a sizeable number of children from Ulster. English vagrants and pickpockets
> were quite common as were various other Europeans. For the most part though,
> the poor Irish were seen as easy pickings for the colonial ruling class and
> treated accordingly.
St. Dominique ran under a different model. They mostly picked up slaves
from Africa, worked them to death, then bought new ones as necessary. There
were a fair number of American "indentured servants" whose legal status and
living conditions were essentially identical to those of a Black slave...
but I don't think this was common in St. Dominique or in other French
colonies.
> I've
> always wondered whether or how much of that creole Voodoo came across from
> Derry and Dublin as opposed to West Africa.
Instead of looking for that in Vodou, you should check out African-American
folk traditions like Hoodoo. There's a conglomeration of all sorts of
mystical beliefs in there, including Irish folk Catholicism and White Trash
"witchcraft." (Most of which, incidentally, bears a much greater
resemblance to folk Christianity than to anything Gardner pulled out of his
ass *ahem* discovered in Ms. Clutterbuck's notes).
>
> There are certain Voudon-like traditions (or I'm told there are) in the
> southern Brazilian states as well where Slaves from the Amazon meet up with
> Patagonian Celts I guess.
There are many Congo-derived traditions in Brazil, particularly in Bahia.
I've heard that Las Regla de Congo (Palo Mayombe) has some strong
similarities to Vodou, particularly to the Congo-based Petwo rites, but
don't know enough about Palo to say for sure. (I'm going to invite a Palero
of my acquaintance to a Vodou ceremony in Brooklyn some time and see what he
has to say).
> No disagreement there. Haiti was clearly an anomaly though, situated at the
> bloody end of the scale. In most parts of the Caribbean, people chose to get
> married and meld rather than butcher one another en masse. There are still
> towns full of blonde people in Cuba, and most of Haiti is as African as
> Ghana, but for the most part it's been more of a peaceful amalgamation.
One of the biggest influences on the Brazilian stuff is Alain Kardec; in
Brazil (and, I've gathered, in much of South America) Kardec is enormously
popular. Imagine a Kardecian Spiritualist leading the prayer which opens
the U.S. Congress: stuff like that happens regularly in Brazil.
> Victor
Kevin Filan
"Kevin Filan" <mrha...@excite.SPAMBGONE.com> wrote:
> Who are some of the other philosophers whom you are studying? I'd hazard a
> guess at
Levi-Strauss and Eliade. On the other hand, it's been almost fifteen years
since I saw the inside of a Philosophy class.
Must remember to proof before posting, must remember to proof before
posting...
Peace
Kevin Filan
Cat Asstrophy
> If you don't find the idea of a blind, mechanical universe disturbing, you
> haven't really thought about it enough. Thinking enough/too much was
> Kierkegaard's greatest gift; it was also his greatest failing
> I'd say that Kierkegaard was like Nietzsche or Dostoyevski; a brilliant
and utterly
> original thinker who gets pigeonholed in with the Existentialists because
of
> a few surface similarities.
Thank you, Kevin.
This is the most interesting thread on this NG in quite a while.
I'm just remembering this stuff from being a small child. When asked what
Existentialism was, my mother would tell people, in the simplest terms
possible, as it was way over most folks heads: It is hope in the face of no
hope. It is understanding that there is no meaning to life, and that you
have no purpose in life other than whatever you choose to make of your life.
There is no here-after, or reward, there is no god who has a plan for you.
If you can face this knowledge, and make something of yourself, THAT is your
purpose in life: what YOU decide you want to make of it.
Of course, I'm paraphrasing it, but that's the general idea. I can't
possibly begin to explain things the way she did, it was long ago.
I also remember her telling me when I had my "Existential Moment". It was
when I told her that if she didn't like the way I was vacuuming the living
room floor, she could do it herself. That was the moment I took control of
my own life. She kicked me in the butt. That's the only time she ever hit
me.
But thank you for reminding me of my "higher learning".
tim jordan
Please see inside text:
Well hope springs eternal.
> The doctrine of eternal progression is fascinating in itself. In fact, I
> think it's one of the grooviest parts of Mormon cosmology. In many ways it
> directly corresponds to some classical Gnostic ideals concerning equality
> between God and Man. (Man the Divine).
Yessir. I don't go much for the idea of the Mormon idea of eternal
progression. Buddy might think Joseph Smith was a MN perhaps? To be honest,
I've never really done much studying of Gnostic material so it'd be
ill-advised for me to comment (not that has ever stopped me before).
> Likewise there's a very interesting incorporation of Arian philosophy
where
> the trinity does not in fact exist, and Jesus Christ is seen as separate
> from God the father (translation for our "expert" Amina: the big G. and
J.C.
> ain't the same dude to Mormon's -- and neither is the holy spook. They're
> all different peeps. HTH.). It all again harkens back to classical thought
> before the purges. Whether it was conscious or accidental, it seems like
> Valentinian Gnosis suddenly sprang up on the American frontier.
The Arians were around in the 2nd Century C.E. weren't they? I don't know if
this similarity was in any way a conscious one being that Uncle Joe (with
apologies to the Stalinists in the newsgroup) wasn't too educated in the
ways of the early Christian Church. I always liked those spooky reading
glasses that allowed Joe to read the gold plates.
> >
> > As I got older, I saw the downside of the religion. Like Jews, they
> > consider themselves superior to the 'gentiles' (a term they freely use
> > in their 'us' vs. 'them' ideology) and are generally racist. Until
> > 1978 when the Supreme Court decided it might take BYU's 501(c)3 status
> > and put it in the shitter, Mormons believed that Negros, Hispanics,
> > Asians, and some Indians (not all, BTW) were the 'Children of Cain'
> > and had dark skin because they descended from earth's original
> > murderer and in the 'pre-existence' they had rebelled against God.
> >
>
> The idea of the Mormon "spirit world" or pre-existence is also quite
> interesting.
