Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ
bal...@xeper.org
Title: Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ
Posting-Frequency: monthly, quarterly to soc.religion.paganism
Last-modified: 2001/06/03
Version: 1.2.5
URL: http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/baltsfaq.html
Copyright: (c) 1997-2001 Temple of Set
Maintainer: Balanone <bal...@xeper.org>
This is one man's FAQ document concerning the Temple of Set. Its
information is drawn from a number of resources, including electronic
discussions, hard copy correspondence, internal Temple of Set documents,
etc.
This FAQ is posted monthly to news.answers and alt.answers, and also to
alt.satanism, alt.pagan, alt.magick, and alt.magick.order. It's posted less
frequently to soc.religion.paganism, the Xepera-l mailing list, and other
appropriate forums. It can also be obtained from
ftp://ftp.xeper.org/pub/faqs/baltsfaq.txt. IMO the HTML version of this FAQ is
much more readable; it can be found at
http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/baltsfaq.html
This FAQ's answers are intentionally brief and concise, sometimes
excessively so, to keep this document's size down. More detailed
information is available in the companion document, "Balanone's Temple of
Set REF." That REF can be obtained from
ftp://ftp.xeper.org/pub/faqs/baltsref.txt. It also has a (more
readable) HTML version, found at http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/baltsref.html
Qualifications: Balanone has been an active member of the Temple of Set
since early 1976, and so is intimately familiar with Setian philosophy and
practice. While this document is just one person's statement, and not an
official statement from/by the organization, this person has the depth of
experience to be reasonably confident in his accuracy. Corrections,
additions, and differences of opinion from other members of the Temple of
Set are more than welcome, and within reason all such will be included in
this document.
Revision history: See "Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ/REF Changes", at
http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/baltsdif.html
Contents:
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Philosophy
2.1 Xeper
2.2 Initiation
2.3 Satanism
2.4 Left Hand Path
2.5 Metaphysics
2.6 Dogma vs Doctrine
3.0 Religion
3.1 The Temple of Set as a Religion
3.2 Set
3.3 The Gift of Set
4.0 Magic
4.1 Black Magic
4.2 Ritual Practices
4.3 Occult Studies
5.0 The Organization
5.1 Membership in the Temple
5.2 Relations with Other Organizations
5.3 Why the Temple of Set?
5.4 Our Reputation(s)
5.5 Pylons and Orders
5.6 The High Priest
6.0 Setians and Setianism
6.1 Activities
6.2 Setians
6.3 Why are we here?
6.4 Miscellaneous
7.0 Contact and Information
7.1 Formal and Official Contact
7.2 Informal Contact
7.3 Friendly and Neutral Others
7.4 Unfriendly Others
7.5 Getting More Information
7.6 Those Stories About Us
8.0 Miscellaneous
8.1 Miscellaneous Links
8.2 FAQ/REF Sources
>> 1.0 Introduction
The Temple of Set is probably best described as an initiatory magical order
of the Left Hand Path, a description which probably doesn't mean much to
those without occult backgrounds.
"Initiatory" means the ToS advocates self-advancement through a series of
levels of self-knowledge and similar attributes.
"Magical" means that the ToS openly works with magic (non-scientific cause
and effect), not stage magic.
"Left Hand Path" indicates that the path followed by Setians is one of
concentration and refinement of the self, leading toward more and more
individuality and more and more individualism, as opposed to the Right Hand
Path goals of growing toward some outwardly determined standard.
A slightly more detailed introduction can be found in the REF.
>> 2.0 Philosophy
2.1 Xeper
- Perhaps the best discussion of Xeper available online is Magus Don
Webb's, found at: http://www.xeper.org/pub/tos/xeper2.html
- Balanone: Setian Philosophy centers around the Egyptian concept of Xeper
(often spelled Khepher), personified by the Egyptian Neter (god?) Xepera
(Khephra), a concept that can be translated to "self improvement," or
perhaps "Be all you can be."
Though that statement above seems simple enough, the study and pursuit
of Xeper has proven complex and long, intriguing and challenging enough
to keep Setians occupied for a life time.
- Apr 28, 1996, Priest Roger Whitaker, Xepera-l:
Xeper describes a methodology for manifestation. You cannot separate
yourself from the force which motivates one to Xeper. It is ingrained
within the many and varied paths which lead to it. Xeper such as it is
results in a deeper recognition of Self consciousness, i.e., the
uniquely human ability to sense its separateness within the body even
while it resides within it. This heightened sense of Self Being, itself
the result of polaric constituents - its me, in this other thing called
a body - becomes a building block of a personal methodology based upon
knowledge, intuition, learning and change as a result of the preceding.
The results of Xeper are manifestations into the world of ideas, art,
science and culture. For the individual the results of Xeper become a
metaphysical departure point for developing a bond with the Prince of
Darkness by creating a matrix of linked ideas whose path leads towards
the Genesis of Self Being.
You'll find another comment or two concerning Xeper in the REF document.
2.2 Initiation
- What do those necklaces and medallions mean?
The Temple of Set is an initiatory organization, dedicated to the
initiation and growth of its members.
That dedication to initiation, to the philosophy of Xeper, and to Set,
is represented by our primary symbol, the Pentagram of Set (a point-down
pentagram within a circle). To help our members identify each other so
we can work together, and to help them identify which level of
initiation has been achieved by each other, we wear this symbol on
different colored medallions, normally worn on necklaces of some kind,
at formal gatherings.
There are six levels of initiation recognized within the Temple of Set,
each with its specific color medallion.
- The first degree member wears a white medallion. This is a period of
trial membership, in which the member begins to explore our
philosophies, our practices, and our society. The member can decide
whether our organization is one which will help the member's
personal growth, and if not he is welcome to leave at any time, with
our good wishes. Likewise, during this period we determine whether
the member will function well within our society, will benefit from
our activity, and will eventually be able to help others in the
organization with their personal growth. If not, then their
membership is terminated, hopefully with no hard feelings. We title
this degree "Setian," which is also the generic name for all of our
members. The term stands for all who pursue their self deification
while in contact with the philosophical and magical stream of the
Temple.
- The second degree wears a red medallion. This is a member who has
completed the trial membership and has been found to be compatible
with and a valued contributor to the Temple of Set, just as we have
been found to be useful to the member's own growth. More, through
hard work the individual has opened him- or herself to the forces of
Becoming within the body-soul complex. This is a place of great
excitement and achievement. We Recognize our Adepts by the quality
of their adventures and projects. This is where we differ form most
occult schools that would award degrees based on knowledge and
memory feats. These members are free to work with our philosophies
and to participate in our activities to the fullest. More members
are in the second degree than any other level of initiation. We
title this degree "Adept," declaring them able to pursue any and all
goals applicable to their personal growth.
- The third degree wears a black medallion. This is a member who not
only has shown all of the qualities of an advanced second degree
member, but who has also been chosen by Set to serve in his
priesthood. This member has demonstrated abilities in working with
and representing Set and the Temple of Set. We title this degree
"Priest." Another way of putting this: the Third Degree Setian has
become Resonate with the Work of Set. He or she is directly
empowered by Set and charged him to expand the Setian experience --
this includes everything form running the Temple, which belongs to
its Priesthood, to a variety of scholarly, artistic, or (obviously)
magical endeavors to increase the Setian mindscape. Third Degrees
can represent the Temple in most matters. If you have any questions
concerning the Temple of Set (the organization, our activities,
beliefs, or members), these members are the best qualified to answer
your questions.
- The fourth degree wears a blue medallion. The Fourth Degree Setian
is the founder of a school of thought in the Temple, which may
effect the general philosophical and magical actions of mankind as
well. These schools of thought are called Orders. Some such as the
Order of the Vampyre or the Order of the Trapezoid are well known
beyond the boundaries of the Temple walls, while others have lower
profiles. The job of the Fourth Degree is the discovery and
articulation of communicable methods of Initiation. The Orders bear
the same relationship to the Temple as departments do to a
University. They are places for the Adept to specialize in pursuit
of the specialized tools for their personal achievement.
- The fifth wears a purple medallion. The sixth wears a gold
medallion. The distinctions between these grades of initiation are
very meaningful within the Temple of Set, but for most purposes you
can consider them as variations upon the fourth degree.
Why do you turn the pentagram upside down?
or as fl...@tiac.net stated on alt.pagan on Jan 10, 1996, and I
responded:
ft> I know some satanists would like to THINK they are pagan, but if
this is the case, why the need to desacrate the Pentagram as they
did the Cross? I know the pentagram is not central to all pagan
beliefs, but there is still no need for this. All pagan faiths that
I know of respect the symbols of other religions.
Agreed. So why do you turn the holy and glorious Pentagram wrong side
up? It's a symbol of dynamic balance, resting actively on one point. Why
do you have to turn it over with its all-important balance point
pointing meaninglessly up into the air?
There is additional discussion of initiation and the Temple's degree system
in the REF document.
2.3 Satanism
Is the Temple of Set a Satanic organization?
The Temple of Set as an organization was founded in 1975 by Dr. Michael
Aquino, in San Francisco. Its initial membership came from the Church of
Satan (that infamous "Satanic" organization of the carny Anton LaVey),
composed of CoS members who felt there was something real and important
about the magic they were exploring, and felt that Anton LaVey's antics of
that year were in contradiction to their own experiences. The Temple of Set
has grown a lot in scope and maturity in those twenty years.
Because of this history, and because of the many antinomian pursuits
followed by Setians, many people will call the Temple of Set "Satanic."
Many Setians do, too, but not all.
"Satan" is a name given to the Prince of Darkness, just like "Set" is a
name given to the Prince of Darkness. However, "Set" is a name given by a
religion which found Setian principles attractive and noble, and which
honored the Prince of Darkness. "Satan" is a name given to the Prince of
Darkness by Christianity out of fear and revulsion. The Christian Satan is
a twisted bastardization of the true Prince of Darkness.
"Satanism" is a term used by many to describe the Left Hand Path in the
West. We are a proud part of the tradition of spiritual dissent, differing
philosophically from the Church of Satan. Their take on the Left Hand Path
is the Immanent Path wherein godhood is achieved by the worship of the
carnal ego with no possibility of personal immortality save in some vague
connection to the organic stream. We are followers of the Transcendental
path, wherein person immortality is achievable by a strengthening of the
idealized Self. In an increasingly post-Christian world, the term
"Satanism" will become irrelevant.
More discussion concerning the Temple of Set and Satanism can be found in
the REF document. You may also be interested in essays concerning the
Prince of Darkness provided by Balanone
(http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/pod.html) and "Concerning our Patron" by High
Priest Don Webb (http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/patron.html).
2.4 Left Hand Path
The Left Hand Path is the tradition of spiritual dissent. It is a process
of using the ideas and actions of the Seeker to create or realize an
immortal, individual, potent, and powerful essence that will survive death.
The Left Hand Path is the quest for personal immortality, won by hard
effort without grace of gods, even of our role model, Set.
2.5 Metaphysics
This section is found only in the REF document.
2.6 Dogma vs Doctrine
The Temple of Set has no dogma, but it does have teachings. We're sometimes
accused of having dogma because of these teachings.
The REF document includes some discussion detailing the distinction I see
between doctrine and dogma.
There is some disagreement on this issue, primarily I believe because
people use different definitions for dogma. For example, in reviewing a
draft of this FAQ, Magus Don Webb, the High Priest, suggested I erred in my
statement above:
DW> Actually the Temple of Set does have dogma:
DW> 1. Being and Becoming are Good.
DW> 2. Being and Becoming can be enhanced by consciously chosen
activities including Magic.
DW> 3. The Temple of Set, if properly maintained and used as a tool can
be used to obtain Being and Becoming.
DW> That's about it.
>> 3.0 Religion
3.1 The Temple of Set as a Religion
Is the Temple of Set a religion?
Yes, although belief in the religion is not required of I* or II* members.
See the REF document for some discussion why I consider the Temple of Set
to be a religion.
3.2 Set
Set is the most ancient name for the Prince of Darkness, given to the
Prince of Darkness in ancient (pre-dynastic) Egypt. Whether Set exists as
an independent metaphysical being, or whether he's a symbol for man's most
individualistic attributes, is a topic always under discussion somewhere in
the Temple of Set.
You may also be interested in essays concerning the Prince of Darkness
provided by Balanone (http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/pod.html) and
"Concerning our Patron" by High Priest Don Webb
(http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/patron.html).
3.3 The Gift of Set
The Gift of Set means so many different things depending upon whom you
speak to. To some it's the gift of Intelligence, to some it's
Consciousness, to some it's the ability to step back from the current
moment/place to see/think about what's happening. To some it's the ability
to work (or at least conceive of) magic. etc. The Gift of Set is whatever
happens to separate us (those with potential) from animals (those without
quite as much potential), which is one of the grey areas that haven't been
clarified very well (some of us not seeing very much difference between
humans and "higher" animals).
There is more discussion of the Gift of Set in the REF document.
>> 4.0 Magic
4.1 Black Magic
What is Black Magic? How does the Temple of Set teach it?
Black Magic is consciously-directed alteration of one's environment through
obscure natural (Lesser Black Magic) or non-natural (Medial Black Magic)
means, or apprehension of the Forms/Principles of the natural/non-natural
universe (Greater Black Magic). Black Magic inverts the formula of religion
from "Thy will be done!" to "My will be done!"
The Temple of Set teaches both theory and practice of LBM/MBM/GBM, along
with individual and social ethical considerations to which the Initiate
must be sensitive in order to use such magical knowledge creatively,
constructively, and responsibly. [Descriptions of "Black Magic" as
involving human or animal sacrifice, rape, or other illegal or
reprehensible practices are merely Judaeo/Christian propaganda, and have no
basis in truth whatever.]
4.2 Ritual Practices
Setian ritual practice is generally not discussed in public forums.
However, some specific questions seem to require answers.
- Do you sacrifice animals (or children)?
No. See the REF document for a more detailed discussion of this, and for
other questions/answers concerning our ritual practices.
4.3 Occult Studies
Discussion of other occult studies (such as Astrology, Thelema and
Crowley), are found in the REF document.
>> 5.0 The Organization
5.1 Membership in the Temple
Note: Most of these sections are explored in more depth in the REF
document.
- Exploration
Joining the Temple of Set is a serious decision. Anyone who is
attracted to the Temple of Set through the things you see and hear
should investigate thoroughly before applying for membership.
- Affiliation
Application to the Temple of Set may be made to the Executive Director
or to any Priest of Set. Information about this procedure is provided
in the introductory letter.
- Assuming you're approved for membership (the Executive Director has
indicated that the majority of applicants are denied), you as a I*
Setian you will receive 1) the current edition of the _Crystal
Tablet of Set_, which includes all of the basic philosophical,
magical, and initiatory material any Setian would need to begin and
accomplish his initiation to the II*, 2) a I* Pentagram of Set
medallion, and 3) a year's subscription to the _Scroll of Set_
newsletter.
- You will have two years in which to achieve the II*, using the
information and inspiration provided by the _Crystal Tablet_, by
correspondence and other contact with Setians, and through your own
work towards Initiation.
- Following from our choice to avoid all practices that would create a
barrier between us and our self-created divinity, the Setian can not
in good faith hold membership in any other religious organization
after he has become an Adept. Membership in organizations that
advocate illegal action are likewise incompatible with Setian
affiliation. One cannot be for one's own Xeper, and be working to
restrict the Xeper of another.
- The application and its approval.
Though some applications are approved and acted upon quickly, other
applications for membership in the Temple of Set seem to take a very
long time. Our "staff" are all volunteers, and their administrative
activities within the Temple of Set are given appropriate
priorities, *behind* personal initiation, family, and career.
Therefore, be prepared for some delay in the processing of your
application. If the delay seems overly long, it's always helpful to
send a friendly query to the Executive Director asking about its
status.
One applicant asked on Xepera-l: "I sent off my letter of
application about three weeks ago now- and I still haven't heard a
word. Any idea how long it takes to get a response?"
- Adept Foster answered:
Once you've submitted your letter of application, it can take
anywhere from one to three months before you hear anything. I
know it sucks to have to wait that long without knowing, but
these things take time- especially when you consider exactly HOW
BUSY the Temple's Executive Director is (and that being the E.D.
is a full time job, ON TOP of a normal, *paying* full time job-
and then add in some time for family, other official Temple
matters and their own personal Initiatory work!) All told, I'm
surprised it happens as quickly as it does.
Just consider this a lesson in patience, and enjoy the
anticipation. :)
- My answer was:
It's highly variable, depending on how busy our volunteer
Executive Director is, and how busy her staff is, and how much
difficulty she has finding an available Priest for the interview
process. Then the question becomes how busy that Priest is,
whether he has email capabilities, etc.
You can send a quick email to her at balf...@xeper.org and
verify that she at least received your letter of application.
- Lewis Cawthorne asked on Xepera-l, Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998,
Subject: TOS & Recognition
Not to put the cart before the horse, but I do have one minor
concern, how would an Initiate in a small town in North Carolina
with some resources at his disposal for traveling to other places
for contact with other Setians but probably without adequate
resources to be able to make it to a normal pylon meeting should
one be within a reasonable distance of his location (which there
probably isn't) ever manage to have enough contact with a Priest
of the temple to be reconized as an Adept?
From: "Koyote", Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998
(All of this is from the p.o.v. of a first degree Setian with
little face to face contact due to where I am and my job hours- I
work most on weekends.)
Recognition, you should remember, is just that- Recognition. The
work must be done by you. Communicating that can take many forms
other than direct F2F. Publishing articles in the various
newsletters, communicating with other Initiates via direct email,
phone conversations, and attending larger gatherings (which occur
in the continental US many times each year) are all adequate.
From: "fun fear", Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998,
As an isolated Setian, I had similiar concerns, but I must agree
with Koyote. The Internet is a wonderful tool for contacting
Priests and Priestesses, and as Koyote suggested, writing articles
for _The Scroll of Set_ is equally rewarding. Also, there are
several correspondence Pylons available.
Beyond this, I have realized that one should _embrace_ one's
isolation. Just look to Set as an example: the apotheosis of the
different and isolate! You have _two years_ to get Recognized --
plenty of time to explore, make contacts with the Priesthood, and,
if worthy, become Recognized. You don't need a group to hold your
hand to do it, I hope! Embrace the isolation, ebrace the Darkness!
From: Balanone <Bala...@geocities.com>, Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998
It's a challenge. That hypothetical Initiate would have to Work
at it -- corresponding with as many Setians as possible at the I*
and II* levels (for breadth of perspective) and with several
members of the Priesthood. He would have to take responsibility
for maintaining correspondences, for establishing new ones to
replace old ones that move on, and for demonstrating to the
Priesthood his level of knowledge, his activity and study, and
his advancement, along Setian lines.
It's a job. It's not easy. Magister L. was the only Setian in
Finland, and he had to work to overcome the difficulties inherent
in demonstrating his Xeper into the II*. Magister W. faced the
same challenges in Germany some years earlier. Magister K and
Magister A in the British Isles had it almost as bad, but at least
English was their native language (though they had to deal with
many curve balls tossed by our writing most Setian materials in
American English rather than British English).
It's not easy, as Priestess N, Adept B, Priest C, Adept D,
Magistra H, Priest R, Priest W, and several others can report
(several were the only Setians in their state, and a couple were
the only Setians in their country).
It's not easy, but it can be done, as these have shown. Only you
can tell whether you're up to the task.