>
> Your analogy to Jews is also fascinating and quite accurate. Both groups
> became quite insular when they were being kicked around (nothing like
> persecution to promote paranoia). Parts of your "Doctrine And Covenants"
> read like a modern Talmud in fact.
Actually I stole the idea from a ms. that my uncle wrote recently on the
Mormon Diaspora from Utah to L.A. and points east. From what I've read of
the Talmud I like it a lot better than the D and C or the Pearl of Great
Price.
> I've often thought that had Joseph Smith not died in the gunbattle there
in
> Carthage, he may have spiked the punch Jim Jones style (or the nineteenth
> century equivalent). Here I digress.
Well in some ways that would've been better in my opinion.
>
> > Guess what happened? When the SC got close to yanking BYU's
> > non-profit status, the LSD (sic) profit (not so sic), Spencer Kimball
> > had a 'vision' that suddenly 'God' figured these colored people were
> > actually not as bad as originally thought and allowed them to become
> > full fledged members of the church. This is what got me started in
> > getting myself excommunicated.
>
> You have a unique perspective on this matter. When I was in school I did a
> bit of talking to various Mormons. They were all my age, though. When my
> generation lived through the 1978 "revelation" I and my peers were between
> three and nine years old.
Well at that time I was a bit older. I was losing my faith in my early
teens and finally progressed into becoming an atheist.
> I'm curious as to how this change affected the Mormon community? Was there
a
> large sense of herdlike obedience to the change? Or were there splinter
> groups and rebels in your immediate vicinity?
Sheep are always sheep -- they believe what they are told to believe.
> > I was inactive pretty much in the
> > church since my parents divorced when I was a strapping lad of six.
> > My mother joined the church to marry my father, but never really
> > bought into the whole LDS thing. My dad was the classic Jack Mormon
> > (one who's raised in the faith, but doesn't go to stake meetings
> > except for holidays with my grandmother who was devout).
>
> In many ways, Mormonism is as much an ethnicity as a religion to people I
> talk to. (Another parallel to Judaism in a weird way). In that regard, do
> you view your own "excommunication" as anything more than a severance to
the
> literal belief in the mythology?
Honestly, I got tired of the missionaries following me around like Typhoid
Mary. I was a bit disillusioned when a girl I dated (who was a devout
Mormon) wouldn't marry me because I wouldn't go on a mission and then attend
BYU.
> >
> >> Mormons are genuinely nice people, despite their predilection towards
> >> pushing their religion on the public. Jehovah's Witnesses usually
> >> send out
> > a
> >> hatchet-faced old ex-whore and her illegitimate offspring to hassle
> >> you on the porch, whereas Mormons have been decent looking younger
> >> people in business attire. (In my experience, anyway).
> >
> > Well Vic, Mormons are not too different from other people. They
> > populate the bell curve of personality, some are noble while a few are
> > assholes and most are somewhere in the middle. Mormons are typically a
> > bit better off financially then the unwashed masses due to the values
> > of hard work and capitalism
>
> Whoa there chief. Ever hear of _Orderville_ Utah? Brigham Young's own
little
> pre-bolshevik experiment in communism?
>
Actually, it was an experiment by the Young to get his followers to live
like the 1st Century Christians in the Acts of The Apostles. It didn't work
out too well as you know.
> (I wrote a paper on that town and the whole "United Order" philosophy in
> college. I'll post it someday if I run across it).
>
> I do know what you refer to, but I've always wanted to get hold of a
> Socialist/Communist Mormon and shoot the shit about such things. Sadly,
you
> are right about the modern capitalist aspect.
> > that are inculcated in its adherents from
> > an early age -- hence the white shirt and short sleeved attire of
> > Mormon 'Elders' (oddly the missionaries who are in their early
> > twenties). If you really want to fuck with an LDS missionary, tell
> > them you'll listen to their speech if you can touch their garments. If
> > you find a missionary that let's you do this say, "Pay Lay Ale" while
> > you touch the cloth -- it'll really confuse the hell out of them.
> >
>
> Well that's an amusing thought, Harry. You sure I should be touching the
> garments though? Shouldn't I bring my hands from upraised to 90 degrees to
> my side as I say it? >;-)
Yup, and don't forget the green Masonic Apron or the chef's hat either. (I
wonder what twisted, inaccurate crap Tani could spin with this info?) Some
of my more cynical relatives used to wonder if any one would notice if they
said, "Pay US NOW!"
Regards,
Harry
People's Commissar
fhn'ghh Yuggya
Ig'Xoth'estn
Vulgtumm Shagaa
Sung to the tune of Yo Aye Yo.
And that is proper R'lyehian.
Humor at it's best:
http://www.geocities.com/vadyanclique/eod.html
http://www.geocities.com/vadyanclique/stargate.html
http://www.geocities.com/vadyanclique/ooey-gooey.html
http://www.geocities.com/vadyanclique/vadyan_dagon.html
http://www.geocities.com/vadyanclique/phil-fish.html
Brought to you by the Flying Monkeys, yes indeed.
"Lupo LeBoucher" <i...@io.com> wrote in message
news:gcydnQW-Qpn...@news.io.com...
> In article <3df79710$0$137$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk>,
> - wolf - <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote:
> >"Lupo LeBoucher" <i...@io.com> wrote in message
> >news:K2Gdnd0J_MH...@news.io.com...
> >> Gee, I wonder if "the Call to Cthulhu" and the "Ceremony of the Nine
> >> Angles" are grammatically correct Yugothian? Maybee Mikey will pipe up,
> >> since it's supposedly his claim to fame and all that.
> >>
> >> Poodles, muh boy: sometimes you give new meaning to the words, "missing
> >> the concept."
> >
> >Explain how the rituals actualize Satanic ideology, then.