From: Christopher Merwin, Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998
As a Temple Initiate from a small town in North Carolina I think
perhaps I can help you with some of your queries. Due to the
widespread distribution of Temple members many Pylons are
organized based around correspondence, with email and Pylon
newsletters as the primary form of communication. In fact, due to
the highly private and individualistic nature of most Setians this
is our prefered means of communication. ... The ability for you to
meet face to face with other Initiates is left completely up to
you and the other Initiates involved. The largest obstacle to
being a Setian in the Carolinas is the local attitudes toward
other non-christian religions, which any intelligent and sensitive
individual should be more than capable of handeling.
- Departure
You may choose to resign from the Temple of Set at any time for any
reason. The great majority of people who leave the Temple of Set do so
simply by not paying their annual dues, and letting their memberships
expire. Many others send a simple and courteous resignation letter to
the Executive Director or any Priest.
A few members are automatically expelled upon the completion of two
years of membership during which they did not achieve the II*. There are
surprisingly few of these to my mind, probably because the Executive
Director and Priesthood do such a good job of screening applicants.
Fewer members resign because they encounter something within the Temple
of Set which they don't like, and fewer still are expelled because they
prove to be incompatible with Setian philosophy or life.
- Rejoining
Despite the claims of a few who state otherwise, the Temple of Set does
not pursue those who leave the Temple of Set. Whether that separation
was friendly, unfriendly, or automatic and impersonal, we feel anyone
and everyone should be allowed to go their own way, as long as they
don't interfere with our Xeper or the organization.
A few people who leave the Temple of Set do apply to rejoin the Temple.
Setians who have left the Temple of their own accord may be allowed to
rejoin on a case-by-case basis. The Temple is not designed as a
revolving door, but we do realize that may not have entered the Temple
at a time conducive to their development. Those that left impersonally
or on an amicable basis are usually welcomed back without hesitation.
Those who caused problems during their earlier membership or after their
departure are carefully examined before they are welcomed back into the
Temple of Set.
- How long does the application process to the ToS usually take?
The application process time is highly variable, depending strongly on
- whether there are any delays in the mail (especially for overseas
applicants)
- the time availability of our volunteer staff (expect longer delays
during conclaves and gatherings)
- whether your application is sponsored by a member of the Priesthood
(which generally speeds up the process greatly)
- whether there is a local Priest readily available to contact you for
an interview
- whether there are copies of the Crystal Tablet available to be
mailed out immediately or whether they need to be printed first
- whether you are accepted or rejected (rejections tend to process
faster than acceptances)
Though some membership applications are processed in as little as two
weeks, it's not uncommon for incidental delays to extend the process to
two months. If you are concerned about the delay, you may send a polite
email or postal mail query to the Executive Director, who should be able
to tell you how far the application process has gone.
As James F Foster wrote on Xepera-l:
General rule of thumb- before complaining about something, ask
yourself: "What am I doing to fix it?" If you aren't doing much on
your behalf, why would anyone else?
Second general rule of thumb: Before complaining about someone else's
(lack of) performance, ask if there's a problem with the paperwork and
if there's anything you can do to help.
5.2 Relations with Other Organizations
By its bylaws, the Temple of Set as an organization can have no formal
relationships or ties with any other organization. Individual Setians,
however, can work with or have dealings with other organizations and its
members. There are two limitations: 1) an Adept II* of the Temple of Set
cannot also be a member of another religious organization, and 2) no Setian
may be a member of an organization which condones or takes part in the
violation of society's laws to the detriment of society.
That first limitation has often been a subject for discussion by people who
don't understand it or who want clarification. One clarification I posted
to alt.pagan in 1996 was,
"The Temple of Set wouldn't care if a Setian chooses to participate in a
Buddhist retreat, an Indian sweat lodge, a Thelemic Gnostic Mass, a
Passover Seder, a Pagan circle, or whatever. Part of being an Adept
Magician is being able to see and mesh with whatever magic is taking place,
understanding the causes of the ceremony and participating in those causes
as appropriate to our own Will.
"However, if someone claimed to seriously believe in the wheel of karma,
and that Xeper is valueless because until we can learn to avoid all
participation in this world we're doomed to ride that wheel cycle after
cycle, then yes, that religious belief would be opposed to the Setian
principles of Xeper, and that person would not be able to remain a member
of the Temple of Set. The two philosophies are simply incompatible."
The REF document includes sections which examine our history regarding
specific other organizations.
5.3 Why the Temple of Set?
The REF document examines the question "What does the Temple of Set have to
offer?"
5.4 Our Reputation(s)
Lupo the Butcher, in his "alt.satanism FAQ file", states/stated: "The most
vocal of groups which border upon Satanism, is the Temple of Set of Michael
Aquino and friends, which splintered away from the Church of Satan in a
disagreement over monetary policy. They have a number of nasty habits,
including the public publishing of names, addresses and workplaces of
former members as a harassment tactic, disinformation regarding Satanic and
occult groups, including their own, and a good deal of "we are the one true
way" posturing."
See the section on Satanism for a summary of the schism with the Church of
Satan.
We do not normally publish the name, addresses, or any other information
concerning former members. We do not harass former members. Thousands of
exmembers have left the Temple of Set for many different reasons, without
any activity such as Lupo complains about.
See the REF document for more information.
5.5 Pylons and Orders
5.5.1 Pylons of the Temple of Set
Setians who live in the same area sometimes organize a local pylon in which
they can meet together regularly for discussions, study, ritual work, and
other activities. See http://www.xeper.org/pub/tos/pylons/pylons.html for a
good discussion of local pylons within the Temple of Set.
In addition to local pylons, there are correspondence pylons which support
the Xeper of Setians who wish to participate in group discussions and
activities by correspondence.
5.5.2 Orders of the Temple of Set
IV* Setians, Masters of the Temple, may found Orders within the Temple of
Set. If you were to think of the Temple of Set as a college of higher
learning, the Orders could be seen as departments within the school, each
concentrating on specific flavors of exploration. They are places for the
Adept to specialize in pursuit of the specialized tools for their personal
achievement. Some Orders, like the Order of the Vampyre or the Order of the
Trapezoid, are well known beyond the boundaries of the Temple walls, while
others have lower profiles.
The REF document includes more information, specifically concerning the
Order of the Trapezoid.
5.6 The High Priest
- The High Priest of the Temple of Set at this time is Magus Don Webb.
- The High Priest is chosen by the Chairman of the Council of Nine, and
serves indefinitely until he vacates the position or is removed from
office by the Chairman.
- The High Priest serves as the President of the corporation.
See the REF document for more information concerning the High Priest of
Set.
>> 6.0 Setians and Setianism
"Setian" is the generic term which applies to each member of the Temple of
Set. "Setians" is the term which applies to two or more members, and to the
entire membership together.
"Setianism" is a term which can be applied to the Setian philosophy, the
Setian religion, and/or the Setian way of life. Some (many?) Setians prefer
the terms "Setian philosophy," "Setian religion," and "Setian way of life"
over the term "Setianism." I find "Setianism" a convenient term to use when
I am referring specifically to the Setian way of life, or to any
combination of these ideas.
6.1 Activities
What do Setians do? This topic is covered in the REF document.
6.2 Setians
6.2.1 Specific Setians
- Executive Director -- can be contacted through the Temple's postal
address, or through email balf...@xeper.org).
- High Priest -- Magus Don Webb can be contacted through the Temple's
postal address, or through email (balf...@xeper.org).
- Dr. Michael Aquino -- the founder of the Temple of Set can be contacted
through the Temple's postal address or through email
(balfaq....@xeper.org).
- Balanone -- this long-time member (and author of this document) can be
contacted through the Temple's postal address or through email
(bal...@xeper.org).
One frequently asked question is why Balanone signs his email and posts
with "PP" below his name. As stated in April, 1993 on the Base of Set
echo and many other times, "That's as close as I can get with this
keyboard to the Egyptian hieroglyph for Shuti (the double Maat feather),
symbolizing my personal dedication to Balance."
- A few others are mentioned in the REF document.
6.2.2 Questions about Setians
Are Setians Pagans? That's a question which depends heavily upon your
definition of "pagan." See the REF document for this discussion.
6.2.3 -- Imposters
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then how should you look at
people who claim to be members of the Temple of Set and aren't? If you
encounter someone online (or offline) who claims to be Setian, how do you know
if they really are?
Our High Priest, Magus Don Webb, offers an excellent answer in his essay "How
to Spot a Setian" (http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/spot.html). My personal
answer is less meaningful, but they're techniques you might find useful.
* All members of the Temple of Set can be identified physically by their
colored cloisonne point-down medallion, and by their membership card (with
expiration date). If you have physical contact with someone who claims to be
Setian but who can't show you the membership card or medallion, that person
is not a member.
June 2001: Recently we've seen a couple of medallions being auctioned on
Ebay. If someone has our medallion, that is not proof they are currently a
member, and maybe not proof they ever were. But if they do not have a
medallion, then they aren't a current member.
* All online members of the Priesthood have a xeper.org email address.
(Example: Priest Thomas White's email address within our domain is
twh...@xeper.org) Anyone claiming online to be a member of the Priesthood
should be able to supply their na...@xeper.org or al...@xeper.org email
address, and should be able to respond to any email sent to that address.
Anyone online who cannot give you an email address @xeper.org, or who cannot
answer mail sent to that address, is not a member of the Priesthood.
* The Executive Director's staff will confirm the membership of any Setian who
asks to have that membership confirmed. The member should send the email
from their email address of record to con...@xeper.org -- this email will
be validated, and the confirmation will be sent to any email address
desired. Any person claiming to be a member online but not willing or able
to provide this confirmation is not a member.
While the Temple of Set and its members normally will not reveal, confirm, or
deny anyone's present or past membership in the Temple of Set, there are
exceptions:
* If members indicate it's OK, such as through the request method above, we'll
confirm their membership.
* Some members are very open and public about their membership. We'll confirm
those members' status.
* People who publicly claim to be members and aren't (in our view) are claiming
to be part of that second group. We will therefore provide the information
that such people are not members.
There have been a few people who fall into that last group, as identified by
members of our Priesthood. These include:
* Rave...@aol.com -- I am told he has claimed to be the High Priest of the
Temple, and that he offers to sell the _Crystal Tablet_. The High Priest of
the Temple of Set is Don Webb. No member of the Temple may sell their Tablet.
(Past members may sell the copy they received from us -- it's their property.
However, they can sell only that one copy -- they are not permitted to make
additional copies for sale.)
* Rever...@aol.com -- I am told he has claimed to be a IV* member of the
Temple of Set. He is not a member.
* Lilithd...@aol.com and/or lili...@aol.com -- I am told she claims to be
a former member. She is not.
* magussa...@aol.com -- I am told he claims to be a member of the
Priesthood in "German Chamber" and claims as well that
lilithd...@aol.com/lili...@aol.com is actually Lilith Aquino. He is not
a member. There is no "German Chamber." Lilith Aquino does not use either of
those two aliases on AOL.
* Xeper87...@aol.com -- While this person has not yet claimed to be a
member of the Temple of Set, he apparently has proclaimed himself the Magus
of Xem. Xem is an Aeonic Word within the Aeon of Set, and the Magus of Xem
was Magus Ronald K. Barrett. This is not Magus Barrett, and this person has
no membership nor recognition within the Temple of Set.
Finally, on reading Magus Webb's "How to Spot a Setian", one Adept mentioned,
Along those lines, I have encountered those who claim that they have been
approached by a Setian, which tried to "recruit" them. I find this very
funny. This right here shows that they have no idea what they are talking
about. I guess it makes them feel good to tell others that such a wonderful
organization as ours was wanting them to be a member. Anyone who really
knows anything about the Temple would know that does not go on.
I've asked a few, "and why would they want you?" Maybe not the polite thing
to say, but I can only laugh at these people.
The Temple of Set does not recruit. Individual members who feel that their
friends might benefit from membership might mention this to their friends, but
we do not ever try to recruit anyone, and don't even approach those people who
have no ties of friendship to us.
6.3 Why are we here?
Here" may be any digital forum -- you may be reading this on a web site, a
newsgroup, or FTP archive. I've tried to generalize the answer to apply to
most situations. For that matter, "here" may also apply to Pagan
gatherings, meetings in hotels, new age fairs, etc. These questions are
examined in the REF document.
6.4 Miscellaneous
There isn't much in this section, and it all resides in the REF document at
this time.
>> 7.0 Contact and Information
7.1 Formal and Official Contact
- Postal Address: Temple of Set, P. O. Box 470307, San Francisco, CA 94147
- Electronic Mail: At this time, you may send email to the Executive
Director c/o balf...@xeper.org
- The Priesthood of Set: To contact a member of the Priesthood, send your
request by postal mail to the Executive Director, who will forward it to
an appropriate member of the Priesthood. (That member of the Priesthood
may not indulge in electronic mail capabilities, so postal mail is
usually a requirement here.)
- Copyrighted material
Almost all of the Temple of Set's internal documents are copyrighted and
intended for internal distribution only. We do release some material for
public consumption from time to time, but other material is not
released. We have problems from time to time with people copying or
publishing our copyrighted material. We'd appreciate anyone and everyone
who helps us maintain our intellectual property rights.
See the REF document for comments concerning the _Book of Coming Forth
by Night_, _Crystal Tablet of Set_, and other publications.
7.2 Informal Contact
- Electronic Mail mailing list(s)
Xepera-l <http://www.xeper.org/pub/tos/archives/xepera.html> is the
only public mailing list hosted by Setians. Moderation is minimal,
topics can be anything of interest to Setians, and participation is
open to all who are not openly hostile to the Temple or to Setians.
Visit its informational web page for subscription information.
- Internet newsgroups
- alt.satanism
alt.satanism is a newsgroup for discussions of satanic philosophy,
religion, organizations, activities, etc. Most Setians avoid the
newsgroup because of the high level of juvenile behavior that we run
into there. However, there are a few Setians who can be contacted
through that newsgroup.
- alt.pagan
alt.pagan attracts several Setians who belong to that community. We
prefer to avoid discussing simply Setian philosophy and religion or
Satanism in alt.pagan, since those are more appropriate to
alt.satanism, but the relationships between Setian philosophy and
religion and other Pagan philosophies and religions are on-topic and
suitable for that newsgroup.
- soc.religion.paganism
soc.religion.paganism is a well-moderated newsgroup in which the
same topics can readily be discussed. There are probably fewer
Setians on this newsgroup than on the other two, but there should be
enough visiting soc.religion.paganism to hold a meaningful
discussion when necessary.
- FIDO/PODS echoes
The Setian Discussions echo (tagname: SET, and previously named "Base
of Set" was the only FTN (Fido Technology Network) echo hosted by
Setians concerning Setian philosophy or the Temple of Set. Moderation
was minimal, and topics could be anything of interest to Setians.
Participation was open to all who were not openly hostile to the Temple
or to Setians. This echo was carried on the FIDO North America
backbone, and by most major hubs within PODS. It was carried in
Australia by both FIDO and PODS, and in Germany (and perhaps other
areas of Europe) by PODS. Unfortunately that echo closed down in 1999,
and is no longer operational.
- World Wide Web sites and pages
- The Temple of Set's "official" World Wide Web site is
http://www.xeper.org/pub/tos/index.html; most sites dealing with the
Temple of Set can be found through links from this site.
- The Order of the Trapezoid maintains its own web site at
http://www.trapezoid.org/
- FIDO/PODS bulletin board systems: There used to be quite a few bulletin
board systems owned and run by Setians, but it seems that all have them
have disbanded or gone to mail-only operations. We also used to host a
Setian Discussions echo, as part of the FIDO and PODS networks. (PODS
is dedicated to Pagan activities and discussions.) That echo is no
longer operational.
7.3 Friendly and Neutral Others
Though I've often quoted from others' responses to frequently asked
questions, still this document is just one person's compilation concerning
the Temple of Set. Anyone who needs a more comprehensive view should
contact one or more of the other Setians (above, or better through
Xepera-l), and perhaps one or more people who aren't Setian. A few people
who are active online, whose independent views concerning the Temple of Set
at this time appear to be informed and reasonable, are listed in the REF
document. Please note that neither I nor the Temple of Set have much
influence over nor agree with everything these people say.
7.4 Unfriendly Others
The REF document identifies a few people whose messages, documents, or
web pages you're likely to run into on the Internet, and who are biased
against the Temple of Set for a variety of reasons.
7.5 Getting More Information
- General Information Letter
The current General Information letter (including membership information
and policies) is available upon request. Write to: Executive Director,
Temple of Set, Post Office Box 470307, San Francisco, CA 94147, USA. Or
provide a *postal* - not E-mail - mailing address to: balf...@xeper.org
There are copies of that letter floating around cyberspace, available on
various FTP sites and on BBSs. Unfortunately, most of them are out of
date, since the introductory letter is updated semi-regularly, and the
files on these unrelated sites aren't. The primary site known and
guaranteed to maintain a current copy is the WWW site maintained by
a Priest of Set, http://www.xeper.org.
- Computerized archives
Over the years, a number of other files pertaining to the Temple of Set
were made available. These were generally intended for limited
distribution, but over time were archived on various Internet and FTN
sites along with material /about/ the Temple of Set which did not
originate /from/ the Temple of Set. Many of these files contain dated
information; the accuracy and authenticity of these is doubtful. In
future revisions of this document, comments about these files may be
added (if you bring the need for same to our attention).
- However, be warned that a lot of files of questionable value are
floating around the 'net. Check the source for each document, and if
you have questions about its value, ask about it on the Xepera-l
mailing list. The REF document discusses at least one such example
of this.
- Archives hosted by Setians
- ftp://ftp.xeper.org
Reference: mailto://webm...@xeper.org
Note: This is the only FTP site both managed by a Priest of
the Temple of Set and dedicated to the Temple of Set at this
time to our knowledge. The reliability of other FTP sites
will be lower -- they will not be as accurate nor current.
As other Setian sites are identified they will be listed at
http://www.xeper.org
- Other FTP sites
- FTP://ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/religion/satanism/ToS
10/1997: the most recent files found were dated 1994.
9/1999: The site URL has changed (capitalization only),
and the most recent files at this time are dated 1996.
It does have a 1994 copy of the Temple's reading list.
- FTP://nic.funet.fi/pub/doc/religion/occult/magick/thelema/ToS
(this is the original slopoke tree moved to funet)
- Obsolete FTP links (no longer useful)
- FTP://etext.archive.umich.edu/pub/Quartz/occult/set
Reference: mailto://f...@etext.archive.umich.edu (Paul Southworth)
October, 1997: I could not find the Quartz/occult directory
November, 1997: It appears that all files dealing with the ToS have
been removed from this site because of their age.
7.6 Those Stories About Us
Despite our general policy of keeping a low profile, sometimes rumors about
us do get spread, generally by people who dislike or fear us for some
reason (perhaps because so little is known about us, or simply because of
our non-Christian belief system, or for other reasons). If anyone (perhaps
someone else at a location of one of our formal meetings, or someone you
meet on the 'net, or some other acquaintance) should ask you any of the
following questions, it's good to be able to give them the correct answers.
7.6.1 A Cult?
"Is this a cult?" No. Some people may define "cult" to mean any
non-Christian religion, and then yes, we don't believe in the Christian
religion. But most people reserve the word "cult" to you mean something
dangerous to society or its members, and no, we're not a cult since we are
beneficial to our members, and we're not anti-social by any means.