>
> *watches point fly past poodles, again*
>
> They don't, you fucking idiot. Satanic Rituals no more actualize
> Satanic ideology than "psychotherapy actualizes logical positivism." I
> suppose if you're an idiot who anthropologizes such things in worthless
> liberal arts courses, you might write essays on such things for your
> schoolteachers. If you actually knew something you'd realize the phrase is
> words strung together without meaning.
>
> So poodles, getting back to the point, why does it matter if LaVey can
> conjugate verbs in Latin when several of the other rituals in the book
> are in invented languages or nonsense words, hmmm? Maybee you can ask
> your "expert" girlfriend that one.
>
> -Lupo
> "Love is what happens to a man and a woman who don't know each other."
> -W. Somerset Maugham <i...@fnord.io.com>
>
People's Commissar
The USA is one of the most Christianized countries out there, on a par with
Ireland and Mexico. The Scandinavian countries fall very low on religious
belief - along with many of the former Soviet bloc countries. Sorry, no
references, but quite a bit was written on this and I'm sure your pal
Dawkins would be quick to point this out.
"Lupo LeBoucher" <i...@io.com> wrote in message
news:CZudnRUXZ-g...@news.io.com...
> In article <3df7ae66$0$183$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk>,
> Corax <ccc4...@vip.cybercity.nospam.dk> wrote:
> >
> >"Victor LeNettoyeurT" <exponent_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:YWVvbg==.d209cd1f77fbcf7efc004ae45d64f825@1039638944.cotse.net...
> >> "- wolf -" <wo...@blazingangles.com.nospam> wrote in
> >> news:3df79bf8$0$196$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk:
> >>
> >> > Unlike you, Corax has the advantage that this is her
> >> > field of study; your statements to her are as uninformed as one would
> >> > expect hers to be if she were to debate physics with you.
> >>
> >> Isn't it interesting that whenever you or Amina/Corax show up here you
> >make
> >> a huge production about what an "expert" she is in the field of
religion.
> >
> >I am not an expert, nor did Ole say I was - but it is not hard to know
more
> >than someone who never studied the subject.
>
> Apparently, it is not hard to know more than someone who asserts that they
> have studied the subject.
>
> > By virtue of my education, my
> >words simply carry more weight in the field of religion than Lupo's words
> >do.
>
> You've yet to show any evidence of having any education which would make
> your words worth a pair of foetid dingoes kidneys, toots. A couple of
> classes in the local community college don't mean a thing, even if you
> have done that much.
> All you've done thus far is make an assertion which is preposterously
> wrong in every possible way. That doesn't present any evidence, pro or
> con, that you may be a credentialed "expert" in "religious studies" of
> course; such an expert might be expected to be wrong most of the time.
>
> As for the very topic of "religious studies" -it's pretty widely
> recognized that most of the liberal arts are not remotely scientific in
> their worldviews, nor is credentialled "expert" status in such typically a
> sign of much intellectual authority in the matters they pertain to.
> http://www.aldaily.com/hangingjudge.htm
>
> -Lupo
> "One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that, no
> ordinary man could be such a fool." -George Orwell <i...@io.com>
Jason@Neskoreni!
Kevin said:
> I would dispute this, as would many Kierkegaard scholars. I'd say that
> Kierkegaard was like Nietzsche or Dostoyevski; a brilliant and utterly
> original thinker who gets pigeonholed in with the Existentialists because
of
> a few surface similarities.
Likewise, it's been a decade since I was in any non - area studies class.
Nietzsche is usually seen as being among the school of Kant, Hegel, and
Schopenhauer.
Except his early (Schopenhauer influence) stuff, he really only had the same
dialectic methodology.
Dostoevsky saw himself as a moral philosopher. A lot of russians I've talked
to see him as too quasi "individualist" for their taste.
Have you read Bulgakov by chance? ...... If you've read say Master and
almost anything by Dostoevsky, you'll see the difference in
what they and we might consider "existentialism. You are right, tho. None of
the 3 should be pigeonholed into "existentialism".
Kierkegaard was probably the most important moral philosopher of the last
150 years.
J@N
People's Commissar
health a guy (immunologist with creds ok) that wrote more textbooks on
THEOLOGY than on medicine - and he's not an ob/gyn. He's against well, you
can figure it out.
"Cat Asstrophy" <sata...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xVUJ9.3603$vz3.10...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Lupo LeBoucher <i...@io.com> wrote in message >
> > That's one of the reasons America was/is such a popular place for
> immigrants; nobody
> > gave a shit how you worshipped in this country, or if you didn't at all.
>
> Unfortunately, since the WTC, the Homeland Security, and our President
> Shrub, the above is no longer true.
>
> Find a sign that DOESN'T have "God Bless America" on it, and I'll kiss
your
> virtual ass.
>
>
>
>
>
>
People's Commissar
surely guess - it's the fat man who has nothing swimming in his "mind"
except ass, dick, balls, mouth, - oh, but he's "straight." - but see
inside.
"buddy" <bu...@here.com> wrote in message
news:qmtJ9.42669$lj.9...@read1.cgocable.net...
> > Well, I don't know that I agree with you here. I think most healthy
people
> > embrace the Satan archetype out of voluntary identification with some of
> > it's more accessible aspects. For example:
> >
>
> > Someone who spends years of his life licking the boot of an insane
woman,
> backing up her
> > nutty screeds on this newsgroup, furnishing the mentally and
> psychologically
> > defective with free computer equipment (so that she can propagate lies,
> > threats and hatred toward people she's never met), going on national
> > television and making a fool out of himself, etc. etc. ad infinitum:
If this refers to Corax - I doubt it. Note how they take Set A of
information and ASSUME it's "the truth" when it might be a ruse. Note how
they take Set B of information and go for it - even inventing fantasy and
then repeating it - and believing it. If I had done 1/10th of what they
accuse me of - my butt would be IN JAIL. Far from it. Head of ADL declared
THEM a hate cult after Gerber presented them with ALL of what he had on
them - all of it (not just the tip of the iceberg that shows up on here),
cops told me to shoot on sight if they come near me or my family since THEIR
intent was clear the entire time. They can try to switch that around, but
the police can SEE and TRACE the postings. So it's the other way around.