The REF document contains more discussion on this topic.
7.6.2 Satanists?
"Are you Satanists?" A lot of people say yes, and a lot of people say no. A
lot of Setians say yes, and a lot of Setians say no. See the REF document
for this discussion.
7.6.3 Naziism and Fascism
Are you fascists? Nazis? No. See http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/nazitrap.html
or http://www.necronomi.com/magic/satanism/fascist.set.txt for one member's
discussion of this question [as of July 6, 1998, the necronomi.com copy was
not found online].
7.6.4 Presidio
What about the Presidio stories?
On August 14, 1987 CE the San Francisco home of Lilith and Dr. Aquino was
raided by San Francisco Police officer Glen Pamfiloff on a search warrant
obtained as a consequence of the accusations of Army chaplain Lawrence
Adams-Thompson that the Aquinos had kidnapped and sexually abused his
stepdaughter as part of the Presidio of San Francisco day-care witch-hunt.
These claims were investigated in depth by the SFPD, the FBI, and the US
Army CID. No charges were ever made in any jurisdiction, and the evidence
has shown Dr. Aquino and Lilith Aquino to be innocent of any such activity.
Full details can be read in the alt.pagan post, dated Sun Jun 02, 22:14,
From : scr...@gladstone.uoregon.edu, Subj : Re: Curio courts the CAW.
7.6.5 Other Occultists
- Why should Wiccans, Druids, and other types of Pagans defend those who
call themselves "Satanists" against the Christian majority?
I've never understood why Wiccans, Druids, and others might think we
want their defending. There are ethical and social reasons to do it, and
that's why Setians generally defend other Pagans against discrimination
and other forms of attack, but Satanists don't need others to defend
them -- Satanists would be happy if other Pagans would simply stop
buying Christianity's lies and attacking the Satanists as if allied with
Christianity's blind bigots.
There's a little more discussion of this in the REF document.
- "Are you witches?" That depends upon your definition of a "witch." We do
explore activities which many people would call "magic," such as
telepathy, divination, and methods of strengthening our souls and
spirits through mental and spiritual discipline. However, modern witches
usually believe that their magical powers come from one or more gods or
goddesses, and many Christians believe these powers come from the devil.
We don't believe in any such gods or goddesses or devils. Most modern
witches claim we are not witches.
- Perhaps the most important point to know and remember about us is that
we believe a primary requirement of self-improvement and individual
Xeper is to be honorable and ethical. We do not tolerate any illegal
activity. We do not tolerate any illegal drugs, and we frown upon
excessive use of legal substances like tobacco and alcohol. We believe
in individual freedoms, and respect everyone else's desire to live life
the way they want to, asking in exchange only the freedom to be able to
live life the way we want to.
We do enjoy companionship and camaraderie. At our various conclaves,
many of us will gather in private rooms, local restaurants, and the
hotel lobby, and we'll just talk for hours, about almost anything. Some
of our people will even sometimes forget to go to sleep, being so
wrapped up in talking to people they see only once or twice a year.
We enjoy life, we enjoy growth, and we enjoy each other. If you spend
time with Setians, you'll find that most of us smile a lot, honest
smiles, reflecting the enjoyment we find in life.
- What about Magda Graham? This is discussed in the REF document.
7.6.6 The Setian Illuminati
These topics are explored in the REF document.
>> 8.0 Miscellaneous
8.1 Miscellaneous Links
- FBI Special Agent Kenneth Lanning's /Investigator's Guide to Allegations
of "Ritual" Child Abuse/:
http://www.necronomi.com/magic/satanism/FBI-ritual-abuse-report.txt and
http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/lanning.9201.html [as of July 6, 1998, the
necronomi.com copy was not found online]
- The Temple of Set's Reading List from the Crystal Tablet of Set (an old
version, but better than nothing):
ftp://ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/religion/satanism/ToS/Reading_list/
8.2 FAQ/REF Sources
- Setian Discussions echo FAQ. author: Balanone, version: Dec 30, 1996
- "More About the Temple of Set" web page. author: Balanone, version: Nov
25, 1996
- The alt.satanism FAQ file. author/editor: Lupo the Butcher, Version 2.3,
January 7, 1996
- Temple of Set alt.satanism FAQ. author: Dr. Michael Aquino, version: Oct
10, 1995
- Misc email from Xepera-l mailing list
- Misc email from newsgroups and echos
Mr. Scratch
> Archive-name: religions/temple-of-set
> Title: Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ
> Posting-Frequency: monthly, quarterly to soc.religion.paganism
> Last-modified: 2001/06/03
> Version: 1.2.5
> URL: http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/baltsfaq.html
> Copyright: (c) 1997-2001 Temple of Set
> Maintainer: Balanone <bal...@xeper.org>
> 5.4 Our Reputation(s)
>
> Lupo the Butcher, in his "alt.satanism FAQ file", states/stated: "The
> most vocal of groups which border upon Satanism, is the Temple of Set
> of Michael Aquino and friends, which splintered away from the Church
> of Satan in a disagreement over monetary policy. They have a number of
> nasty habits, including the public publishing of names, addresses and
> workplaces of former members as a harassment tactic, disinformation
> regarding Satanic and occult groups, including their own, and a good
> deal of "we are the one true way" posturing."
>
> See the section on Satanism for a summary of the schism with the
> Church of Satan.
>
> We do not normally publish the name, addresses, or any other
> information concerning former members.
Yes, they do not "normally" do so; if you are ToSsed out of the Temple,
and keep your mouth shut, the ToS will let you go about your business, and
will only trash your reputation via gossip and accusations within the
Temple itself. However, if you voice your complaints in public, as Lupo
LeBoucher has done, one may very well expect to find just such information
addressed to Usenet or some other public forum.
> We do not harass former members. Thousands of exmembers have left the
> Temple of Set for many different reasons, without any activity such as
> Lupo complains about.
Mmm-hmmm...people who quietly slinked away, without making you face any
consequences. As I said, those who don't lie down are given an entirely
different treatment.
> 7.4 Unfriendly Others
>
> The REF document identifies a few people whose messages, documents, or
> web pages you're likely to run into on the Internet, and who are
> biased against the Temple of Set for a variety of reasons.
From the ToS REF: "Mr. Scratch was a member of the Temple of Set for about
a decade, and even a member of the Priesthood of Set for a few years. He
was expelled from the Temple of Set late in the year 2000 because of an
event the High Priest saw as revealing a disregard for the Temple's
confidentiality and security which was not acceptable in a Priest."
"Mr. Scratch's view and interpretation of this episode is very different,
as he seems to delight in posting to alt.satanism. Suffice it to say I
accept and agree with the High Priest's decision. "
(*Mr. Scratch throws his arms up and shouts out a Homer Simpsonesque
"WhooHOOO!*)
I finally made the notorious "enemies" list!
Yes, I suppose you could say I disagreed with the High Priest's reasons
for kicking me out. I was ostensibly booted from the organization for
maintaining a friendship and having dinner with someone the High Priest
didn't like (Lupo).
When I joined the Temple of Set, I was not aware that I was to turn over
my own decision-making processes to the Temple's bureaucracy, nor did I
realize that some appointed theocrat now had the power to dictate my
personal life.
Say, why didn't Kerry Delf make the list? She was also booted for being
nice to the wrong people, and has given the ToS much the same kind of
exposure as I have as a consequence. On the other hand, perhaps Balanone
is smart enough to recognize that Aquino has already caused the Temple
considerable humiliation by being caught lying in an attempt to besmirch
her reputation, and has decided the matter is best left alone.
> 7.6.1 A Cult?
>
> "Is this a cult?" No. [...] most people reserve the word "cult" to you
> mean something dangerous to society or its members, and no, we're not
> a cult since we are beneficial to our members, and we're not
> anti-social by any means.
I think many of us agree that the word "cult" is often used in a rather
emotional manner, and yet we all have a certain sense as to what a "cult"
is. For better or for worse, we follow the example of Justice Potter
Stewart when judging a group for whether or not it is a cult; "I can't
define it, but I know it when I see it."
The ToS FAQ says that the definition of a cult is a group that is not
beneficial to its members, and is anti-social -- and since the Temple of
Set doesn't consider itself such, its leadership does not like to be
referred to as a "cult."
Now, I would guess that a great many of the groups that we consider
"cults" would say the same thing about themselves. The Scientologists
certainly consider themselves beneficial to their members, and not
anti-social. Same with the Moonies, the Children of God, and the
Jehovah's Witnesses...the list goes on and on. Pretty much NO group that
we would consider a "cult" considers itself as such, and I think most of
them would say they are "beneficial" to their members, and are "not
anti-social." Very few religions have been built by stating up front that
they think human society is worthless, and that they intend to abuse any
adherants they may come across. Those that do so generally don't fare too
well.
But let me put it to the prospective Setian who is considering this
question of the ToS's "culthood" this way...
From the moment you request to join the Temple, the hierarchy begins to
build a dossier on you. It starts out with a picture of your driver's
license, your physical address, your home and work phone number, your
interests, and so on. Then, for the rest of your career in the Temple,
personal information about you is compiled into your file. Whenever you
screw something up -- it goes into the file. Which Priests do you work
with, and whom you are in touch with? Into the file. When a person finds
themselves being questioned by the hierarchy, this file comes out. You,
as a member, do not have access to the file.
What do you suppose this information is for? Do you really think it is
done for your "benefit," as per the Temple's claim to its non-cult
status?
Then, you may find as I did, that your personal freedom is infringed upon.
In my case, they disliked my friends. For Lupo, they disagreed with what
he retained in the alt.satanism FAQ (i.e. he would not allow it to be
turned into ToS propaganda). For Eardly Scott, they didn't like that he
was willing to sell his products to their "enemies," the Church of Satan.
There are any number of forms of personal interaction that the Temple
hierarchy will step in to prevent if they so desire. These are not
"unethical" behaviors, mind you, these are simply personal choices about
what you think is best for you. They presume to control their initiates,
and you will be punished if you do not conform.
The Temple will deem itself responsible to police your thinking.
Recently, a wave of purges was initiated by the hierarchy against
postmodernists in the Temple, denouncing, punishing and expelling whomever
they deemed a postmodernist, a PoMo sympathizer, or who used PoMo
terminology in their conversations. The Temple has also worked to
chastise those who disagree with the hierarchy's extremist animal-rights
political views, bringing their heel down on those who defend any kind of
hunting or scientific animal testing. While some small philosophical
differences are tolerated, for the most part you will be expected to march
in psychological lock-step with the hierarchy.
Does any of this seem in keeping with a group that supposedly champions
autonomous self-deification and independent Will?
Is the Temple of Set "anti-social"? Well, consider that they refer to the
entire society at large as it exists outside the Temple of Set as "the
World of Horrors," and speak of the rest of the human population as if
they were despicable or dangerous animals. The ToS leadership bears
considerable antipathy, even hostility, toward those on the outside of the
Temple, lashing out at whomever they consider remotely capable of turning
on them -- even if the persons in question have done them no harm, or have
even helped them. During my time in the Temple, I frequently found the
rhetoric of the hierarchy toward the larger non-Setian culture so virulent
and isolationist, that I often wondered if they would barricade us in some
remote compound if they only had the resources.
They strongly denounce those who maintain friendly contact with ex-Setians
who have been driven or kicked out of the Temple. In some cases, a Setian
can expect to be expelled if they are found communicating with that person
(in this sense, the ToS practices a very real form of ex-communication, or
"shunning"). Like many groups we recognize as "cults," they demand
unconditional loyalty from their members in this regard, and will not
tolerate the possibility that members' thoughts and perceptions would be
tainted by an opposing view from someone who has had a negative (or more
objective) experience of their organization.
The curious thing about this is that the individual Setian member probably
doesn't recognize these cult-like tactics for what they are. Most of them
are like loyal citizens of some national dictatorship -- their minds are
bent into conformity and obsequiousness. This has gone on for so long, in
an atmosphere where one can only gain acceptance by toeing the line, that
many of them are simply incapable of understanding the psychological
techniques that have shaped them into conformists and unwitting yes-men.
Since they are not among the dissidents, and have not experienced the
injustice and repression for themselves, they either don't think they will
be targeted in the future, or they simply fail to recognize that the
leadership has succumbed to tyranny in the first place. The hammering of
the Initiate's mind into submission is a slow process, one they may not
even be able to see happening, even as they undergo the metamorphosis from
independent seeker of knowledge to a nodding and compliant appendage of
the ToS superorganism.
As I've said in the past, I once heard a former member of the Children of
God cult tell his tale, and he recalled that he had denied the CoG's
culthood to a reporter by saying "Hey, its not like we're camping out on
people's doorsteps, trying to recruit them." A few months later, when
recruiting stats for his region were low, and his CoG leaders were
desperate, he found himself sitting on a potential recruit's front porch,
waiting for the recruit to come home. At about 4:00 AM, he realized "I
believe I am camped out on someone's doorstep here." I just have to
wonder when my Setian friends will realize that they are camped out on
that doorstep.
So, is the Temple of Set a "cult"? Dunno. But consider that it is a
strictly hierarchal organization that places considerable punitive powers
in the hands of its administrative body. It is a group that compiles
secret files on its members. It tells them what they can and can't do,
what they can and can't say, what they can and can't think, who they can
and can't talk to; it coerces its members into not communicating with its
critics, shuns its ex-members who complain about the group, and denounces
the impure and tainted world outside its controlling body.
"Cult?"
(*Mr. Scratch shrugs his shoulders and cants his head ambiguously*)
You be the judge.
Mr. Scratch
Priest of Set
Simon Jester
> On 17 Jun 2001 bal...@xeper.org wrote:
>
> > Archive-name: religions/temple-of-set
> > Title: Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ
> > Posting-Frequency: monthly, quarterly to soc.religion.paganism
> > Last-modified: 2001/06/03
> > Version: 1.2.5
> > URL: http://www.bigfoot.com/
....Hey Baloney: you got the wrong URL! Shouldn't that be
www.bigMOUTH.com? Or www.BIGmouthLITTLEbrains.com --- ???....
~balanone/baltsfaq.html
> > Copyright: (c) 1997-2001 Temple of Set
> > Maintainer: Balanone <bal...@xeper.org>
>
> > 5.4 Our Reputation(s)
> >
....worthless as a whore's hymen....
> Is the Temple of Set "anti-social"? Well, consider that they refer to the
> entire society at large as it exists outside the Temple of Set as "the
> World of Horrors," and speak of the rest of the human population as if
> they were.....dangerous animals.
....well PRAISE SET!!!
Now that we have Lilith's Ark-te, NONsetians have climbed up a rung!
If they think of a NONSetster like me as an ANIMAL, that means NOW I
have some worth in their Holy & Perfect eyes, am I right??? Now lets
all join hands and sing, "we shall overcome someday"....thank you
Ark-te {{sobbing out of control, so grateful!!}}....
Jerry {flippin Setters the bird}
SOD of CoE
bal...@xeper.org (Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ):
>> Archive-name: religions/temple-of-set
>> Title: Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ
>> Posting-Frequency: monthly, quarterly to soc.religion.paganism
>> Last-modified: 2001/06/03
>> Version: 1.2.5
>> URL: http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/baltsfaq.html
>> Copyright: (c) 1997-2001 Temple of Set
>> Maintainer: Balanone <bal...@xeper.org>
>> 5.4 Our Reputation(s)
>> Lupo the Butcher, in his "alt.satanism FAQ file", states/stated: "The
>> most vocal of groups which border upon Satanism, is the Temple of Set
>> of Michael Aquino and friends, which splintered away from the Church
>> of Satan in a disagreement over monetary policy. They have a number of
>> nasty habits, including the public publishing of names, addresses and
>> workplaces of former members as a harassment tactic, disinformation
>> regarding Satanic and occult groups, including their own, and a good
>> deal of "we are the one true way" posturing."
>>
>> See the section on Satanism for a summary of the schism with the
>> Church of Satan.
>>
>> We do not normally publish the name, addresses, or any other
>> information concerning former members.
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org>:
> Yes, they do not "normally" do so; if you are ToSsed out of the Temple,
> and keep your mouth shut, the ToS will let you go about your business,
> and will only trash your reputation via gossip and accusations within
> the Temple itself. However, if you voice your complaints in public,
> as Lupo LeBoucher has done, one may very well expect to find just such
> information addressed to Usenet or some other public forum.
he has a point. what do you think of this, Balanone?
*has* the Temple of Set done this in the past? if so, when and why?
>> We do not harass former members. Thousands of exmembers have left the
>> Temple of Set for many different reasons, without any activity such as
>> Lupo complains about.
>
> Mmm-hmmm...people who quietly slinked away, without making you
> face any consequences.
no denial of specific incidents here.
> As I said, those who don't lie down are given an entirely
> different treatment.
I've heard this complaint and seen testimony supporting it from
a number of ex-ToS Setians. this seems to support the fervency
of faith and passion present in ToS members, but I don't see
it as unique or improbable. expect this from organizations,
Satanists. if you can get the better of an organization trying
to enslave you, you are seeing to your own needs and opposing
that which is wrong at the same time.
>> 7.4 Unfriendly Others
> expelled from the Temple of Set late in the year 2000 because of an
> event the High Priest saw as revealing a disregard for the Temple's
> confidentiality and security which was not acceptable in a Priest."
> I was ostensibly booted from the organization for maintaining a
> friendship and having dinner with someone the High Priest didn't
> like (Lupo).
consorting with hostile agents. c'mon, you gotta expect that from the
truly faithful. I've had dinner with Lupo and we're friends also,
but I haven't heard from a cult strongarm. sounds like it is just an
attempt to manipulate someone integral to the structure, as compared
to the world at large. territorial disputes using dirty tactics. you
gotta keep abreast of the integrity of your supposed 'superiors'.
>> 7.6.1 A Cult?
> From the moment you request to join the Temple, the hierarchy begins to
> build a dossier on you. It starts out with a picture of your driver's
> license, your physical address, your home and work phone number, your
> interests, and so on. Then, for the rest of your career in the Temple,
> personal information about you is compiled into your file. Whenever you
> screw something up -- it goes into the file. Which Priests do you work
> with, and whom you are in touch with? Into the file. When a person finds
> themselves being questioned by the hierarchy, this file comes out. You,
> as a member, do not have access to the file.
Balanone, are you aware of what he's describing? is it something upon
which you or some other source in the Temple might comment on this and
his subsequent allegations?
> The Temple will deem itself responsible to police your thinking.
fits with the religious exclusivity.
> ...The Temple has also worked to chastise those who disagree with
> the hierarchy's extremist animal-rights political views, bringing
> their heel down on those who defend any kind of hunting or
> scientific animal testing.
HOORAY! some religious principles. gotta respect them.
> While some small philosophical differences are tolerated, for
> the most part you will be expected to march in psychological
> lock-step with the hierarchy.
and why not, if it carrying out Set's desires?
> Does any of this seem in keeping with a group that supposedly
> champions autonomous self-deification and independent Will?
perhaps in antagonism to its example?
> They strongly denounce those who maintain friendly contact with
> ex-Setians who have been driven or kicked out of the Temple. In
> some cases, a Setian can expect to be expelled if they are found
> communicating with that person (in this sense, the ToS practices
> a very real form of ex-communication, or "shunning"). Like many
> groups we recognize as "cults," they demand unconditional loyalty
> from their members in this regard, and will not tolerate the
> possibility that members' thoughts and perceptions would be tainted
> by an opposing view from someone who has had a negative (or more
> objective) experience of their organization.
this does sound like it fits the bill for cult behaviour, Mr. Scratch.