They DO threaten people; harass people and do things intended to cause real
harm to families. They have done this for years to every org or org founder
that disagreed with them. They are exactly what Christians think a "satanic
cult" is. They accuse others of doing it to them? They LIE. It's to seel
on the cos files. Their own words.
If the paragraph above refers to me, let's straighten out this way out of
proportion pile of bullshit. 1. Wolf did not know me for years. In fact,
in the sense that I know my friends, Wolf didn't know me at all. There are,
for instance, NO photos of me and Wolf partying. I party with my friends.
2. I do not post nutty screeds - serious articles are on SR website and
they are solid gold - which is the main reason they hate us so much. We
have something very dark, an entire tradition; and they can no longer USE IT
(they used to) to get members that they themselves regarded as "talent." 3.
They attacked us, emailed death threats, and did much other stuff that led
ME (not them) to go to the police. That's the bottom line there. They feel
they can make threats with impunity and then reverse it and pretend I
threatened anyone's life? Saying I'd "not throw their kids a life safer if
they were drowning" is not a death threat. What they emailed me WERE "I'll
kill you" emails, all handed to the cops and other such garbage; all given
to the police yet nothing can be done out of state like that except tell me
to shoot them on sight if they come near me. They are stalkers - plain and
simple. They are sexually demented people, obsessed to an extreme - proof
is that they never stop following me around on usenet; they try to poison
anything we do when we are NOT bothering them (and then they cry "you
threatened me" when one of us strikes them back!) I do not follow their
posts around. Exhibit number ONE. They follow me around like lunatics.
Outing the names and addreses and phone numbers of neighbors on this
newsgroup with obvious intent to cause harm - again, I gave it all to the
police. They didn't go to the police. I did. Fucking satan cult. Do I
hate these people? They don't freaking exist in my life - but lest they try
to come near me I will shoot them on sight - and that is what the POLICE
told me to do after seeing reams of their garbage. They email me all this
provocatory information - then accuse me of trying to harm Barton's kid?
What I specifically said, after Schlesinger threatned a xian minister who
came to the council with a complaint is that if they CONTINUE to fuck with
xians, the xians who have clout WILL fuck with their HPess and probably get
her kid taken from her. THAT is what I said. Why would I harm her or her
kid? That is what THEY would do, it is what they try to do when they post
neighbors on here when grandkids are visiting here. THEY do this.
http://www.geocities.com/bartonletters/ I already had her phone number
(it's crossed off on there). If I had ever wanted to do anything to her, I
could have easily done it. THEY WANTED me to do this - and that's obvious
as all get out.
They never quite catch on. I don't care about them, their stupid org. We
have our org and the Dark Tradition and that is ALL that matters. Why the
hell does this bother them so much? Do you know? They have made a monster
out of nothing. They are delusional, insane people, paranoid as hell. They
are incapable of seeing their own provocatory actions. Lest someone feed
you the blown out of proportion pack of lies - that's the bottom line. As
to their accusing one and everyone of being a sock that disagrees with THEM
(the collective them) (they are now accusing YOU of being Jason!) well,
sorry buster, but socks do not pose in pictures with me or fill pages of
family photo books that I do have or end up flmed on vcr partying. These
losers probably have no friends in life. They are garbage, shit - and
whatever else. They are a satan cult - simple as that, defined by Webster
as exactly what the Christians say they are.
I have NO idea what MN is. You are dealing with losers, people who do hate
each other profoundly. The one who really DID want me to "narc out" Barton
for who the fuck knows what reasons had his engagement to her best friend
destroyed bitterly. WHO HAD MOTIVE to want to hurt her? I sure the fuck
didn't. That person kept bothering me with that "did you get her addy yet?"
over and over. Well fucking shit - I never even phoned the woman up and I
HAD her number. Losers - and when I will NOT do their bidding, they turn it
around, claim I wanted to do this or that and become netstalking obsessed
lunatics. Exhibit: all over this newsgroup - them following me around like
abusive stalkers. Well, on usenet there is killfile. They are just
consuming their lives with this crusade. I think that sending her (mailing
it printed out since she's not even online) my trashings of the cos was hurt
enough. GO read her letters. She trusted me alright - and I tore her
freaking org favorites to shreads for the shit they pulled and handed the
rest that's not on cos files to Gerber to hand to the ADL - who ASKED for
it. Yeah, ASKED for it. Newflash: I GOT PAID. I'd have done it for free.
> > > -Wolf- bothers
> > > me because he's quite pretentious -- but delivers mostly bitchy
> > > comments to those who question the SR's or the Dysfunctional Durga
Here you can see where someone pretended to sincerely ask a question about a
cultural title that has NO meaning to them at all; and that is why they know
this term which means nothing to them. They lied, there is never any
sincerety in them, they are two-faced malice-filled klippoths - bottom line.
There is nothing dysfunctional about me - but there is definitely a lot
dysfunctional about a man with a TV show that consists of holding a dildoe
up for 30 minutes, whose mind (at his age, too) is filled with nothing but
images of dick, balls, mouth and ass but claims to be straight; who obsesses
about a stranger (me) and imagines he knows me. He doesn't get it - I let
him TALK, yessed him to death. Next he projects all this "you wanted this"
on me? I heh heh, simply fw'd his emails to others to save after hitting
the "delete" buttons. Clutter. The same for most of the obsessives on
here. The name of their game is sychophancy; they have no flame in them,
nothing - they are dead things wallowing in hell. Bottom line. They hate
us because we have Substance to present.
They slander Wolf by calling him "my" whatever. Sorry, he's not mine. In
their fantasy world, he is linked up with me or the SR. That's just in
their fantasy world - which they are free to dwell in like the lunatics they
are. I have nothing to do with him and barely knew him. He never even met
me. It's just more slander - like how they try to negate your existence by
now calling you a sock. Wolf might like the Tradition - but the Tradtition
and Tani are two distinct entities here; the Tradition prevails forever
whether I'm alive or not.
Exhibit one: they follow my every posting and according to others, TRY to
post to me despite being killfiled for months. Exhibit two, I do not follow
them around. Exhibit three, they slander the hell out of me and my family
on here - and try to negate the existence of my friends. Exhibit four -
they invent fantasies about me and they are obsessed - and dwelling on the
past which is, in all our opinions - irrelevant - past, gone, ancient
history.
None of the people who posted here in favor of me were socks - and I can
surely prove that. But that never matters on usenet. They repeat the same
lies - over and over. For them, that fantasy world becomes their reality.
If you want to see some of us that were willing to be on a website, see
www.satanicreds.says.it and scroll down to founders, under the heading
Kishites you can see the whole gang of us that for years had the Tradition.
The difference between me and my pals and them and their pals when they DO
manage to get a group photo from a party (wait, they usually have posed
pictures, not casual ones) is that we like each other and have known each
other for many years. They hate each other and two face each other all the
time. LIke when HP of one org asks me to hand over info from a favored
Priestess that she ALREADY KNEW - and for what reason? To check and see if
the Priestess had slack lips and talked? Probably. No other reason I can
think she'd ASK me to get this and hand it to her. Heh. Our pals are not
in posed pictures per se - they are casual and the frienships are genuine.
Note that Wolf is not in the gang. He never knew us except perhaps, some of
us by email or phone.
The problem with LaVey is that everything he did was based on his own self
loathing and desire for acceptence by the wasp mainstream, even if he had to
become Clark Ashton Smith's hilariously bogus character out of a story Smith
wrote (yeah, that's right, right down to the organ, the weird geomety, the
bs about how he got his house, all of it - right out of Smith's story). As
far as asking LaVey about women goes - may as well ask an anorexic about
food. He was a piss freak with a hang up on white pussy of the blonde
depigmented variety. Nothing to find out from that. The best of their
members, as someone recently pointed out, when admitting the failings of
their "satan endeavor" j ust rehashes the same fucking TIRED bs about what
anyone knows as social dynamics. Always harping on "herd conformity" and
other shit no one I know notices enough to even care about. And if the
writer of that latest piece wants to be FREE he can simply cut the leash
from the cos and go off on his own and LEARN something about his own social
dynamics. (No, he'd not be welcome in SR; he's too too trite and back there
FUSSING about "herd conformity." They want the "herd" to notice them -
that's their problem).
Best ignore it, wipe the filth from your feet and walk away. His
sychophants don't LET you walk away, they campaign against you with
obsessive netstalking - the type you see right here.
>
> Damned straight. But you are toying, and giving certain onlookers what
you
> perceive they would not protest to. Deep down you do not care or even
> really know. That comment is a sweeping generalization that contradicts
the
> original philosophy you indicated above. A transparent lie.
Ooooooo, you're good. Yes, if this is who I think it is - he does that a
lot. This is his idea of conning someone HA!! But then, it doesn't matter
if it's who I thik it is, they are all made of the same ripped up, shreaded
cloth.
Tani Jantsang
>
Jason@Neskoreni!
I have too many ppl killfiled to see what moron failed to notice that.
I would have to say buddy probably won the argument, tho.
Once the kids start whining about other people, project their sexuality, and
generally try to "flame" LOL ...... they have forfeited.
Jews and homosexuals seem to be their satan, that's when they started
crying.
J@N
buddy
Sorry, that people probably confused you with me. Did not mean to put you
into a precarious position.
"Jason@Neskoreni!" <ja...@neskoreni.ua> wrote in message
news:pAjK9.3933$MV5.3...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> buddy's on a canadian cable network.
>
> I have too many ppl killfiled to see what moron failed to notice that.
I think that most are not morons per se, but just to blind themselves - they
can't handle the ideal of searching for something higher than themselves -
"the truth". This prospect terrifies them. I stirred up a lot of painful
emotions here and personal attacks that I wouldn't wish upon anyone.
> I would have to say buddy probably won the argument, tho.
I won nothing Jason. Arguments with hurt people, make them more hurt or
hardens their hearts more, and makes them retreat to their bubble of
narcissistic delusions. They become more defensive, avoidant, and
scapegoating/projective and throw their pain of a possible realization of
their ignorance or imperfections upon their object of "attack" because they
are highly intolerant to pain.
I became week and fallen and took the posture of any reg here and got into
oneupmanship contests. Because their crass, vulgar, lieing, delusional and
bellicose natures abhor me.
I just reflected their essences back onto them.
I initially endeavoured to help people learn something about themselves,
perhaps painfully, and progress. But this may be too painful for people who
cannot acknowledge their imperfections and are terrified to do so. I bit
off more than I can chew. I am going to refrain from the "evil" vitriol
against others that they hold so dear as a perverse virtue. Maybe one day I
may have a positive effect.
A minor comment of idiot or moron every now and again, can be funny, and
people shouldn't take themselves too seriously. But put-downs go on to a
pathological extent here, a pathological collective behavioural trait in
this ng, which indicate pathological personality traits. In America, these
traits are overlooked.
> Once the kids start whining about other people, project their sexuality,
and
> generally try to "flame" LOL ...... they have forfeited.
I am not going to say I do not get a charge from winning an argument. But
at any hint or indication of that, a collective envy sets in. "you mess
with one symbiote, you mess with them all".
> Jews and homosexuals seem to be their satan, that's when they started
> crying.
?
> J@N
-6rass6alls6uddy
Jason@Neskoreni!
> Hi Jason
>
> Sorry, that people probably confused you with me. Did not mean to put
you
> into a precarious position.
No problem.