> the ToS superorganism.
borg-like?
isn't unity of nonviolent purpose, alliance, to be admired?
kind of like herds shifting in the water, air, or on the earth.
> So, is the Temple of Set a "cult"? Dunno. But consider that it is a
> strictly hierarchal organization that places considerable punitive powers
> in the hands of its administrative body.
what kind of 'punitive powers'?
> It is a group that compiles secret files on its members.
given Aquino's background (in intelligence) is this really surprising?
the only real issue is whether and why they might be secret.
> It tells them what they can and can't do, what they can and can't say,
> what they can and can't think, who they can and can't talk to;
> it coerces its members into not communicating with its critics,
> shuns its ex-members who complain about the group, and denounces
> the impure and tainted world outside its controlling body.
> "Cult?"
could be.
>(*Mr. Scratch shrugs his shoulders and cants his head ambiguously*)
>You be the judge.
>Mr. Scratch
>Priest of Set
thank you for your scintillating testimony, Mr. Scratch.
I'll surely archive that in my Set directory.
blessed beast!
bobo...@satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
TOKUS (http://www.satanservice.org/)
Lightning Strike
SOD of CoE wrote in message <9gruru$b...@bolt.sonic.net>...
chomxxo
> consequences. As I said, those who don't lie down are given an entirely
> different treatment.
I read of a what a Hutian named Wif did 20 years ago and it gave me a
little deja vu. To those that keep the history, thanks. I've got this
idea that doing something greater is the greatest revenge.
SOD of CoE
"Lightning Strike" <no_ma...@fbi.gov>:
| Are you a Luciferian or a Le Veyan Satanist?
*these* are my options?
luciferian? my other pseudonym here is "nocTifer".
you figure it out.
LaVeyan? yeh, I can spell his name. I told them I wasn't sending
the $100 but they could confer upon me the status of member if
they saw fit. I found more in Deboo than in most other modern
Satanic media I sampled. I like it when people call him 'Tony'.
the hating stupidity part he got right.
zazas zazas nasatanada zazas
bobo...@satanservice.org (SOD of CoE)
SOD of the CoE
Balanone's ToS FAQ:
>>> We do not normally publish the name, addresses, or any other
>>> information concerning former members.
>"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org>:
>> Yes, they do not "normally" do so; if you are ToSsed out of the Temple,
>> and keep your mouth shut, the ToS will let you go about your business,
>> and will only trash your reputation via gossip and accusations within
>> the Temple itself. However, if you voice your complaints in public,
>> as Lupo LeBoucher has done, one may very well expect to find just such
>> information addressed to Usenet or some other public forum.
bobo...@satanservice.org (SOD of CoE):
>he has a point. what do you think of this, Balanone?
>*has* the Temple of Set done this in the past? if so, when and why?
etc.
I have received private communications from Balanone indicating that
* he won't bother to respond to my queries in alt.satanism
apparently because of how contributions to this forum are
used or treated in response
* he won't respond privately for public quotation
apparently for the same reason.
therefore it gives the appearance of a non-response and I am saddened
that the Scratch-Balanone clear-channel-of-communication has clogged up.
blessed beast!
bobo...@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
formerly known as IX Corp
SOD of the CoE <bobo...@satanservice.org> wrote:
>50010620 VI! om Midsummer! Hail Satan!
>
>Balanone's ToS FAQ:
>>>> We do not normally publish the name, addresses, or any other
>>>> information concerning former members.
>
>>"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org>:
>>> Yes, they do not "normally" do so; if you are ToSsed out of the Temple,
>>> and keep your mouth shut, the ToS will let you go about your business,
>>> and will only trash your reputation via gossip and accusations within
>>> the Temple itself. However, if you voice your complaints in public,
>>> as Lupo LeBoucher has done, one may very well expect to find just such
>>> information addressed to Usenet or some other public forum.
>
>bobo...@satanservice.org (SOD of CoE):
>>he has a point. what do you think of this, Balanone?
>>*has* the Temple of Set done this in the past? if so, when and why?
>
>etc.
>
>I have received private communications from Balanone indicating that
>
> * he won't bother to respond to my queries in alt.satanism
> apparently because of how contributions to this forum are
> used or treated in response
>
> * he won't respond privately for public quotation
> apparently for the same reason.
In other words, there will be no more balognia from Balanoney.
His posts always made me sleepy anyway.
-Lupo
"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even
though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who
neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight
that knows not victory nor defeat" Teddy Roosevelt <i...@io.com>
Mr. Scratch
> I have received private communications from Balanone indicating that
>
> * he won't bother to respond to my queries in alt.satanism
> apparently because of how contributions to this forum are
> used or treated in response
Curious, as he's perfectly willing to post his bogus "FAQ" to these
newsgroups. I suppose his esteem of this newsgroup depends on whether he
thinks he'll be challenged on the issues.
> * he won't respond privately for public quotation
> apparently for the same reason.
>
> therefore it gives the appearance of a non-response and I am saddened
> that the Scratch-Balanone clear-channel-of-communication has clogged up.
>
> blessed beast!
>
> bobo...@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
The Temple would rather be destroyed by praise than saved by criticism.
Well Tyagi, it appears you have the answer to your questions, and it is
this:
(*Balanone squinches his eyes shut, plugs his ears with his fingers, and
shouts "NANANANANA! ICANTHEARYOU! ICANTHEARYOU!")
Which might not seem like much, but to me it reads volumes.
I'm admittedly a bit disappointed. I was looking forward to ensnaring a
few more ToSsers in their own lies, should they have tried to deny
anything that I said. Certainly I thought Aquino would have cooked up
some fraudulent kneeslappers that would have given me ammunition for weeks
to come. Instead, we're back to the familiar old ostrich trick.
I'll give credit where it is due, though: Balanone is smart enough to
recognize the value of keeping his mouth shut when speaking up will only
get him into trouble. Twenty-odd years of practice makes perfect.
In truth, it must be tough for him, as the last of the fairminded Temple
liberals. Surrounded by critics and attackers whose only interest is in
climbing the authoritarian rungs of the degree ladder, and lording it over
their charges. Hounded from the Chairmanship. His Order of Shuti
strangled off and disbanded (there really can be no place for "Balance" in
today's Temple of Set), and his fellow adherents of Xem "gagged,"
repressed, and driven into resignation.
He'll soon be friendless within the walls of the Temple, if he isn't
already. And when all the supports are gone...well, those rising in the
hierarchy have no respect for 2 decades of dedication and self-sacrifice
(they hardly know the meaning of the words), all they know is that
Balanone stood between them and the shiny baubles they craved. Suffice it
to say that the political culture of the ToS rather resembles that of the
island boys of _Lord of the Flies_, and I wouldn't be surprised if they
already have a stick sharpened just for him.
Who knows? Maybe by this time next year, we'll find him joining the ranks
of we Nobles on the Outside!
If that day comes, Balanone, we'll welcome you with open arms, and raise a
mug in your honor!
Forrester
Just passing by and noticing.
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSU.4.21.010617...@garcia.efn.org...
People's Commissar
I got somewhat of an official response, very polite and to the point with
details, to the answer I gave Kevin Filan on "Anton LaVey Black House"
thread - forwarding what I wrote to Kevin to a few people connected to the
TOS.
As you can see, I did not post it. I didn't even expect a reply to it. Or
ask for one.
TJ
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"SOD of the CoE" <bobo...@satanservice.org> wrote in message
news:9hdcjo$m...@bolt.sonic.net...
Forrester
You might have better luck convincing people of all you say if you prove it.
Ole Wolf, formerly of the CoS, did this by using the CoS's own emails to
prove what they do - and a very clear picture is there to see.
http://home19.inet.tele.dk/angles/cosfiles/
You have nothing of this kind to show. On these files one does not have to
hear *about* what the hierarchy of the CoS said from another person. One
can see it by viewing the hierarchy's own emails, emails they thought would
never see the light of day, sent bcc to the inner circle. One can see one
hell of a lot of things on there, they are a real eye opener.
All we hear from you is iffy maybe's about the Magisters Schreck. Why
should anyone believe you or any other *ex* ToS member? You got booted out.
You did *not* get booted out for having Locklin as your friend. You are
stooping to the lie when you keep posting this. People knew you were his
friend for years. You got booted out for exactly what Dr. Aquino said. It
doesn't take much explaining.
You *now* bemoan the background checks that the ToS does. Why? You could
have complained about that years ago. You did not. Why not? It's not like
they sneak around behind your back and get this information. They ask you
for it openly. You gave it.
I read Ole Wolf's files. I can see how the hierarchy wrote emails saying
one thing to some people, and the opposite to other people. Ole Wolf has a
valid complaint since he took their word and admits to having lured people
out of money and into an organization that he came to view as a racket and a
cult. Ole Wolf explained this thoroughly and superbly.
I'm sorry. I do *not* see what you are complaining about. The point is
just lost. You are flaming the ToS and doing nothing but that. You have
proof of nothing. All you have is the hearsay of a few disgruntled *ex* ToS
members.
Just passing by.
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSU.4.21.010628...@garcia.efn.org...
Carcosa
Forrester <mn...@itgo.com> wrote in message
news:tjtt49r...@corp.supernews.com...
> Mr. Scratch,
>
> You might have better luck convincing people of all you say if you prove
it.
>
> Ole Wolf, formerly of the CoS, did this by using the CoS's own emails to
> prove what they do - and a very clear picture is there to see.
...........................................................>
Already been done. Do a deja search and you'll be able to give it a read.
There were several Hunt/Delf/T'.'S'.' threads active at one time, all of
which seemed to illustrate how willingly the T'.'S'.' could abandon its
integrity.
Non Serviam.....Jim..........
the artist formerly known as IX Corp
Forrester <mn...@itgo.com> wrote:
>All we hear from you is iffy maybe's about the Magisters Schreck.
*Raises eyebrow*
What's the "iffy maybee" about the Schrecks?
They are very obviously both dumb as a box of twigs, and self-hating Nazi
jews.
>Why should anyone believe you or any other *ex* ToS member? You got
>booted out.
Why should anyone believe Michael Aquino? He got booted out of the Church
of Satan.
>You did *not* get booted out for having Locklin as your friend. You are
>stooping to the lie when you keep posting this. People knew you were his
>friend for years.
No, he got booted for having "Brother Lupo" as his friend. Apparently an
entirely different animal: a seven foot tall green skinned slavering
monster with human and setian skulls dangling from his hair. Something
like the critter in the Schwartzenegger movie "Predator."
>You got booted out for exactly what Dr. Aquino said. It
>doesn't take much explaining.
Like when he said this:
"
>In this case it was the unanimous opinion of the High
>Priest and the Council of Nine that by associating
>yourself socially with someone like Locklin you had
>displayed your casual disregard, if not contempt for
>the Temple of Set; hence the HS was in your case
>disgraced and should be removed accordingly.
"
Funny, he did say "locklin" there, didn't he?
And here too:
"
> It was
>more a case of whether Hunt's maintaining a long-standing
>personal friendship with Locklin, in disregard of the latter's
>behavior towards the Temple of Set, was in keeping with
>the Priesthood's honor and dignity
"
Wow; he says "Locklin" there too. I wonder how he gets brother Lupo and
that pastey faced science geek "Locklin" confused.
"the most important living being in Setian cosmology"
-Brother Lupo
"The close affinity of the 'beautiful' and the 'good' was most keenly felt
and understood of all civilized nations by ancient Greece" -Paul Henry
Lang, Music in Western Civilization <i...@dillenger.io.com>
Mr. Scratch
> Mr. Scratch,
>
> You might have better luck convincing people of all you say if you
> prove it.
Ah! The lastest in ToS sockpuppetry! Welcome!
> Why should anyone believe you or any other *ex* ToS member? You got
> booted out.
Actually, I don't expect anyone to believe me simply based on my opinion
alone. However, I do provide support for those opinions, and can also
point out witnesses to many of my claims.
If you mean to say that people shouldn't consider what I have to say
*because* I was kicked out, then I think you are committing a rather
substantial logical fallacy. Does the fact that I got ToSsed from the
organization automatically make me a liar, or somehow nullify a decade of
observation?
> You did *not* get booted out for having Locklin as your friend. You
> are stooping to the lie when you keep posting this.
Lupo has already posted the relevant quotes. Aquino directly stated, in
no uncertain terms, that I was kicked out because the High Priest and
Council of Nine decided my friendship with Locklin was inconsistent with
being a Priest of Set.
Before you go around calling people liars, you really ought to get your
facts in order.
> You got booted out for exactly what Dr. Aquino said. It doesn't take
> much explaining.
You must be talking to a different Aquino.
Perhaps to you it "doesn't take much explaining," but I seem to be missing
something. If I wasn't booted over the Locklin affair, then maybe you
would be so kind as to explain to me why I was expelled!
> You *now* bemoan the background checks that the ToS does. Why?
I didn't complain about background checks, actually -- so far as I know,
the ToS doesn't have the resources for proper background checks. What I
spoke of as possibly being "cult-like" behavior is the maintenance of
secret files on individual members and ex-members. This isn't done for
any benefit of the member, it is just a compilation of whines and bitches
from various Priests about the person in question. When said person does
find themselves being examined for some real or imagined slight, the file
comes out, and the defendant then finds himself having to answer for all
the other crap that has accumulated there as well.
> You could have complained about that years ago. You did not. Why
> not?
I already addressed this months ago. You really should go check out
www.google.com, do an alt.satanism search on "Mr. Scratch," and
actually *read* about my position, rather than simply take the ToS's word
on it.
To briefly reiterate, I kept my mouth shut because those members who
criticize the Temple of Set are typically expelled or driven out. I
wanted to stay in, and I hoped that the Temple could in time be reformed
by the diligence of honest Priests.
Now that I'm out and it's become clear to me that the Temple cannot (or at
least *will* not) be reformed, I feel no obligation to keep such
criticisms to myself.
> It's not like they sneak around behind your back and get this
> information. They ask you for it openly. You gave it.
If you are referring to the membership files, no they do NOT ask you for
the information. I wouldn't be surprised if most ToS members were unaware
that they had such a file. The information is simply collected, from
whatever source they can gather it from (largely the III* and IV*).
> I'm sorry. I do *not* see what you are complaining about. The point
> is just lost. You are flaming the ToS and doing nothing but that.
> You have proof of nothing. All you have is the hearsay of a few
> disgruntled *ex* ToS members.
What kind of "proof" do you want, Forrester? Will an actual
*super-duper-double-top-secret* file satisfy you?
There used to be a certain ex-ToS member named Harry Mowry, who came to
alt.satanism to criticize the Temple. I, being a loyal ToSser, and being
somewhat skilled in these kinds of verbal jousting, gave poor ol' Mowry
quite a rough time of it. I was assisted in this effort by my acquisition
of a 30-odd page file on him, sent to me unrequested by a high-ranking
official of the ToS, that contained personal information about him,
documented his conflicts and goings-on with other Setians, and whatever
miscellaneous occult-related public information they had on him at the
time.
You can see some (admittedly crappy) photos of the file at:
<http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1122563&a=8246806&p=51263035&Sequence=0&res=high
and
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1122563&a=8246806&p=51263036&Sequence=0&res=high
The information in these files is rather personal in places, so it's just
as well you can't read it from the photos -- I just want you to know what
it looks like. Hell, Forrester, you almost certainly have one yourself,
if you've been in long enough to catch someone's ire. BTW, if anyone is
in touch with Mowry, he's welcome to contact me for a copy.
You can also see an image of a simple questionnaire (though I doubt that
most Setians fully understood what this information was for) that the
Executive Director sent out to all Setians in 1997, requesting basic
information on initiates (contact information including work phone number,
order/pylon affiliation, III* and IV* contacts, interests, etc.).
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1122563&a=8246806&p=51263039&Sequence=0&res=high
> Just passing by.
"Thank you, come again."
(Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, The Simpsons)
Tez
> If you mean to say that people shouldn't consider what I have to say
> *because* I was kicked out, then I think you are committing a rather
> substantial logical fallacy. Does the fact that I got ToSsed from the
> organization automatically make me a liar, or somehow nullify a decade of
> observation?
No, but waiting until you get expelled to bring up said observations
doesn't
really do much to give you an image of the bringer of light and truth.
It just makes you seem...well...vindictive and bitchy are the best
words I can come up with right now. Not many ethical people wait a
decade for their ethics to kick in.
Keep it up, this is better than South Park.
Tez
Alt.Satanism: It's all true, no one could make this up.
Mr. Scratch
Pah! "Tezcatlipoca!" You wouldn't know The Enemy of Both Sides if he
pulled your weak little heart out.
> "Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote:
>
> > If you mean to say that people shouldn't consider what I have to say
> > *because* I was kicked out, then I think you are committing a rather
> > substantial logical fallacy. Does the fact that I got ToSsed from the
> > organization automatically make me a liar, or somehow nullify a decade of
> > observation?
>
> No, but waiting until you get expelled to bring up said observations
> doesn't really do much to give you an image of the bringer of light
> and truth. It just makes you seem...well...vindictive and bitchy are
> the best words I can come up with right now.
Typical ToSser: the only thing you are concerned with is "image", not
substance. "OooOooH! See! See! It doesn't LOOK good, so it CAN't be
true!"
Frankly, I don't care how you ostriches feel about my appearance. If the
best you can do to defend yourselves is to bitch about my image, then so
much the better.
Think about it. In the past months, I've posted reams of revelations
about your crumbling little hobby religion (and more to come!), NONE of
which has been refuted. You haven't even managed to weaken a single
element of my efforts to reveal the abusive nature of your hierarchy, or
the absurdity of your organizational philosophies. Furthermore, on the
rare occasion you've worked up the nerve to meet me here, all you've
accomplished is to dig yourselves into a deeper hole, getting caught in
all manner of logical tomfoolery, and entangling yourselves in
demonstrable lies.
So now, totally bereft of factual defense, you are lauching ad hominem
attacks at your accuser's "image." Well done! If anything demonstrates
the total failure of the Temple of Set to meet criticism with integrity,
it is this!
What's your next bone-crushing mastermind defense going to consist of?
Spelling flames? "Yo momma" snaps? How about the ol' "I'm rubber, you're
glue" standby -- think you can handle it?
> Not many ethical people wait a decade for their ethics to kick in.
(*Rolls eyes*)
Pshaw! Tongue-clucking from the ToS about "ethics!" Say no more!
Apparently I'm not giving the "Elite" enough to snivel about. Here,
this ought to keep you busy for awhile...
From Setian-L--
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Friday, June 29, 2001, 6:47:19 PM,
I wrote to seti...@yahoogroups.com
re: [setian-l] List policy reminder
B> A gentle reminder: One of the policies of this mailing list, as shown
at
B> http://www.xeper.org/members/mlists/setian-l.html is:
>> Please remember that subscriptions to this mailing list are restricted
>> to members of the Temple of Set, and that the messages on the list are
>> intended only for Setians. If you wish to share a message posted to
>> Setian-l with nonmembers, please obtain the permission of the author of
>> the post (and anyone quoted) before doing so.
Despite the policy and my reminder, someone on the list forwarded my
recent post concerning Mr. Foster's demands to him.
Personally, I don't care about that forward, and if I had been asked I
would have given my permission for the forward, but it does mean there's
someone on the list who is unable to follow this policy, who believes
it's more important to forward information to non-Setians than to be
honest with our fellow members.