> "Jason@Neskoreni!" <ja...@neskoreni.ua> wrote in message
> news:pAjK9.3933$MV5.3...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > buddy's on a canadian cable network.
> >
> > I have too many ppl killfiled to see what moron failed to notice that.
>
> I think that most are not morons per se, but just to blind themselves -
they
> can't handle the ideal of searching for something higher than themselves -
> "the truth". This prospect terrifies them. I stirred up a lot of painful
> emotions here and personal attacks that I wouldn't wish upon anyone.
Probably not the ones you were arguing with. I was answering about some
anons, also.
> > I would have to say buddy probably won the argument, tho.
>
> I won nothing Jason. Arguments with hurt people, make them more hurt or
> hardens their hearts more, and makes them retreat to their bubble of
> narcissistic delusions. They become more defensive, avoidant, and
> scapegoating/projective and throw their pain of a possible realization of
> their ignorance or imperfections upon their object of "attack" because
they
> are highly intolerant to pain.
True. I was being a bit facetious. I did not see the majority of the debate.
> I became week and fallen and took the posture of any reg here and got into
> oneupmanship contests. Because their crass, vulgar, lieing, delusional
and
> bellicose natures abhor me.
> I just reflected their essences back onto them.
Haha I do it all the time. It is admittedly not the best indulgence for one
to engage in.
> I initially endeavoured to help people learn something about themselves,
> perhaps painfully, and progress. But this may be too painful for people
who
> cannot acknowledge their imperfections and are terrified to do so. I bit
> off more than I can chew. I am going to refrain from the "evil" vitriol
> against others that they hold so dear as a perverse virtue. Maybe one day
I
> may have a positive effect.
Good Luck.
> A minor comment of idiot or moron every now and again, can be funny, and
> people shouldn't take themselves too seriously. But put-downs go on to a
> pathological extent here, a pathological collective behavioural trait in
> this ng, which indicate pathological personality traits. In America,
these
> traits are overlooked.
Oh, I know. It gets boring hearing the same silly stuff for months on end,
tho.
We have some societal problems in the states that some seem to wan to deny
at all costs.
> > Once the kids start whining about other people, project their sexuality,
> and
> > generally try to "flame" LOL ...... they have forfeited.
>
> I am not going to say I do not get a charge from winning an argument. But
> at any hint or indication of that, a collective envy sets in. "you mess
> with one symbiote, you mess with them all".
LOL ... I am way too used to structured debates.
The rest referred to a separate argument. *snip*
J@N
Victor LeNettoyeur™
*snip*
>
>
> > I've
> > always wondered whether or how much of that creole Voodoo came across from
> > Derry and Dublin as opposed to West Africa.
>
> Instead of looking for that in Vodou, you should check out African-American
> folk traditions like Hoodoo.
Well, here I see my own mistake. I was assuming Vodou was a broad
designation that referred to the general folk religions of Africans in the
Western hemisphere! I didn't know there was this much variety.
There's a conglomeration of all sorts of
> mystical beliefs in there, including Irish folk Catholicism and White Trash
> "witchcraft." (Most of which, incidentally, bears a much greater
> resemblance to folk Christianity than to anything Gardner pulled out of his
> ass *ahem* discovered in Ms. Clutterbuck's notes).
This is where we get into the interesting part of all this (at least the
part that's interested me in the past). At some point the traditions of
Africans, Native Americans and Europeans are welded together. What we have
today seems to resemble not three separate traditions, but more of a
multifaceted scale with lots of gray area between the three extremes. Voodoo
dolls are inevitably sold along-side medicine bags and Elvis paintings on
black velvet in the hole-in-the-wall curio shops I've been to. (There's one
in Seattle's Pike Market last I checked that fits this description). When
one examines the underpinnings of all these philosophies, which seem to
originate in vastly different places among very different groups of people,
he discovers that nearly identical themes lie just below the surface.
>
> >
> > There are certain Voudon-like traditions (or I'm told there are) in the
> > southern Brazilian states as well where Slaves from the Amazon meet up with
> > Patagonian Celts I guess.
>
> There are many Congo-derived traditions in Brazil, particularly in Bahia.
> I've heard that Las Regla de Congo (Palo Mayombe) has some strong
> similarities to Vodou, particularly to the Congo-based Petwo rites, but
> don't know enough about Palo to say for sure. (I'm going to invite a Palero
> of my acquaintance to a Vodou ceremony in Brooklyn some time and see what he
> has to say).
That sounds great. Folk traditions are interesting.
As I heard it, in the southern Brazilian state of Rio Grande Do Sul, they
allow something of a public chicken sacrifice in the capital city park.
(Imagine how that would go over anywhere in this country with P.E.T.A. and
the A.L.F.). It sounded to me somewhat similar to the European-Cuban
traditions of Santeria and like that. Most uninformed people (like me)
assume that these rites all fall under the "Voodoo" umbrella, though I'm
coming to appreciate the broad variations.
Axolotl2
Victor LeNettoyeur wrote:
>
> Heya Axolotld00d,
>
> How goes? Please see below...
>
> Axolotl2 wrote:
>
> > Johnny Cat wrote:
> > >
> > > The Christmas tree is nothing more then an evolution of the Yule log.
> >
> > Once again John Shawspank proves that he doesn't know what he's talking
> about, unless of
> > course Martin Luther was engaged in some holiday season back engineering.
>
> I can't pretend to have any sort of expertise on the matter, but I thought
> John Shaw/GOD did a pretty good job of explaining the origins of the
> Christmas tree. Can you be specific as to where he was mistaken? I'm
> particularly unfamiliar with Martin Luther's role in it's inception. The
> Yule log tradition predated Protestantism by a good while.
>
> I've heard different variations on this theme depending upon the locale.
> Candles on pine trees symbolized the stars on the nights that the sun never
> rose (we're talking Northern Europe here). This supposedly predated Luther
> and Christianity by several hundred years. I can't be specific as to why
> this happened or any details; just one of them things I heard someplace and
> wondered about.