Since this person can not follow the list rules, and since we do not have
the ability to identify which subscriber this is, please be aware that
anything you post may end up in the hands of those who are not members,
and may therefore end up in the hands of those who are actively hostile
to the Temple of Set.
Since my gentle reminder and the comments posted to the list in response
weren't enough to forestall such forward, apparently this person simply
doesn't care what his/her fellow Setians think about his behavior.
Additional commentary apparently won't change that behavior.
Therefore, if you are uncomfortable with your posts being shared with
people outside the Temple, you may need to refrain from posting on
Setian-L.
Balanone
PP
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Personal Security 7.0.3
iQA/AwUBO0B7THAR60BhEzDuEQIMjQCfdRDv1LPvybocWSKAxbPG8rGyim8An2dS
y0CiZ6q85aMNUChZwHV3a10k
=c0U7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Tez
SOD of CoE
boboroshi:
>> I have received private communications from Balanone indicating that
>> * he won't bother to respond to my queries in alt.satanism
>> apparently because of how contributions to this forum are
>> used or treated in response
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org>:
> Curious, as he's perfectly willing to post his bogus "FAQ" to these
> newsgroups.
come now, Mr. Scratch, Balonone doesn't deserve that kind of treatment
from you, does he? he's just avoiding discussion in the forum you have
chosen to express yourself. it was obvious from your post that he posts
to Setian email lists, and may have more important things to do than to
generate a swathe of conversations which pertain to the ToS in negative
ways and only embarrass the temple in having become issues.
I have always liked Balanone and am saddened by your break with him.
> I suppose his esteem of this newsgroup depends on whether he
> thinks he'll be challenged on the issues.
maybe he thinks the positions are well-known and he has addressed what
he thought was worthy of our time in the FAQ he created. I certainly
won't spend much time on org-individual conflicts. these are rather
commonplace and, while important to make plain to the public as you
are doing, they have little to do with Satanism, magic, mysticism,
or the subjects which interest me. I don't blame him for not wanting
to get dragged into a discussion about them. they can be very tedious.
from what I can see, Balanone has always carried himself respectfully
and with candor. I respect his attitude and composure, and it is too
bad that you and he have had a falling out (my inference). was it
because you have embarked on this purposeful Luciferian crusade that
Balanone decided to refrain from addressing the matter in alt.satanism?
or does it have anything to do with you at all? it sounded like he had
better things to do with his time than be part of a discussion there.
>> * he won't respond privately for public quotation
>> apparently for the same reason.
>>
>> therefore it gives the appearance of a non-response and I am saddened
>> that the Scratch-Balanone clear-channel-of-communication has clogged up.
> The Temple would rather be destroyed by praise than saved by criticism.
this is true of all organizations eventually. just like individuals,
there are limitations to their virtue and skill.
> ...Balanone is smart enough to recognize the value of keeping his
> mouth shut when speaking up will only get him into trouble.
or pointless activity. look at the horrendous time which Michael Aquino
has wasted in alt.satanism attempting to have the last word. can't be
done with a living forum without some kind of support team or hired
help. cults can conquer a usenet forum, but only for a finite period.
> ...Suffice it to say that the political culture of the ToS rather
> resembles that of the island boys of _Lord of the Flies_, and I
> wouldn't be surprised if they already have a stick sharpened just
> for [Balanone].
>
> Who knows? Maybe by this time next year, we'll find him joining
> the ranks of we Nobles on the Outside!
organizations are social fictions associating aggregate groupings
of interested participants in some shared activity, thought or
behaviour pattern. individual human beings are much more real
than organizations. an organization can't be present, only its
members (shareholders, boards, etc.) can present themselves, and
this is just a group of people, no greater in authority on the
matter of worship of some god toward which the temple is dedicated.
wouldn't the better focus of activity be the desires and thoughts
of Set? why bother with humans in alt.satanism if this is not what
Set wishes with the priest? why would we wish to infer his
motivations rather than ask him to explain explain them?
after all, if I desire, I can ask Balanone and then represent him
here, because I consider him to be kindred. you have probably
already heard something from him explaining his desires. so better
for you to focus on the substance of the posts.
you say Balanone's FAQ is "bogus"? is it just that portion of the
FAQ you didn't like or do you think the rest of it is accurate
and informative? I think Balanone is pretty thorough in his
compositions and clear in his communications. I'd like to know
more about what you think is 'bogus' in his FAQ. thanks. I don't
expect there to be agreement on the points concerning ex-members. ;>
> If that day comes, Balanone, we'll welcome you with open arms,
> and raise a mug in your honor!
I'm raising one to both of you right now. Hail Satan!
>Mr. Scratch
>Priest of Set
Hail Set!
blessed beast!
bobo...@satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/
Satanism Archive: http://www.satanservice.org/
SOD of CoE
now to comment more thoroughly on the FAQ and Mr. Scratch's assertions.
(Balanone the friendly) bal...@xeper.org posted his ToS FAQ:
>>> Archive-name: religions/temple-of-set
>>> Title: Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ
>>> Posting-Frequency: monthly, quarterly to soc.religion.paganism
>>> Last-modified: 2001/06/03
>>> Version: 1.2.5
>>> URL: http://www.bigfoot.com/~balanone/baltsfaq.html
>>> Copyright: (c) 1997-2001 Temple of Set
>>> Maintainer: Balanone <bal...@xeper.org>
>>
>>> 5.4 Our Reputation(s)
>>>
>>> Lupo the Butcher, in his "alt.satanism FAQ file",
this is inaccurate. Lupo edited the file, but the work was not just
his. he credits those who are responsible for assisting him in the
creation of the ONLY NEWSGROUP FAQ FOR ALT.SATANISM CREATED BY
NUMEROUS PARTICIPANTS IN THE FORUM. most of the rest of the newsgroup
FAQs were created by individuals or cults (CoS/HPaulis, ToS/Aquino,
CoS/Valentine, TOKUS/me, FCoS/whoever, and maybe more).
>>> states/stated: [apparently Lupo is quoted here]
>>> "The most vocal of groups which border upon Satanism, is the
>>> Temple of Set of Michael Aquino and friends, which splintered
>>> away from the Church of Satan in a disagreement over
>>> monetary policy.
that's understating it. usually the ToS expression is 'because
they didn't want to sell priesthoods'; from the CoS side, more
variable, but most rationally due to a personality and value
clash, rather than anything monetary. Hermetic (esotericists) vs.
materialist (power-based club) is another way of looking at it.
rather a more philosophic (and attention-shifting) difference
(because both Aquino and LaVey seem to crave attention and
probably were competing with one another based on their
presumed strengths -- intellectualism, sensationalism,
respectively.
the statement above is arguable and I can understand why
different perspectives (especially NON-ToS) might want it
changed. I'd restate it as:
The most vocal of groups which border upon Satanism,
is the Temple of Set (whose more visible members include
Michael Aquino and Don Webb) which splintered away from
the Church of Satan in a disagreement over membership
and social issues.
perhaps Balanone would prefer this?
>>> They have a number of nasty habits, including the public
>>> publishing of names, addresses and workplaces of former
>>> members as a harassment tactic, disinformation regarding
>>> Satanic and occult groups, including their own, and a good
>>> deal of "we are the one true way" posturing."
>>> [...]
>>> We do not normally publish the name, addresses, or any other
>>> information concerning former members.
it is important if it happened once or twice though, Balanone.
>>> 7.4 Unfriendly Others
>>>
>>> The REF document identifies a few people whose messages, documents, or
>>> web pages you're likely to run into on the Internet, and who are
>>> biased against the Temple of Set for a variety of reasons.
>>
>> From the ToS REF:
>> "Mr. Scratch was a member of the Temple of Set for
>> about a decade, and even a member of the Priesthood
>> of Set for a few years. He was expelled from the
>> Temple of Set late in the year 2000 because of an
>> event the High Priest saw as revealing a disregard
>> for the Temple's confidentiality and security which
>> was not acceptable in a Priest."
this is interesting inasmuch as it provides us a glimpse into
the sociology of the Temple of Set and its power structure.
membership squabbles and personal conflicts in orgs are not
at all new, and why so many Satanists go independent. I feel
such things are important to those who like org Satanism. :>
>> "Mr. Scratch's view and interpretation of this episode is
>> very different, as he seems to delight in posting to
>> alt.satanism. Suffice it to say I accept and agree with
>> the High Priest's decision. "
and remain a pleasant participant in the org in which he finds
value in continuing to be a member. I think he handled you
with kid gloves, Mr. Scratch. I think he could have been much
more dismissive and rude to you and was not.
>> (*Mr. Scratch throws his arms up and shouts out a Homer Simpsonesque
>> "WhooHOOO!*)
>> I finally made the notorious "enemies" list!
what did you expect? apparently anyone can get a place on this
list if they cause enough of a stir in alt.satanism. this tells
us where the focus of attention appears to be at least in
Balanone's perspective (I am not aware of any ToS authority
which backs his file).
Mr. Scratch, please present the Temple of Set's position on
this issue for us, if you can, or ask someone who can so I
can archive the synopsis. thanks.
>> ...Aquino has already caused the Temple considerable humiliation
>> by being caught lying in an attempt to besmirch her reputation,
>> and has decided the matter is best left alone.
what were the details of this besmirching?
>>> 7.6.1 A Cult?
>>> "Is this a cult?" No. [...] most people reserve the word "cult" to you
>>> mean something dangerous to society or its members, and no, we're not
>>> a cult since we are beneficial to our members, and we're not
>>> anti-social by any means.
>>
>> I think many of us agree that the word "cult" is often used in a
>> rather emotional manner, and yet we all have a certain sense as
>> to what a "cult" is.
there are qualities which are generally agreed.
>> For better or for worse, we follow the example of Justice Potter
>> Stewart when judging a group for whether or not it is a cult; "I
>> can't define it, but I know it when I see it."
that is not a very helpful standard method. I would instead start
with a thorough study of the subject made by law enforcement and
juridical agencies, followed by sociological investigation and a
trip to a few encyclopedias. its usage in religious, academic,
and media significances, from positive to negative, would be a
better way to go about defining it. 'knowing it when one sees it'
is a rather more subjective and unreliable course of action, though
I can understand someone's argument that their will is more
important than some organized authority or competing scholar.
>> The ToS FAQ says that the definition of a cult is a group that is not
>> beneficial to its members, and is anti-social -- and since the Temple
>> of Set doesn't consider itself such, its leadership does not like to
>> be referred to as a "cult."
pretty weak, isn't it? he could refer to Bonewits' Frame.
>> The Temple will deem itself responsible to police your thinking.
this is one reason that I found it valuable to get the OTO to agree
that they weren't going to police the minds of its initiates (at
least where I was concerned, and not to my knowledge). I wanted to
ascertain a firm footing in the negotiations we were having
concerning their interpretations of my initiation oaths (about
which we disagreed strongly :>).
>> Does any of this seem in keeping with a group that supposedly
>> champions autonomous self-deification and independent Will?
no it does not.
>> So, is the Temple of Set a "cult"? Dunno.
from what you have claimed that is a rather strange conclusion,
interestingly conservative. if what you say is true, then we're
talking about a cultish organization to be sure, though it may
have changed since you were removed from membership.
>> "Cult?"
>> (*Mr. Scratch shrugs his shoulders and cants his head ambiguously*)
>> You be the judge.
thanks for bringing this to our attention, Mr. Scratch.
always a pleasure. :>
blessed beast!
bobo...@satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
Satanism Archive: http://www.satanservice.org/
Tez
> pulled your weak little heart out.
Oh, so you know me now? Thats pretty good considering I've only posted
one
post. Others might say you're assumptive. But oh, just see the clarity
of Scratch's vision on alt.satanism, I'd say, gawk in amazement at his
capability to understand a person in just one post!
I can get you in as a circus act if you want, you'd have to start as
the guy who guesses people's weight though.
>
> > "Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote:
> >
> > No, but waiting until you get expelled to bring up said observations
> > doesn't really do much to give you an image of the bringer of light
> > and truth. It just makes you seem...well...vindictive and bitchy are
> > the best words I can come up with right now.
>
> Typical ToSser: the only thing you are concerned with is "image", not
> substance. "OooOooH! See! See! It doesn't LOOK good, so it CAN't be
> true!"
I'd like to focus on Scratch's above comment in all it's Rorshachian
(It's not a word, I know folks, please bear with me) glory. I use the
term "seems" and
it launches little Scratch into a diatribe completely off the topic of
his bitchy, vindictive nature while (at the same time) completely
qualifying it!
I will acquiesce to Scratch's semantic mollycoddling and amend my
statement:
"Scratch, you are bitchy and vindictive"
See? Nothing about image there. Just loving you for being YOU
babycakes.
>
> Think about it. In the past months, I've posted reams of revelations
(substitute "revelations" for "my poor wittle hurt fewings")
> about your crumbling little hobby religion
Wow, and you were able to stay in a "hobby religion" for a whole
decade? How did your titanium sense of ethics stand up to such a doozy
of an onslaught?
>(and more to come!)
You keep saying so, and weeee keep waiting....hurry up, my popcorn's
getting cold.
, NONE of
> which has been refuted.
Well, not that I'm one to do so, but perhaps those of a more sadistic
slant are enjoying your personal destruction of 10 years of your life,
and want to watch how you destroy the rest?
You're not without your comic value, y'know.
> You haven't even managed to weaken a single
> element of my efforts to reveal the abusive nature of your hierarchy, or
> the absurdity of your organizational philosophies.
Theres a kid with Tourette's Syndrome that lives a couple houses down
from me.
You can hear him yelling all hours of the night. I don't refute him
either.
> Furthermore, on the
> rare occasion you've worked up the nerve to meet me here, all you've
> accomplished is to dig yourselves into a deeper hole, getting caught in
> all manner of logical tomfoolery, and entangling yourselves in
> demonstrable lies.
Logical tomfoolery? Saying that Balanone is going
"NyeanyanyaIcanthearyou" when it's in your favor, but will raise a
toast in his honor if he got booted? Go back and read (or have someone
read it to you) the Webster's definition of logic, because youuuuu
lil' crumpet are not following any.
>
> What's your next bone-crushing mastermind defense going to consist of?
> Spelling flames? "Yo momma" snaps? How about the ol' "I'm rubber, you're
> glue" standby -- think you can handle it?
Welll, I stood up pretty well to reading you take the time to type
"Nyahnyah.."
ad naseum, what else do you have ?
>
> > Not many ethical people wait a decade for their ethics to kick in.
>
> (*Rolls eyes*)
>
> Pshaw! Tongue-clucking from the ToS about "ethics!" Say no more!
Sure. I've said all I need to. The fact that you consider a dismissive
"Pshaw"
as an adequate refutation says all I need as well. But please, don't
stop on that account....
Ummmm...gosh this is uncomfortable...ummm..well...I can't seem to see
your name anywhere in here. Sure, there's a mention of a Mr. Foster,
but nothing about you unless...unless...it really is ALL about you
isn't it?
Tez
SOD of CoE
tezcat...@volcanomail.com (Tez):
> I can't seem to see your name anywhere in here. Sure, there's
> a mention of a Mr. Foster, but nothing about you unless...
> unless...it really is ALL about you isn't it?
no, not from Mr. Scratch's perspective. the issue is honour,
consistency of administrative application of power within a
temple ostensibly dedicated to the creation in its membership
of autonomous decision-making and independence.
while I'm not sure this is to what the temple is *acually*
dedicated (look to an examination of Set for that one), I
do think Mr. Scratch is attempting to place some attention
on inconsistencies and duplicity within an organization
attempting to pride itself on its advanced state.
like Mr. Scratch, I am very circumspect in my expression.
I am taking no sides in this debate, but your assertion here
is an overstatement if his expression (at the website he's
constructing) is taken as support for his accusations. I
have seen nothing from you arguing coherently against him.
btw, pleased to meet you, Tez. I don't think I've seen this
pseudonym before in alt.satanism or usenet, outside the
domain name that Wednesday had (has?). are you a member of
the ToS? familiar with the events being fussed over?
Mr. Scratch
> "Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote in message >
>
> > Pah! "Tezcatlipoca!" You wouldn't know The Enemy of Both Sides if he
> > pulled your weak little heart out.
>
> Oh, so you know me now? Thats pretty good considering I've only posted
> one post. Others might say you're assumptive.
No, not assumptive; I've known a hundred like you, maybe more. All hot
air and no substance. Listen, it shouldn't be a surprise: after years of
clobberi...er..."debating" the endless parade of mental degenerates on
Usenet, it's just like being a good mechanic; take your car to an
experienced greasemonkey, and he can diagnose the problem with the engine
simply by putting his ear to the hood and listening. He's heard it all
before, every knock, every ping, every kind of whine and grind...and so
have I. My ear tells me, from your initial personal attacks, that you
have nothing to actually argue with. You are pissed off, but you don't
actually have anything of substance to say.
Let me show you what I mean.
> I can get you in as a circus act if you want, you'd have to start as
> the guy who guesses people's weight though.
> I'd like to focus on Scratch's above comment in all it's Rorshachian
> (It's not a word, I know folks, please bear with me) glory. I use the
> term "seems" and it launches little Scratch into a diatribe completely
> off the topic of his bitchy, vindictive nature while (at the same
> time) completely qualifying it!
> I will acquiesce to Scratch's semantic mollycoddling and amend my
> statement: "Scratch, you are bitchy and vindictive"
> See? Nothing about image there. Just loving you for being YOU
> babycakes.
> (substitute "revelations" for "my poor wittle hurt fewings")
> You keep saying so, and weeee keep waiting....hurry up, my popcorn's
> getting cold.
> Well, not that I'm one to do so, but perhaps those of a more sadistic
> slant are enjoying your personal destruction of 10 years of your life,
> and want to watch how you destroy the rest? You're not without your
> comic value, y'know.
> Theres a kid with Tourette's Syndrome that lives a couple houses down
> from me. You can hear him yelling all hours of the night. I don't
> refute him either.
(*Chuckle*)
Tez, when I speculated that your "mastermind" strategy of dealing with me
would consist of "Yo-Momma" snaps and "I'm rubber, you're glue" refrains,
it was intended as a *joke*, not a suggestion!
Let me clue you in here (again): I don't care about your petty insults.
And if *I* don't care about them, then you can bet your lucky stars that
nobody else here does either. You can fire off weak shots to your heart's
content, but all you are going to do is demonstrate to the readers exactly
what I've been saying -- that you resort to ad hominems because you cannot
refute my statements about the Temple of Set. I actually appreciate
frustrated and impotent displays of hostility on the part of ToSsers; as
my WWII bomber-pilot Gran'pappy used to say, "when the flak is heaviest,
you know you're hitting the target." Thanks for letting me know I'm
hitting home, Tez!
If you think you are going to impress the masters who have hold of your
leash, however, you're going to have to stop barking like a frightened
spaniel, and show a little teeth! Not to worry though, I'll give you a
chance to redeem yourself at the end of this post.
> Logical tomfoolery? Saying that Balanone is going
> "NyeanyanyaIcanthearyou" when it's in your favor, but will raise a
> toast in his honor if he got booted? Go back and read (or have someone
> read it to you) the Webster's definition of logic, because youuuuu
> lil' crumpet are not following any.
(*Scratch gives Tez a kind but condescending look*)
Yes, a very complex chain of thought. Let me help you with it.