>
> in the nordic countries the sun, hung on the cross of the zodiac, set (died)
> for three days and was reborn after the solstice. Gives a whole new meaning
> to the Christ myth, don't it? ;-)
As my father would say "look it up". The Yule log and Christmas tree have different origins,
uses and symbology. While Martin Luther, or the myth there of, may indeed have borrowed the
Christmas tree from what may as well be the Druidic myth the Yule log has a more Nordic and
secular origin. Shaw made his assumption based only on the obvious, that both items are made
of wood and I hope that he will take the cue there and either light his head on fire on
December 21st or put the frayed end of a live electrical cord in his mouth on Christmas Eve.
> Perhaps Danish
> > "religious expert" Corax can help you out on this one.
>
> While by her own admission she finally came clean about her status, her post
> on Kierkegaard was quite interesting and thorough. Corax/Amina does have it
> in her to argue intelligently once in a while. I suppose I should learn from
> Kevin Filan which buttons to push in the event she removes me from her
> "ignorelist" in the future.
So Corax got one right for a change? It would have meant so much more if she hadn't first
made the rather pretentious point of letting everyone know that "by virtue of my education,
my words simply carry more weight in the field of religion..." Every few months or so John
Shaw gets one right too, that is if he can manage to cut and paste the information taken
from a web site.
Lisa
what he had on them - all of it (not just the tip of the iceberg that shows up
on here), cops told me to shoot on sight if they come near me or my family
since THEIR intent was clear the entire time.
They can try to switch that around, but the police can SEE and TRACE the
postings. >>
Ooooo. Spooky.
1. Who gives the proverbial flying fat frog's ass what the ADL thinks?
Certainly not me.... and I doubt I'm alone in that.
2. Who gives the proverbial etc, etc. about the police being able to "SEE" and
"TRACE" postings? No one out here is posting stuff along the lines of the "This
is
tragic/true news" post (along with the occasional death-threat) except you,
Phyllis.
3. Hey Phyl.... is your grandson still taking point on the Rantsang
Attack-Squad? Cool.
:Snippity-doo-dah....:::
<<2. I do not post nutty screeds - serious articles are on SR website and they
are solid gold - which is the main reason they hate us so much. >>
Phyllis, Phyllis Phyllis! No one out here "hates" you. You are viewed as an
amusing crackpot, nothing more. You only wish you were taken seriously enough
to be actually hated. That would be far preferable to having everyone fall out
of their chairs laughing every time you try to post something serious, and
using your unintentional one-liners as sig. files.... you can take anything but
being laughed at, can't you? That really burns you right down to the dermis.
<<Fucking satan cult. Do I hate these people? They don't freaking exist in my
life - but lest they try to come near me I will shoot them on sight - and that
is what the POLICE told me to do after seeing reams of their garbage. >>
What's the matter, Phyl? I thought the sharpshooting grandkid was going to
scrag us all on sight - has he not been keeping up with his target practice
here lately...? You mighty "TURANIANS!" feel a need to involve the police, when
you lot take the law into your own hands on a regular basis, to hear both you
and Jeffro Gerbler tell it...? Old age must be setting in.
And if you hate everyone on this NG so much, why are you still here?
<<They are delusional, insane people, paranoid as hell.>>
If we were, you wouldn't be nearly as upset as you are.
<<socks do not pose in pictures with me or fill pages of family photo books
that I do have or end up flmed on vcr partying. >>
Phyllis partying the night away on video.... now that's material worthy of
pay-per-view! I wonder if she's down at the local dance-club partying away with
the ex-Nazis in it?
:SNIIIIIIIIP::
<<They hate us because we have Substance to present.>>
And your "substance" is pretty amusing, too. Amusing to those of us just
casually reading, and just as amusing to actual scholars of the things you
write about. Why is it everyone who majors in Eastern studies thinks your
writings on Hindu religious practices/beliefs are wrong, Phyl? Are they all
devotees of the "SATAN CULT!" as well?
<<They slander Wolf by calling him "my" whatever. [...] I have nothing to do
with him and barely knew him. >>
Riiiiiiight.
<<None of the people who posted here in favor of me were socks - and I can
surely prove that. >>
Uh-huh....
<<The difference between me and my pals and them and their pals when they DO
manage to get a group photo from a party (wait, they usually have posed
pictures, not casual ones) is that we like each other and have known each other
for many years. >>
Posed photos: SUREST SIGN OF THE KLIPPOTH!
I guess no one except Phyl here can form a friendship or party with people they
know.... must be a Turanian thing.
<<They hate each other and two face each other all the time. >>
Is this anything like how you allege to have hated Harry Lime, Ryan, Victor and
myself ever since you first met us, yet went out of your way to cultivate a
relationship in each case? Would that fall under the category "two-faced"?
At least when Harry, Ryan, Victor and myself all got sick of your blather we
had the grace to cut you loose: had we not done that, you'd -still- be emailing
us all 20+ times a day about absolutely nothing.... you, who 'hated us on
sight.' "
Riiiiight.
<<Our pals are not in posed pictures per se - they are casual and the
frienships are genuine.>>
Posed photos: surest sign of a false friendship.
<<The problem with LaVey is that everything he did was based on his own self
loathing and desire for acceptence by the wasp mainstream, even if he had to
become Clark ::SNIP::>>
Ladies and gents, please hold onto your seats as the train abruptly switches
tracks...
<<He was a piss freak with a hang up on white pussy of the blonde depigmented
variety. Nothing to find out from that. >>
......I'm getting the -distinct- idea that LaVey turned Phyllis' amorous
advances back in the day down flat. I've been thinking this for a while now. It
all fits. "No fury like a woman scorned" and all that. He turned her down,
thereby dealing a deadly blow to her pride; enter revenge-campaign.
Someone else: <<But you are toying, and giving certain onlookers what you
perceive they would not protest to. Deep down you do not care or even really
know.>>
Ah, we all KNEW and we ALWAYS KNEW this, right? "I love you, Mommy! I'll always
love you no matter what those meanies say about you! You're my HERO!"
Now I suggest you go supervise the grandkid's target-practice, Phyl. Getting
offline for 15 minutes will do you a world of good.
L.
Axolotl2
Victor LeNettoyeur wrote:
>
> Heya Axolotld00d,
>
> How goes? Please see below...
>
> Axolotl2 wrote:
>
> > Johnny Cat wrote:
> > >
> > > The Christmas tree is nothing more then an evolution of the Yule log.
> >
> > Once again John Shawspank proves that he doesn't know what he's talking
> about, unless of
> > course Martin Luther was engaged in some holiday season back engineering.
>
> I can't pretend to have any sort of expertise on the matter, but I thought
> John Shaw/GOD did a pretty good job of explaining the origins of the
> Christmas tree. Can you be specific as to where he was mistaken? I'm
> particularly unfamiliar with Martin Luther's role in it's inception. The
> Yule log tradition predated Protestantism by a good while.
>
> I've heard different variations on this theme depending upon the locale.
> Candles on pine trees symbolized the stars on the nights that the sun never
> rose (we're talking Northern Europe here). This supposedly predated Luther
> and Christianity by several hundred years. I can't be specific as to why
> this happened or any details; just one of them things I heard someplace and
> wondered about.
>
> in the nordic countries the sun, hung on the cross of the zodiac, set (died)
> for three days and was reborn after the solstice. Gives a whole new meaning
> to the Christ myth, don't it? ;-)
As my father would say "look it up". The Yule log and Christmas tree have different cultural
origins, uses and symbology. While Martin Luther, or the myth there of, may indeed have
borrowed the Christmas tree from what may as well be the Druidic myth the Yule log has a
more Nordic and secular origin. Shaw made his assumption based only on the obvious, that
both items are made of wood and I hope that he will take the cue there and either light his
head on fire on December 21st or put the frayed end of a live electrical cord in his mouth
on Christmas Eve.
> Perhaps Danish
> > "religious expert" Corax can help you out on this one.
>
> While by her own admission she finally came clean about her status, her post
> on Kierkegaard was quite interesting and thorough. Corax/Amina does have it
> in her to argue intelligently once in a while. I suppose I should learn from
> Kevin Filan which buttons to push in the event she removes me from her
> "ignorelist" in the future.
So Corax got one right for a change? It would have meant so much more if she hadn't first
Lisa
whatever moniker he's going by this week::
<<I think that would be advisable. While you might truly believe that we all
suffer from some newly documented but dangerous psychological disorder, the
rest of us will take some convincing. >>
You know, I really really get sick of this tactic.
It's the SOS: someone decides they hate everyone out here, usually because in
some way or other, they got laughed-at. We're all delusional losers, we're
"terrorists," "netstalkers" (flaming someone constitutes "stalking," as we all
know and have always known!) "filthspewers", "mentally ill", "NOTHINGNESSES!!!"
(not usually spelt that well), "THANATOS!", "klippoths" "pawns of the COS!"
"dangerous, armed maniacs!" "on MEDS!",
serial killers, and just generally unlikeable people.
Now, when you find yourself amongst those whom you find unpleasant to be
around, what do you do?
I'll tell you what I do: I get the f*** out.
For instance, I generally am not real fond of Xtian dogma, and so you will
never find me at a Pentecostal revival meeting, as holyrolling xtians handle
snakes (poor snakes... I'm always rooting for the snakes in these scenarios)
and listening to people "speaking in tongues". Nor do I relish pulpit-thumping
leaders of the flock; this is not my scene, although interesting on an
anthropological level.
Do I stand around wasting my time, telling all and sundry how stupid they look
and sound, and exhorting the snakes to bite? (well, it's all about testing the
"healing power of Jesus" is it not? I say let's really test that.) Do I tell
them that I regard each and every one of them as literally insane?
No. I avoid the entire conundrum and never show up in the first place. If I
dislike people and their actions, I -avoid- them.
There are more than a few people here on alt.silly who need to do likewise; If
everyone here is such a deviant, why are these naysayers still here? And I ask
that in all seriousness.
<< If someone only read this part of your post, what do you think they will
think of you, not knowing you from Adam?>>
This is an excellent question for "Jason" to ask, especially considering his
behavior here lately. See thread "Turanians and the Lefties".
<< I was drinking that night and did a foolish thing, because I was
mischeivious and do have some MN myself. Just what the hell are you talking
about. >>
Well, knowing one has a problem is half the battle. If "Jason" is having
problems with schitzophrenia (by his own admission) and alcohol, perhaps his
time would be better spent in seeking the help he needs, rather than lingering
here with people he purports to dislike.
<< I hardly post anything in that time compared to the likes of Lupo, Filan,
Ygraine, etc. This is virtually their life.>>
And thank goodness these parties are not spamming us with the likes of the
stuff seen from "Jason." Ygraine has posted what?, once here in the last six
months; both Kevin and Lupo have drastically reduced their posts during the
same time. Meanwhile were we to go out to Google, we'd see at least five posts
a day regarding totally off topic stuff from "Jason" along with a few exchanges
with "Nomen Nescio". Hel-LO?!
There is something deeply wrong with this person.
L.
Jason@Neskoreni!
I am not buddy. buddy is on a canadian cable network.
I would appreciate not being referred to as buddy, thanks.
J@N
Jason@Neskoreni!
I am not buddy.
I would appreciate not being referred to as buddy, as I have no idea what he
is talking about.
buddy is on a canadian cable network, I am not.
J@N
Jason@Neskoreni!
On what basis did you think buddy was me?
a very simple search shows he's on a canadian cable network while I'm on an
american isp.
I have been emailed on this several times now, perhaps in the future you
will bother to check isps at the very least?
J@N