1) Balanone's refusal to answer my statements can be interpreted as an
avoidance of the subject, and an implied confirmation of my statements
(which is to my favor).
2) However, sometimes avoidance is the best approach, particularly if he
cannot tell the truth without further incriminating himself (which is NOT
to my favor).
3) Even in consideration of Balanone's avoidance of the questions, I must
also recognize that he elected an honest approach of silence, rather than
choosing to combat me with baldfaced lies (which some of your party have
briefly attempted, until they were overwhelmed by the evidence). In that,
he is at least somewhat honorable himself. I give credit where it is due.
So very difficult to grasp. Maybe you should read this explanation about
a dozen more times, hmm? Just to make sure you have it.
Now, here's that opportunity I promised you earlier, to impress all the
hierarchy by refuting my treachery in *fact* and with logic, rather than
by ham-handed and poorly executed insults!
Here you go...answer these questions (and answer them all, now, no picking
and choosing):
* If your organization is built for the benefit of its membership (unlike
a "cult"), why does it keep files on those members' perceived wrongdoings?
* Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its members'
personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
* How does the use of excommunication and "shunning" benefit the
individual Setian?
* If the purpose of the Temple is to promote the individual Will, why does
it appear that the Temple is attempting to hammer out a philosophical
conformity (beyond core Setian principles) among its membership?
* Is the Temple a cult? Explain your answer.
* Why is the membership of the Temple declining at an accelerated rate?
Go to!
SOD of CoE
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org>:
>1) Balanone's refusal to answer my statements can be interpreted as an
>avoidance of the subject, and an implied confirmation of my statements
>(which is to my favor).
that would be folly. we already know he disagrees with you.
>also recognize that he elected an honest approach of silence, rather than
>choosing to combat me with baldfaced lies ....
that isn't the only alternative. one would be the expression of an
opinion which you dislike or with which you strongly disagree, such
that you were judged by some Setians (ones presently influencing
the ToS membership roster) to be unworthy of their time.
> * If your organization is built for the benefit of its membership
> (unlike a "cult"), why does it keep files on those members'
> perceived wrongdoings?
in order to weed out the weaklings and moles.
> * Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its
> members' personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
no, but it may react strongly when a combination of catalyzing
incidents and communications are thrust before it, inclusive
of inciting expulsion. after reading the correspondence at your
site, I'd say that we're talking about personality conflicts,
communication break-downs, and little more. sure, some of the
members of these orgs are dimwits. *expect this* I say. if you
don't, you're delusional.
> * How does the use of excommunication and "shunning" benefit the
> individual Setian?
it prevents members of the temple from wasting their time in
needless banter, bothering themselves with manipulative,
deceptive, or unbalanced individuals.
> * If the purpose of the Temple is to promote the individual Will,
> why does it appear that the Temple is attempting to hammer out
> a philosophical conformity (beyond core Setian principles)
> among its membership?
appearances before the predisposed have a habit of meeting with
expectations. :>
> * Is the Temple a cult? Explain your answer.
not by Bonewits, by my very far outside perspective.
> * Why is the membership of the Temple declining at an accelerated rate?
is it? is membership some kind of important indicator? can one ever
produce support for one's claim about its changing? or will we be
hearing bad remakes of 'Less filling! More taste!' forever?
>Go to!
I answered them. not too difficult.
>Mr. Scratch
>Priest of Set
what does Set think about the temple, Mr. Scratch?
what does it take to worship this deity?
Mr. Scratch
Tyagi, now you're ruining the fun. Those questions were for my friend
Tez. I'd like to see if he's got the brains to work through them, and how
he does it.
What I'm really going for here isn't any kind of objective answer -- I've
already got those. What I want to see is how a ToSser fanatic like Tez
will answer them. It should be quite different from how you, me, or
anyone else would handle the problems. I'd also like to see how much he's
willing to admit to, and how much he'll throw fits over and deny.
So, lets see if Tez is willing to do his own homework, shall we? :)
Mr. Scratch
On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, SOD of CoE wrote:
> 50010706 IV! om Hail Satan! Lunatix!
>
> > * If your organization is built for the benefit of its membership
> > (unlike a "cult"), why does it keep files on those members'
> > perceived wrongdoings?
>
> in order to weed out the weaklings and moles.
>
> > * Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its
> > members' personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
>
> no, but it may react strongly when a combination of catalyzing
> blessed beast!
>
> bobo...@satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director,
> Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
> Satanism Archive: http://www.satanservice.org/
Mr. Scratch
the artist formerly known as IX Corp
SOD of CoE <bobo...@satanservice.org> wrote:
>btw, pleased to meet you, Tez. I don't think I've seen this
>pseudonym before in alt.satanism or usenet, outside the
>domain name that Wednesday had (has?).
Golly, that's a name from the past. What is Wednesday up to these days?
"What will Wednesday eat in the Nuetopian utopia?"
>are you a member of
>the ToS? familiar with the events being fussed over?
Put $100 on the "yes" box for me monty.
-Lupo
"Meat is good. Anyone who doesn't like meat should be shot. Then there'd
be more space to grow more meat." -der Fishninja <i...@dillenger.io.com>
C7 Chairman
(in message <V5n17.9835$rh.2...@news6.giganews.com>):
> In article <9i3ok5$g...@bolt.sonic.net>,
> SOD of CoE <bobo...@satanservice.org> wrote:
>
>> btw, pleased to meet you, Tez. I don't think I've seen this
>> pseudonym before in alt.satanism or usenet, outside the
>> domain name that Wednesday had (has?).
>
> Golly, that's a name from the past. What is Wednesday up to these days?
> "What will Wednesday eat in the Nuetopian utopia?"
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~wednsday/index.html
Mr. Scratch
> tezcat...@volcanomail.com (Tez):
>
> btw, pleased to meet you, Tez. I don't think I've seen this
> pseudonym before in alt.satanism or usenet, outside the
> domain name that Wednesday had (has?). are you a member of
> the ToS? familiar with the events being fussed over?
Nah, the name is probably just intended as a "jab" at me. I founded the
Smoking Mirror Pylon/Element in the ToS, all dedicated to Tezcatlipoca
(Nahuatl for "Smoking Mirror", the Aztec god of black magic, treachery,
violence, and the night -- among other things -- the dark side of the
human personality). Not much of a jab really, but if you don't have
anything else, you use what's available I suppose.
Either that, or it's the Shreckster himself, who likes to adopt
Tezatlipoca's names for himself now and again. I kinda doubt it though --
"Tez" isn't up to Schrecks level of communication. And besides, the
Schrecks are in darkest Germany, where messages are apparently still sent
by carrier pigeon and pony express.
Mr. Scratch
Tez
Right to the meat of the matter:
> Here you go...answer these questions (and answer them all, now, no picking
> and choosing):
>
> * If your organization is built for the benefit of its membership (unlike
> a "cult"), why does it keep files on those members' perceived wrongdoings?
Oh please...you show a JPEG of a bunch of papers with pentagrams and
we're supposed to belief there are files based on that? Thats your
proof? Second of all....you just have one? I would think if the Temple
was keeping a clearing house of information on it's initiates, you'd
surely have more than one. C'mon Scratch, back it up.
Translation:Bullshit
>
> * Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its members'
> personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
No, because a responsible organization is made up of people who are
responsible.
You are not of this category.Think about it: You were friends with
Lupo/Locklin/Whogivesadamn for awhile, no one said a thing. You
brought him to the Conclave hotel, swept it under the mat, got caught
and got expelled. Thats it Scratch; No great conspiracies (I'm sorry,
you're just not that important to anyone but yourself), just you
screwing up and not being able to handle it. If the fact that you were
friends with Lupo was the last straw, you would've been gone years
ago. Bring antagonistic anti-Christians to a Sunday bible picnic,
people aren't going to want you around. Bring antagonistic
right-to-lifers to a
pro-choice meeting (and vice versa), and people aren't going to want
you around.
Bring an antagonistic anti-Setian to the Conclave hotel, and people
aren't going to want you around." Hey, how 'bout I bring Maninblack by
your house in a month or two? I promise he'll be good." How would you
respond to that?
>
> * How does the use of excommunication and "shunning" benefit the
> individual Setian?
My own initiatory work is something special and intimate. I need to
trust the people I'm going to interact with, or it's no go. Believe it
or not Scratch, I have friends who are ex-Setians, one or two who
didn't even leave in particularly good graces. The Temple knows about
this and you know what else, THEY DON'T CARE! Simply because they know
I don't talk Temple stuff with said ex-Setians, I don't take them
around Conclaves, there is no crossroads where the two shall meet. I
wouldn't expect the Priest of a "hobby religion" to understand that
however.
>
> * If the purpose of the Temple is to promote the individual Will, why does
> it appear that the Temple is attempting to hammer out a philosophical
> conformity (beyond core Setian principles) among its membership?
Ummm, Kinda vague don't you think? I Work with people who come from
and Work with Yogic, Satanist, Pagan and Neuroliguistic Programming
backgrounds. These backgrounds acrete into the perspective that they
each hold towards Setian philosophy and there is no negative
repercussions for it, as they're not using Setianism as a "catch-all"
terms for things they like that they want to have validated in the
eyes of others. Beyond core Setian values, no agreement on application
is really asked for. Therefore, the philosophical conformity thing
doesn't hold water.
>
> * Is the Temple a cult? Explain your answer.
Last I checked, cults don't let you leave. Second of all, cults do
require a mindless obedience, which is not conducive to productive
discussion of initiatory and magical worth, which is something that
the Temple is not lacking in an abundance of, you'll be sorry to know.
In short, cults don't leave you alone. Then again, talk smack about
practically anyone, and they're bound to respond.
>
> * Why is the membership of the Temple declining at an accelerated rate?
Ah yes, another one from the "I sez so, therefore it is" file of
Maestro Scratch. Lets turn back the hands of time, shall we?:
Date: 2001-05-29 22:50:08 PST
“I'd like to speak with you a moment about the atrocious loss of
membership
in recent months. My inside sources in the Temple of Set Priesthood
inform me that the total membership of the ToS has dropped
dramatically
over the past several months, and now stands at about 275, give or
take. “
-Mr. Scratch
There you have it folks. The ironclad proof of the huge Setian
diaspora: Mr. Scratch says so. "My inside sources", thats it? Not even
a copy of an e-mail to this effect? Certain people are going to
believe you, simply because they want to and not based on evidence
(which works in your favor). Not a whole lot that can be done about
that. However, there are a few people out here who do not worship at
the altar of the Written Word and actually like a bit of evidence, not
interpretation, not inference, evidence. Once again, back it up
Scratch. Give comparisons and contrasts. "Accelerated rate of
decline"? Compared to what. Show proof or find a new line, because
this one isn't taking.
Y'know what? This is your show, run it how you like. At the end of the
day, all you have is this list. The great thing about your assumptions
is that you're the only one who has to live with them.
Yes Scratch, the last word is yours. Do whatever you want with it.
Adios all,
Tez
Kevin Filan
>Mr. Scratch,
>
>Right to the meat of the matter:
Tell ya what: since you were so kind as to respond to Scratch's questions,
perhaps you could respond to the quote below, taken from Magistra Zeena
Shreck's 1990 letter to Michael Aquino?
* * * * *
Another fact conveniently not included is the common knowledge that as the
co-director of the Werewolf Order, I have paved a unique path of my own
inspired by the Western European magical tradition. These very European
magical traditions, which I have always maintained as my own, are of more
personal importance to me than the largely Eastern and negative
Judeo-Christian
imagery still so boringly peddled by the CoS. In the desire to appeal to the
masses, Barton's book makes it glaringly clear that the real motive of the
Church of Satan is to attract cash from "economic power brokers"; what other
reason could justify the sickeningly repetitive flattery she (he) extends to
Zionism, Bolshevism, and the state of Israel while safely negating any Norse
or Teutonic mythology
* * * * *
Perhaps you would deign to speculate on:
1) What "economic power brokers" were giving LaVey money so that he would
promote Zionism, Bolshevism, and the State of Israel.
2) What aspects of the Church of Satan are pro-Zionist or pro-Bolshevik.
3) What other Setians share Zeena & Nicky's beliefs that "economic power
brokers" infiltrate organizations in order to promote their Zionist,
Bolshevik, pro-Israel agenda
(I wonder how many times I have to ask this before it gets included in
Balanone's Temple of Set FAQ).
Peace
Kevin Filan
------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe to those who love is given sight
to pierce the veil of seeming night
and know it pure beyond all imagining.
- Bruce Cockburn
Kevin Filan
People's Commissar
you on this non issue and I am not even a spokesperson for the TOS. I also
postes a nice little scenario for you to contemplate. Clue: I didn't make
it up. Once upon a time Nick and Zeena thought a, b, c. Then years passed
without them ever taking note that you or your friend existed. They ignored
you. Then they changed and now they say d, e, f. End of story. You WANT
the TOS members to glue themselves to your little personal conflict. You
have never grown up, never gotten over this garbage. Or else you are just a
pent up fool getting off with this garbage. You are hell bent determined to
prove the Schrecks to be Nazis. Let's see - they were once before? They
are not now? FTR: they'd not be allowed into the TOS if they were. You're
here just itching to get just ONE Tos member to respond to your stupid
past-history shit. I don't see them obliging you.
Filan, I sent a fw of the entire convo to the FBI in my area myself. You
think I'm joking? I didn't even have to do it. I called the Medina County
Police too and asked them if they got complaints against Nancy Warlick.
This was weeks back. They said NO! I told them your name, I told them what
she and your youruself claim you have done to her. I had a nice chat with
them and told them where to find it all. I phoned Hendry and told them
about you trying to gather BOGUS, oh yes, bogus indeed, bs against me. Now,
if you think you are going to create bogus complaints against me, have your
own lackeys do what you claim "me and my comrades" do when we do NOTHING of
the sort, then you know nothing about police procedure on really finding out
things. You can't fake emails, real letters, or phone calls - and mine's
tapped at my request.
I'll see you in jail - or better yet, your stinking cowardly organization
sued and dismantled every brick and nail. Aquino should have done it when
that CID garbage happened right then and there.
We'll see who is accountable - you certainly are not: You slandered Aquino's
dead mother online. You hacked his online bank account - it's on record.
All of it. You are trash, Kevin. Almost every Magister in the COS is
connected to the patriot movement - neo-Nazis. I know who every one of them
are. And thanks to me, so do those that watch such things. NO, not the
Feds. You are a hate cult.
You think I bluff? Ask Barnyard Bertha about that. This ng IS BEING
monitored. I saw to that. They must have considered me a pain in the ass.
But it is being monitored. Not by anyone that posts here so wipe off the
smirk.
Why don't you get a life before I join up with Aquino, especially regarding
that bogus CID slander, and sue the god damned shit out of your stinking
organization? Give ME a reason to do it, I'd do what Aquino failed to do -
doesn't matter if your stupid club is not worth a penny. It would be worth
it just to see you dismantled. Wiccans would praise the day. Rid the world
of LaVeyan poison and let the real LHP breathe.
Tani Jantsang
Kevin Filan
=====
Shut up, Grandma. Nobody gave you permission to speak.
Kevin Filan
Live at One
"Kevin Filan" <Raks...@MailAndNews.com> drooled out of a drunken stupor and
splattered
>
> Shut up, Grandma. Nobody gave you permission to speak. Blah blah blah
blah, myaaaah myaaaaa myaaaa. I'm such a lackey blah blahblah blah, nyah!
>
> Tani myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa, blah blah.
> ::rolls eyes till she goes blind:: And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa
> myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I'm right see? I kill file everyone see? I never post
> to thier things see? I never read anything see? myaah myaah myaaa blah
> blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa, blah blah.
>
> Aquino myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa, blah blah.
> ::chuckles:: And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
>
> Tani myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa, blah blah. And
> BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
>
Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa, blah blah. And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa
> myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
>
> Aquino and Lilith myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa,
> blah blah. And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
>
> And the Schrecksters myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa
nyaaa,
> blah blah. And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! And I was
productive.
> I was loyal. They conspired, blah blah blah. And my ex wife blah
blahblah
> blah. She's married to blah blah blah blah. The purge of good blah blah
> blah blah and I'm good. I'm good. I was always good. Everybody else is
> bad. But but but but because of the blah blah blah myaaaaaaaaa!
> Nick and Zeena 1990, letter blah blah blah, the letter, see the letter.
See the >letter?
>
> TANI TANI TANI myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa, blah
> blah. And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
>
> Nikolas and Zeena myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa,
> blah blah. And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! It's all thier
fault,
> it really is and blahblah blah blah blah.
>
> TANI TANI TANI myaah myaah myaaa blah blah. Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa, blah
> blah. And BLAH BLAH BLAH, myaa myaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
>
> And can somebody explain to these Living Dead Trolls what it means to move
> on and get a life? HE HE HE HE HE. I don't think so. Isn't that great?
>
> Yours truly,
>
> Arnold
>
Live at One
Kevin Filan
=====
Tani Jantsang once again proves that alt.satanism and menopause are a
singularly bad combination.
>Filan, I sent a fw of the entire convo to the FBI in my area myself. You
>think I'm joking? I didn't even have to do it.
You are welcome to send the FBI whatever information you like, and they are
welcome to do with it what they will. In a similar vein, I am entitled to
provide your victims with evidence suggesting a continuous pattern of
misbehavior on your part, a pattern which goes back some ten years. This is
important, particularly in jurisdictions which have recently passed
"stalker"
laws. If a victim can show a pattern of misbehavior on the part of their
stalker (i.e. if s/he can show this person regularly has her cult members
cause offline trouble for people she doesn't like), it becomes easier to get
criminal penalties and orders of protection, should these become required.
>This was weeks back. They said NO! I told them your name, I told them what
>she and your youruself claim you have done to her. I had a nice chat with
>them and told them where to find it all. I phoned Hendry and told them
>about you trying to gather BOGUS, oh yes, bogus indeed, bs against me. Now,
It will be up to the FBI and the Hendry County Sheriff's Department to
determine if the letters sent to school officials, employers, White Power
skinheads, etc. were bogus. You are, of course, free to explain these
letters
however you like.
>if you think you are going to create bogus complaints against me, have your
>own lackeys do what you claim "me and my comrades" do when we do NOTHING of
>the sort, then you know nothing about police procedure on really finding out
>things. You can't fake emails, real letters, or phone calls - and mine's
>tapped at my request.
As I said: it is my prerogative to provide this evidence to anyone you
victimize in the future. It is then their prerogative to bring it to the
attention of your local police department.
>All of it. You are trash, Kevin. Almost every Magister in the COS is
>connected to the patriot movement - neo-Nazis. I know who every one of them
>are. And thanks to me, so do those that watch such things. NO, not the
>Feds. You are a hate cult.
Jill? Jill Panther? Is that you, Jill????
>Why don't you get a life before I join up with Aquino, especially regarding
>that bogus CID slander, and sue the god damned shit out of your stinking
>organization? Give ME a reason to do it, I'd do what Aquino failed to do -
Tani, you know the address for the Church of Satan's attorney: you've sent
him
reams of your schizophrenic drooling. Why don't you shut up and put your
money where your mouth is?
You think the CoS is slandering you? Go ahead. Sue.
I'm waiting. But not holding my breath.
GUlLLOTlNA
>As I said: it is my prerogative to provide this evidence to anyone you
victimize in the future. It is then their prerogative to bring it to the
attention of your local police department.>>
Seems like somebody's pretty angry over this one....methinks the "lady" doth
protest a wee bit too much.
I will reiterate: any reg on this board who receives harrassing phonecalls,
whose supervisor is contacted at work, who receives unacceptable snail-mail
from not only Jantsang but ANY of her little cronies, or any other harrassment,
let me know. I will do everything I can to help you; and I do not go back on my
word. This crap has went far enough.
*********
There are such things as accessories before and after the fact. It would
behoove you & your minions to keep this in mind...and now you can call the
local sheriff's department and report my determination to hit you people where
it hurts, if you are stupid enough to make that neccessary.
Tinfoil-Helmet Lady: <<You are trash, Kevin.>>
You are disfunctional faux-Tatar trash from the Steppes of New Jersey.
Impressive!
<< Almost every Magister in the COS is connected to the patriot movement -
neo-Nazis. I know who every one of them are.>>
So what?!
Am I the only one SICK AND TIRED of hearing this TRIPE from someone who
admittedly socializes with same in real life?! I declare, "Nazis" are looking
better and better as a result.
<<And thanks to me, so do those that watch such things. NO, not the Feds. You
are a hate cult.>>
Just call me a "hate cult" of one....I hate stupidity and liars both.
>>Why don't you get a life before I join up with Aquino, >>
I certainly hope Aquino has more sense than this. I really do.
>Give ME a reason to do it, I'd do what Aquino failed to do ->>
Ball's in your court, old bat.
Control your mouth (which evidently possesses a 'mind' of its own - if one can
call it that) and it goes no further. You made this situation - you dig
yourself in deeper & deeper with every manic post.
Then your cronies appear and throw a few more shovels of dirt on top of you for
good measure. ::laughs::
Ain't just whistling Dixie:
L.
*********
"There is no pleasure comparable to the standing-upon the vantage-ground of
Truth." - Francis Bacon
People's Commissar
employer, school or anything of the sort.
You LIE, boy.
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"Kevin Filan" <Raks...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B83...@MailAndNews.com...
GUlLLOTlNA
completely off the topic of his bitchy, vindictive nature while (at the same
time) completely qualifying it!>>
Perhaps this is because the word "seems" is overused by persons trying to flame
enemies on this group, with no real info regarding that enemy - they are then
reduced to conjecture, fantasy and other such unacceptable hyperbole.
Tez, a few friendly hints (honest!)
You are in way over your head here. If you disagree with Scratch's opinion of
the Temple of Set, fine. You will appear far more credible if, instead of
trying to match personal insults with him, you stick to the issues at hand &
refuting his arguments in a logical fashion.
We do have regs out here regarding which there has been speculation involving
Tourette's Syndrome - Scratch is not one of them.
If I remember correctly, both Mr. Scratch and Kevin Filan have repeatedly asked
you to address various issues/questions. You have yet to do so; instead we see
a bunch of personal insults. Those insults might even be construed as "bitchy"
or "vindictive."
If ToS is not what it's cracked up to be as far as unacceptable activity, (that
is, if they truly do not out people's info and expel them over sillinesses)
perhaps you'd be advised to provide examples showing how Scratch's opinions and
experiences are off the mark, rather than this sort of thing.
All we ever see from people who come here trying to discredit him is a lot of
sound and fury with *no* actual refutation of his version of events.
Kind of makes one wonder. Or not.
L.
*********
alt.satanism: Where he-said-she-said does *not* constitute proof.
SOD of the CoE
RE the Temple of Set, realities and ideals
Mr. Scratch:
>> * If your organization is built for the benefit of its membership (unlike
>> a "cult"), why does it keep files on those members' perceived wrongdoings?
tezcat...@volcanomail.com (Tez):
> Oh please...you show a JPEG of a bunch of papers with pentagrams and
> we're supposed to belief there are files based on that? Thats your
> proof? Second of all....you just have one? I would think if the Temple
> was keeping a clearing house of information on it's initiates, you'd
> surely have more than one. C'mon Scratch, back it up.
this seems a misplaced discussion. Scratch provides enough information
in his correspondence that one might infer that a *file* is kept on
each of the ToS members. given Former HP Aquino's position with respect
to military intelligence, it doesn't seem out of the question that such
a file would be kept on members. I know for a fact that this kind of
file is kept for OTO members who have correspondence with officers
(just for keeping track of correspondence and admin matters; nothing
nefarious in the activity at all, just good communications). yes, such
a file *might* contain complaints, but so what? that there were
implications made to Mr. Scratch that his complaint file was 160 pages
and this turned, over time, into 60 is interesting, but it tells us no
more, really about the practices of the temple's administration.
>> * Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its members'
>> personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
>
> No, because a responsible organization is made up of people who are
> responsible. You are not of this category. Think about it: You were
> friends with Lupo/Locklin/Whogivesadamn for awhile, no one said a thing.
other ToS members (like you below!) have made it clear that they also have
ex-ToS friends and have heard no warnings about this. however, it should
be stated that the ToS is clear in its initial interviewing process that
it is concerned about competing affiliations. if one is a member of a
church outside the Temple one cannot rise in its ranks without abandoning
what it deems 'conflicting interests' (i.e. one cannot serve two gods).
> You brought him to the Conclave hotel, swept it under the mat, got
> caught and got expelled....
not entirely accurate, if you read Mr. Scratch's account. Lupo was giving
*them* a ride, dropped them off at the hotel lobby entrance, and someone
Lupo knew (but apparently didn't even recognize) *happened* to be at this
location at the hotel. perhaps you could elaborate on what was 'swept under
the mat'. it does sound like Scratch/Delf did not make an immediate
explanation to their superiors, which might or might not have salvaged
their membership.
> Bring an antagonistic anti-Setian to the Conclave hotel, and people
> aren't going to want you around.
even if it was an accident? this seems a bit harsh. I've read through all
of the text at Mr. Scratch's website now (rather than just the "Scratch
Dialogues"), and it does seem obvious that an attitude problem exists in
the temple's upper echelon sufficient to be noticed by members themselves
(cf. the Setian Manifesto written by internal members called 'The Cluster').
this is not really news to me, given the attitude displayed by Former HP
Michael Aquino in alt.satanism, inclusive of outright lying concerning
other individuals such as myself as regards our activities/expression.
arrogance and power-mad elitism based on what *I* would call 'delusions of
grandeur' (certifiable? I am in no position to judge) is certainly not
scarce in the Satanist community. that Mr. Scratch and others have taken
so long to ascertain that it is a facet of the Temple of Set is somewhat
surprising to me, but apparently they are not, as I am, conditioned to
distrust orgs and skeptically (sometimes cynically) examine their doings.
Aquino's initial responses to my queries satisfied my suspicions that this
would be the case based on the fact that
1) he made it clear that dual-membership in 'other religions'
would not be tolerated for advanced temple membership
and 2) he proceeded to belittle and insult me when I (again) informed
him that my interest in the temple was academic, rather than
constituting an attempt to join.
since then we have been on friendly terms and I have even defended him
in public against Curio and other idiots. I admire his wit and intellect
even if I do not trust the organization (any organization) to deal
fairly with its members (by virtue of the increased egoic pressure put
upon those in positions of social power who are truly unready to deal
with its repercussions -- i.e. 'they haven't done their yoga').
>> * How does the use of excommunication and "shunning" benefit the
>> individual Setian?
>
> My own initiatory work is something special and intimate. I need to
> trust the people I'm going to interact with, or it's no go. Believe it
> or not Scratch, I have friends who are ex-Setians, one or two who
> didn't even leave in particularly good graces. The Temple knows about
> this and you know what else, THEY DON'T CARE! Simply because they know
> I don't talk Temple stuff with said ex-Setians, I don't take them
> around Conclaves, there is no crossroads where the two shall meet. I
> wouldn't expect the Priest of a "hobby religion" to understand that
> however.
this is a NON-ANSWER. rather than avoid the actual question, would you
be so kind as to address it? how does the use of excommunication,
expulsion and social SHUNNING benefit the individual Setian (and, I
would add, the Temple of Set)? why doesn't this constitute a very
important facet of the temple's cult-like character?
>> * If the purpose of the Temple is to promote the individual Will, why does
>> it appear that the Temple is attempting to hammer out a philosophical
>> conformity (beyond core Setian principles) among its membership?
>
> Ummm, Kinda vague don't you think? I Work with people who come from
> and Work with Yogic, Satanist, Pagan and Neuroliguistic Programming
> backgrounds. These backgrounds acrete into the perspective that they
> each hold towards Setian philosophy and there is no negative
> repercussions for it, as they're not using Setianism as a "catch-all"
> terms for things they like that they want to have validated in the
> eyes of others. Beyond core Setian values, no agreement on application
> is really asked for. Therefore, the philosophical conformity thing
> doesn't hold water.
it was and continues to be my contention that the Temple of Set has a
philosophical litmus test which membership must pass before being
allowed to assume positions of authority within it. this litmis amounts
to holding no direct social connection (e.g. sect membership) or
intellectual positions, beliefs, values, etc., which are in conflict
with what the officials in the temple consider to be important (and
thusfar 'religious membership' or belief seems to be at the root of
this litmus test as I have experienced it distantly and obliquely).
>> * Is the Temple a cult? Explain your answer.
>
> Last I checked, cults don't let you leave.
false. it depends upon one's circumstance and relation to the cult.
at certain points greater and greater pressure is liable to be placed
upon members to remain with the group, and cults of extreme danger
indeed can and do resort to shaming and extortion to attempt to
prevent attrition. post-exilic publishing of former-members' private
information as revenge could display an ethics which might also cover
the use of (even hostile) pressure-tactics against members to get them
to conform to prescribed standards. however, a blanket statement like
the above is not a reliable standard of assessment.
I applaud Mr. Scratch's efforts to educate the Setian community
about the dangerous of cultism (even using his humourous contexts
such as portraying the ToS as INGSOC in an Orwellian satire),
and yet neither do I think that he has done his homework, nor
do I think that there is sufficient emphasis in the occult or
Satanist communities surrounding this very real danger.
it is sour grapes to level the criticism against the ToS without
what I would consider a greater degree of data than may be found
at the radio-free-setian website regarding pressure tactics and
restriction and control of the private lives of members. that
there is *some* is to be expected. the temple is UP-FRONT about
what it considers conflicts of interest. I do not see that this
extends, however, into the realm of sexual liaisons, consumption
of food, sleep patterns, or general social association, however.
that you believe that cults "don't let you leave" is a horror
story of the worst of cult nightmares, and yet one does not always
meet up with this kind of nightmare in a glancing exchange (even
including membership).
for example, my own departure from association with the Church of
Scientology, which I was studying strictly on my own, and from an
investigative relationship with Nichiren Shoshu of America (NSA)
and the International Society for Krishna CONsciousness (ISKCON),
the two of which I studied in comparison and contrast of religious
fanaticism for a college course on religions was met with some
level of pursuit. I expected this, especially of the Scientologists,
who called me repeatedly and at times, beratingly, attempting to
get me to come back to the fold. members would of course witness
a *far greater degree of pressure*, and it would include all of
their friends and family, because of the exclusiveness which the
cult requires its members to maintain. we have no evidence to
support this kind of cult atmosphere. in fact, Mr. Scratch offers
us evidence to the *contrary* in his explanation of his
relationship with Lupo, someone whom the ToS considers an enemy,
given that the ToS knew about his continuing association and did
not try to dissuade him from it.
> Second of all, cults do
> require a mindless obedience, which is not conducive to productive
> discussion of initiatory and magical worth, which is something that
> the Temple is not lacking in an abundance of, you'll be sorry to know.
>
> In short, cults don't leave you alone. Then again, talk smack about
> practically anyone, and they're bound to respond.
leash-length variation and areas of freedom do exist, even in the
most extreme cults. better would be an evaluation a la Bonewits or
some better-informed cult expert of the temple's activities and
how its membership is being treated. many of the incidents described
at Mr. Scratch's web site (http://www.radio-free-setian.com/) do have
something in common with complaints of seriously dangerous cults,
though by and large what he and those he is quoting seem to be
describing appears to take place in just about *ALL* organizations,
especially those which are pyramidal of structure and presumptuous
of cosmological authority -- often religious). for this reason it is
valuable to observe how the temple responds to Mr. Scratch at all
its levels (if indeed it replies at all) in public and privately.
I recommend perusing the following document and considering, based
on your own experience with the temple, how it fares (post the
results *here*, along with an explanation of your authority):
http://www.satanservice.org/delusion/bonewitsframe.txt
>> * Why is the membership of the Temple declining at an accelerated rate?
in
# Temple of Set Situation
# by Walter Radtke
at http://www.radio-free-setian.com/_history/walter.html
the following text may be found:
# ...the lack of growth of
# the Temple over the past 7 years. It's membership has remained static at
# about 300 and no one copped to the fact that this is not a healthy
# statistic for any organization. ... The Temple takes in a half dozen or so
# new members a month and loses a half dozen members a month, mostly from the
# I*. Naturally, this was never assumed to be the fault of the Temple, yet
# myself and others, including the Schrecks with whom I was on a friendly
# basis, had received report after report of I* and II* dissatisfaction with
# various aspects of interaction with mainly the Priesthood.
this seems to indicate a lack of temple membership growth by someone who
would have been aware (by his assessment) of the membership situation.
not only this, the apparent reason for the dissatisfaction described by
Radtke is the officious, arrogant attitude (sometimes a distinct LACK
of communication and sometimes just hostility and rudeness) by the UPPER
echelon of the temple. Former HP Michael Aquino certainly has displayed
this attitude with some individuals with whom he has corresponded in
usenet (and even with me in private), so it doesn't seem out of the
question that it might be pervasive in the temple membership's officers.
on the *other* hand, I have very few complaints of this type which I may
bring up concerning the behaviour of Balanone, whom I gather, after
reading Mr. Scratch's web site files, is the Chairperson of the Council of
Nine -- the administrative body of the temple). this seems to represent
*contrary* evidence, and so I have wondered about the atmosphere therein.
> Mr. Scratch says so. "My inside sources", thats it? Not even
> a copy of an e-mail to this effect?
> ...Give comparisons and contrasts. "Accelerated rate of
> decline"? Compared to what[?]....
it is true that Mr. Scratch gives us no additional information about
how he came by this information about a Setian departure from the ToS,
though he seems to know people who at least *have* been in a position to
know about the data. whether they are *still* in such a position or have
connections to the temple is a matter left unresolved, but your criticism
and request for supporting data here does seem justified.
Forrester
reason. Reason was provided. Explanation was provided. The matter is
quite closed and no longer up for debate.
"Tez" <tezcat...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:dd92d963.01070...@posting.google.com...
> > Here you go...answer these questions (and answer them all, now, no
picking
> > and choosing):
My, my, he likes to make his little demands, now does he?
>
> No, because a responsible organization is made up of people who are
> responsible.
> You are not of this category.Think about it: You were friends with
> Lupo/Locklin/Whogivesadamn for awhile, no one said a thing. You
> brought him to the Conclave hotel, swept it under the mat, got caught
> and got expelled. Thats it Scratch; No great conspiracies (I'm sorry,
> you're just not that important to anyone but yourself), just you
> screwing up and not being able to handle it. If the fact that you were
> friends with Lupo was the last straw, you would've been gone years
> ago. Bring antagonistic anti-Christians to a Sunday bible picnic,
> people aren't going to want you around. Bring antagonistic
> right-to-lifers to a
> pro-choice meeting (and vice versa), and people aren't going to want
> you around.
> Bring an antagonistic anti-Setian to the Conclave hotel, and people
> aren't going to want you around." Hey, how 'bout I bring Maninblack by
> your house in a month or two? I promise he'll be good." How would you
> respond to that?
Good comeback, if I say so myself; but you didn't have to say a word.
Maninblack?
>
> Y'know what? This is your show, run it how you like. At the end of the
> day, all you have is this list. The great thing about your assumptions
> is that you're the only one who has to live with them.
>
> Yes Scratch, the last word is yours. Do whatever you want with it.
I rather enjoyed the comment about people laughing as he wastes yet another
ten years of his apparently not-so-precious life. An evil grin passed
across my face upon reading that. Tez, I didn't know you had that in you.
They have even gone to the trouble to create an anti-ToS egroup dedicated to
the ToS. The wiser ones entrapped in that game of futility will move on to
better things.
They are cut from the same mold, Locklin, Scratch and that other one, Filan.
They can't create a single thing that inspires a living soul. They band
together and sling flames to and fro at those who have; that seems to be
their life story.
>
> Adios all,
Just passing through.
>
> Tez
Mr. Scratch
http://www.radio-free-setian.com/
Yes, those rumors you've heard are true, folks.
This page has been founded by a number of ex-members of the Temple of Set,
to provide the public with a behind-the-scenes image of the workings of
the Temple, and for those of us who have been involved with the Temple to
tell of our experiences and observations. We hope that you enjoy it.
I'm especially pleased with James Foster's work on the flash sequence (as
well as with the rest of the work, but that bit in particular still
impresses me a great deal). There is a great deal of further material
that is in the process of being formatted for posting on the site, so
check back in periodically to see updates!
To the hierarchy of the Temple of Set; pehaps you should mark this as a
milestone. I suppose it is a certain kind of benchmark that must be
passed in the decline of any religious organization that loses its way
into demagoguery, that former members will band together to create a means
of exposing you.
In any case, we welcome contact with Setians, both current members and
former members, and wish those who are thinking of joining the Temple of
Set the wisdom and insight to choose what is truly best for them.
Mr. Scratch, Priest of Set
www.radio-free-setian.com
Mr. Scratch
On 7 Jul 2001, Tez wrote:
> > * If your organization is built for the benefit of its membership
> > (unlike a "cult"), why does it keep files on those members' perceived
> > wrongdoings?
>
> Oh please...you show a JPEG of a bunch of papers with pentagrams and
> we're supposed to belief there are files based on that? Thats your
> proof? Second of all....you just have one? I would think if the Temple
> was keeping a clearing house of information on it's initiates, you'd
> surely have more than one. C'mon Scratch, back it up.
Note that there is no denial that the Temple keeps files on the activities
of the membership (which they do). Tez also fails to answer the question;
would a religion built for the benefit of its members keep files on those
members' wrongdoings? A total dodge.
Instead, Tez wants to quibble about the one file I already examined here,
demanding "proof" that it is real. Well, I suppose I could send it off to
a trustworthy neutral party for confirmation. Or post a FOIA style
blacked out version. But in either case, Tez, the file is real, and I can
arrange proof if you really want to quibble.
> > * Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its
> > members' personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
>
> No, because a responsible organization is made up of people who are
> responsible. You are not of this category.
Again, you are not answering the question. You go on to further complain
that I was not kicked out for my association with Lupo, yet this is in
denial of Michael Aquino's own statements on the matter. I love it how
you guys shift around in your reasoning for giving me the boot. First, it
was for my treacherously consorting with the enemy. When it turns out
that such things make you look bad, now it is for bringing Lupo into the
hotel driveway.
Here's some quotes for you:
[On my not informing the Gang of 9 that I'd accidentally allowed Lupo to
know where the Conclave location was:]
"He would have no doubt suffered great embarrassment if he had told us
that something was wrong -- and probably he would be tossed out anyway --
but the spirit of the III* would have lead him to do so."
(Don Webb, HP ToS)
"The atmosphere [of the Co9 meeting to determine Hunt's expulsion] was
not particularly emotional. It was more a case of whether Hunt's
maintaining a long-standing personal friendship with Locklin, in
disregard of the latter's behavior towards the Temple of Set, was in
keeping with the Priesthood's honor and dignity.
[...]
"What is perhaps most ironic about this is that the *actual* reasons,
as detailed above, are apparently incomprehensible to Hunt; he cannot
understand why his dalliance with Locklin should have been considered
the least relevant to his sacred office. It is precisely that lack of
sensitivity that was of decisive concern to the Council.
[...]
"In this case it was the unanimous opinion of the High Priest and the
Council of Nine that by associating yourself socially with someone like
Locklin you had displayed your casual disregard, if not contempt for the
Temple of Set; hence the HS was in your case disgraced and should be
removed accordingly."
(Michael Aquino)
Yup, nothing, nothing, NOTHING to do with my being friends with Lupo!
Look folks, if you'll read the dialogues, I think it's clear that the
reason given for my expulsion is pretty much 50/50 -- because I was
friends with Lupo, AND because I accidentally allowed him to discover the
Conclave location. For while, the ToS chose to emphasize the former
reason, making an example of me (perhaps as a way to indirectly warn their
Setian dupes that if they failed to choose the right friends they might
suffer the same fate). When this explanation turned around to bite them
in the ass, all of a sudden they changed tune.
> If the fact that you were friends with Lupo was the last straw, you
> would've been gone years ago. Bring antagonistic anti-Christians to a
> Sunday bible picnic, people aren't going to want you around. Bring
> antagonistic right-to-lifers to a pro-choice meeting (and vice versa),
> and people aren't going to want you around. Bring an antagonistic
> anti-Setian to the Conclave hotel, and people aren't going to want you
> around.
Er...We're talking about the parking lot here, which is all that Lupo saw
of the Conclave (and at the time, even seeing this, Lupo had no idea of
what it was. All he saw was a goofball in a cowboy hat, smoking a
cigarette, no doubt shaking in astonishment at the seven-foot-tall,
fanged, green-skinned, horn-headed, human-skull-necklace-wearing
apparition Kerry and I were shaking hands with). So yes, I would expect
that if I pulled up in the parking lot of some pro-choice meeting in a
right-to-lifer's car, shook hands, and let him drive off, I would be
questioned about the nature of the interaction. Once it was cleared up
that the whole thing was an accident, and that the right-to-lifer in
question was never any danger to the proceedings, I would also expect the
pro-choicers to get over it. Maybe I'd get a stern lecture on
carelessness, but I wouldn't expect them to denounce my choice of friends,
paint the encounter out as if my friend had shown up sporting a vest of
dynamite sticks, and give me the flying boot.
> Hey, how 'bout I bring Maninblack by your house in a month or two? I
> promise he'll be good." How would you respond to that?
Actually, back when I was pounding heads with him, if Maninblack and I had
been in the same town, I would not have been at all surprised by a chance
encounter. We live in similar subcultures, after all, and I know we have
mutual friends. I wouldn't have been pleased by it, but I'm an adult, and
can accept the fact that sometimes we meet people we don't like.
My encounters in the Temple with someone who had physically and verbally
abused me over the course of years, and had told tremendous lies about me
in order to diminish my reputation, were far more obnoxious than any such
encounter with Maninblack would be. In fact, I'd say they were worse than
any distress the Temple encountered by having Lupo in their hotel
driveway, by a factor of ten. Yet I accepted it for what it was.
I guess I don't feel you've answered this question either, about whether
the Temple of Set is being responsible by trying to control its members'
choices of friends. Given the above Aquino quotes, and this one regarding
a Setian who had been expelled for undetailed reasons:
"The discovery of Setian Initiates maintaining friendly and cordial
relationships with this <ahem> 'person' will not be dismissed lightly. I
trust I have made myself clear, and that a single warning is sufficient to
the wise?" -- Bruce Ware IV*
It should be clear to most readers that the Temple will do exactly what
I've accused them of, if they feel the person in question is an "enemy."
> > * How does the use of excommunication and "shunning" benefit the
> > individual Setian?
>
> My own initiatory work is something special and intimate. I need to
> trust the people I'm going to interact with, or it's no go. Believe it
> or not Scratch, I have friends who are ex-Setians, one or two who
> didn't even leave in particularly good graces. The Temple knows about
> this and you know what else, THEY DON'T CARE!
No? Maybe you just don't have the "right" friends!
Sure, lots of Setians leave the Temple under bad circumstances, and then
remain silent on their experiences. So long as they keep their mouths
shut, the Temple won't do anything. However, if said friend is an
"enemy," you have a whole different story. Look at what happened to Scott
when he tried to arrange a business deal with Gilmore, and with George
Smith when he met with LaVey.
I'll tell you what, "Tez." You're only a few hours drive from my fine
city. Why don't you come on over for a weekend. No, no, don't go telling
or asking the Temple if it's okay -- it's supposed to be none of their
business, right? Just come on over without saying a word to anyone, and
Kerry and I will show you the sights. We'll have dinner at my favorite
restaurant, and you can tell me all about whatever. I'll show you the
latest shipment of Tibetan mortuary tools, and Kerry can fill you in on
neuropsychology. We'll throw down some beer at the local microbrewery,
and you can crash on the futon before you head home. It'll be great!
Then, once you're back, I'll pop onto a.s, and tell the world what a swell
guy Tez is. I'll tell them all about great joke you told that made me
squirt chianti out of my nose, and about where you stand on the whole
Brittney Spears/Christina Aguilera phenomenon. You can do the same for
Ol' Scratch on Setian-L. Tell em' what a great guy I am, and that we're
the best of pals.
Think about it. What kind of reception do you think YOU would get?
> > * If the purpose of the Temple is to promote the individual Will, why
> > does it appear that the Temple is attempting to hammer out a
> > philosophical conformity (beyond core Setian principles) among its
> > membership?
>
> Ummm, Kinda vague don't you think? I Work with people who come from
> and Work with Yogic, Satanist, Pagan and Neuroliguistic Programming
> backgrounds. These backgrounds acrete into the perspective that they
> each hold towards Setian philosophy and there is no negative
> repercussions for it, as they're not using Setianism as a "catch-all"
> terms for things they like that they want to have validated in the
> eyes of others. Beyond core Setian values, no agreement on application
> is really asked for. Therefore, the philosophical conformity thing
> doesn't hold water.
No? Why are postmodernists being harassed and driven from the Temple?
What happens to anyone who mentions on the e-lists the notion of hunting
rituals, or defends animal testing? Why do the adherents of Xem feel
they've been gagged, and forced into resignation? Why the current
attitude about the IOT and Chaos Magick?
(http://www.radio-free-setian.com/index2.html)
No, there is definitely a narrow path of acceptable philosophical thought,
and it is getting all the narrower. Is that specific enough for you?
Again, Tez, you have failed to answer the question.
> > * Is the Temple a cult? Explain your answer.
>
> Last I checked, cults don't let you leave.
No, they *frequently* make it difficult for members to leave (though cults
rarely maintain their membership by force, but rather usually use guilt,
shunning, and other psychological games to retain members who are losing
their interest), but there are exceptions -- especially in regard to cults
which are in the midst of an ideological purge and are calling for purity
in the ranks. In the case of such groups, not only will they let you
leave, they might even MAKE you leave. I believe this is what you have
going for you in the ToS.
Once the Gang of 9 has a firm grip on the reins, I wouldn't be surprised
if we see a gradual change to exactly the kind of organization you
mention, where members are guilt-tripped, threatened and blackmailed into
remaining. You just don't have the strength and cohesiveness to do it
now.
> Second of all, cults do require a mindless obedience, which is not
> conducive to productive discussion of initiatory and magical worth,
> which is something that the Temple is not lacking in an abundance of,
> you'll be sorry to know.
You have many kinds of mindless obedience in the Temple. I suppose you
are probably too well indoctrinated to be able to see them for what they
are. I know that for a time I was.
As for "initiatory and magical worth" in the Temple...well, you probably
have no idea how ultimately foolish this jumble of ToS buzzwords and lingo
is. It's like a Krishna adherent telling a critic that his organization
is ultimately justified by the good karma it creates among its members.
It is an argument built on faith and indoctrination, not on evidence.
Sure, there is "productive discussion of initiatory and magical worth"
going on within the Temple of Set -- but these things are only valuable
within the Temple. In a way, you are demonstrating here the "mindless
obedience" you mention above, by demonstrating your willingness to
substitute intangible things that the Temple tells you are precious, such
as Initiation and "magical worth," in the place of things that are truly
valuable.
> > * Why is the membership of the Temple declining at an accelerated
> > rate?
>
> Ah yes, another one from the "I sez so, therefore it is" file of
> Maestro Scratch. Lets turn back the hands of time, shall we?:
>
> Date: 2001-05-29 22:50:08 PST
>
> "I'd like to speak with you a moment about the atrocious loss of
> membership in recent months. My inside sources in the Temple of Set
> Priesthood inform me that the total membership of the ToS has dropped
> dramatically over the past several months, and now stands at about
> 275, give or take." -Mr. Scratch
>
> There you have it folks. The ironclad proof of the huge Setian
> diaspora: Mr. Scratch says so. "My inside sources", thats it? Not even
> a copy of an e-mail to this effect?
...
> Once again, back it up Scratch. Give comparisons and contrasts.
> "Accelerated rate of decline"? Compared to what. Show proof or find a
> new line, because this one isn't taking.
I love this new strategy you ToSsers have adopted! You can't deny the
evidence, so you've taken to banging your shoes on your desks, and
demanding "proof!" Such a surprise that you've again evaded the question.
Well, Tez, I gained my figures from counting the names on one of your more
recent membership rosters, which I *haven't* posted in demonstration of
the falling membership numbers because I respect the privacy of the
rank-and-file membership of the Temple. Still want me to post the "proof"
on this newsgroup? I don't imagine you do.
Here's something for you to ponder, though:
"The Temple will retain members if and only if *it is doing what it is
designed to do*. -- The Onyx Tablet of Set, file OTO-4-12
Is your Temple still doing what it is supposed to be doing? Or has its
purpose been lost amid ego wars and politics?
> Y'know what? This is your show, run it how you like. At the end of the
> day, all you have is this list. The great thing about your assumptions
> is that you're the only one who has to live with them.
Yes. I encourage you to continue thinking in these terms, Tez: it's only
"this list," and furthermore, they're only words! Duck your head back
into the sand, and make it all go away.
> Yes Scratch, the last word is yours. Do whatever you want with it.
>
> Adios all,
Such a disappointment, you guys never seem to want to stick around.
Well, I'll give you this; you've made a more spirited defense than most of
your ilk. You've even made a good point or two, if we put aside the fact
that you evaded many of the questions. All in all, I think you've earned
a well-deserved pat on the head from your masters, and if you're lucky,
maybe they'll let you lick their hands for a moment or two!
> Tez
Mr. Scratch
Priest of Set
Mr. Scratch
> You don't owe Scratch any explanation. You don't need to provide any
> reason. Reason was provided. Explanation was provided. The matter
> is quite closed and no longer up for debate.
I actually let out a loud guffaw as I read this paragraph!
*Ring ring!*
Forrester, pick up the Clue Phone: this is NOT Xepera-L. You do not get
to dictate the topics of debate here, or decide whether they are "closed"
or "open." WE dictate when a topic is no longer up for debate when WE are
tired of debating it!
This is so typical of the ToS, trying to seize control and censor the
forum, when they are unable to stand up to the controversy. It is
particularly laughable when they have neither the power nor the authority
to do so.
My guess is that Forrester is a Magister/a or a Magus/a of the Temple of
Set. Only someone of that degree would be so arrogant, so overwhelmed by
a misplaced sense of authority, so downright pig-headed stupid as to
actually believe that his/her words translate in any way to the outside
"World of Horrors" as a means of commanding others' actions. Only someone
of that grade would be so sheltered from reality and so ill-accustomed to
dealing with people who regard his/her false status pyramid as a joke,
that they would make such a pronouncement in the first place!
Keep on barking out orders, Forrester! We're all out here in our spare
bedrooms and libraries, clicking our heels and goosestepping to your
command!
BTW, potential Setians: this is exactly the kind of treatment (on the
mild end) you'll get in the ToS if you do or say something they don't
like. Just makes you want to rush on out and send in your money, eh?
> > > Here you go...answer these questions (and answer them all, now, no
> > > picking and choosing):
>
> My, my, he likes to make his little demands, now does he?
This is truly funny, since you just showed up here, commanding us all to
pipe down!
You know, I can only think of one person offhand who displays this
particular variety of mutton-wittedness, in combination with boundless
arrogance, and serves as a cheering section for those who do his/her dirty
work.
(*Mr. Scratch peers closely at a nervous Forrester*)
Yyyeeesssss... I'd wager I might recognize you. Hmph.
Not that it matters, I suppose.
> Just passing through.
Yes, I love the way you ToSsers are always "just passing through" or "Oh,
I just happened to be reading this newsgroup as a lark" or "I was bored,
so I just wanted to pop in for a moment and see what all the fuss was
about," or some such, like they aren't here reading this stuff every
freakin' day and gritting their teeth with enough intensity to bite
through tank plating.
You can pretty much tell the membership status of a sockpuppet by the
denials they make.
Thanks for the laugh...*ahem*..."Forrester."
catherine yronwode
>
> Forrester wrote:
>
[etc.]
I have been enjoying this ToS/anti-ToS dialogue a lot. I happen to be
one of those slightly oddball folks who derive gentle amusement from
reading accounts of mild scandals that do not involve death but do
involve exposures of previously-concealed deeds committed by those in
authority who are caught in flagrante delicto as they fail in some wild
attempt to create and maintain a hierarchically-ranked belief-system.
Keep 'em comin'!
cat (reveal the names of the sockpuppets! record the names of those in
charge!) yronwode
Forrester
While I think your claims against the ToS are wholly made out of
vindictiveness, I do not think the same of Ole Wolf's claims. Most of the
members of the ToS are socially fine people. Most of the members of the CoS
are social trash.
The CoS Files
Last updated: February 27, 2001.
This collection of files document how the Church of Satan (CoS) uses lies
and two-faced policies, discloses personal membership information, requests
that its members harass other people and other organizations, all in order
to recruit people who will pay $100 in membership registration.
Some members of the CoS would rather believe that the documentation found in
these files is not correct, and have attempted to dismiss it as "hearsay,"
"out of context," etc. I have compiled a reply to the various objections.
My personal involvement in the CoS was exclusively based on the CoS'
endorsement of the dark doctrines. Today, the CoS has radically departed
from this policy--or more specifically, this collection of files shows that
the people now in charge of the CoS never had that policy. I was expelled
from the CoS for defending the dark doctrines, as were others; some others
simply resigned; yet others still hope the CoS may "return" to a state they
have yet to realize it was never in.
When I encountered the CoS, it was the only organization that endorsed the
dark doctrines. Today, several Satanic organizations embrace the dark
doctrines. Now that the CoS has turned its back on the dark doctrines, it is
these other organizations that offer Satanism while the CoS offers nothing
but a group wailing ground for suffering egos in need of delusions of worth.
What is documented in these files is only the tip of the iceberg. I have
left the organization unscarred, but others who are still in the
organization are subject to harassment, intimidation, depersonalization, and
other forms of "education" (Blanche Barton's word)--and apparently some
enjoy it. Steer clear of this organization!
I am hosting this documentation to save people the $100, the divulgation of
their personal data, and their wasted time, and to make up for my share of
the responsibility of luring people into the CoS with the promise of
Satanism.
If you have any further evidence, please let me know. (See this document for
what I mean by "further evidence.")
The CoS files are available for download as a compressed Zip file for
offline browsing.
Ole Wolf.
Subscribe to CoS files update notifications
Powered by www.egroups.com
CoS Higher-Ups Intimidating and Interfering
Getting Proof of Bullying Behavior
When members of the CoS complain about abuse, Peggy Nadramia's usual
responses are variants of "get proof or shut up." In the few occasions where
the members saved the pertinent documentation, typically the member would
typically be told that this was just that one person "having fun," and that
the member not bother about it.
Here is the whole sequence of events that transpired from Peggy telling me
(Tani Jantsang) to "get proof" that Andre Schlesinger and Lestat Ventrue
were being AWFUL to their own COS members in chat and otherwise. What was
uncovered was a lot more.
The CoS responded promptly once the proof was irrefutably available by
terminating the title of Tani Jantsang, and by expelling Hr. Vad and Ole
Wolf, who were all opposed to the oppressive policy.
Form Emails
Did you have a Web site with Satanic content, and were you greeted with a
polite response from a CoS official who "had been alerted" to your site?
If so, it was not praise for your good work. You simply received a form
email that is intended to make you join the CoS. The form email is usually
tailored to the situation; here is an example of an attempt to coerce a
person into the CoS, and a form letter that was originally written by Peter
Gilmore.
Peter Gilmore's "Waffen SS" Email
The CoS asks its members harass other organizations and help silence people
who speak up against the CoS. This email from Peter Gilmore where he
practically says "come to us for dirt" proves it. Evidently, some members
harassing other people have been requested by the CoS officials to do so.
This document also shows an exchange of emails between Ole Wolf and Lord
Egan, who founded the First Church of Satan.
Peter Gilmore Ghost-Posting on alt.satanism
Despite his claims, Peter Gilmore does read alt.satanism. He does not post
on this newsgroup, however, but relies on CoS members whom he asks to post
his messages, as this sample documents. It is not clear whether he abstains
from posting because of an image he wants to maintain, or whether it is
because he can post incorrect messages without personally taking
responsibility.
Peter Gilmore Scaring Timothy Stewart
Timorthy Stewart had originally solicited comments on the subject of
Satanism versus fascism. When he put the findings on his Web site, Peter
Gilmore found it necessary to subject himself to reading and commenting it.
This document commenting on it. Stewart immediately suffered selective
amnesia, claiming that Tani had made him alter his document. This is Tani's
reply to Stewart.
Peter Gilmore Bullying Amina
Amina Lap has been a member of the CoS since 1997, and has done a
significant amount of work. Amina was not scared like Timothy Stewart. This
file documents how Peter Gilmore first praised her work, then later
attempted to scare her--and it documents how he lies.
Peter Gilmore Considers Lord Egan a Threat
In this email from Peter Gilmore, it is evident that Peter Gilmore considers
Egan a threat to the CoS. It was when Tani Jantsang refused to combat Egan
for using a tradition that the CoS has no exclusive rights to use (ANYONE
can use real knowledge) that Peter Gilmore turned against her. This strongly
suggests that the CoS only used the dark doctrines to lure people into the
organization.
Lestat Ventrue as a Spy in #satanmuse
The CoS has a number of "Satanic Rules of the Earth," one of which states
that Satanists keep their noses to themselves and not interfering with other
people's businesses. However, the CoS actively interferes with other people.
Here we have proof of Lestat Ventrue being in #satanmuse, the chatroom owned
by the dark doctrines people, posing as "someone" that just "happens" to be
there.
Members and Officials Slandering and Interfering
Here is proof that the COS slanders people, that the COS administrators
can't stop their members and officials from slandering people, and that they
care far too much about what people on #satanmuse are doing. They go far out
of their way here, and admit it, to annoy and harass people who are trying
to mind their own business in their own chat rooms. These logs are
incredible and have information that will blow the mind of some readers,
including COS readers.
Dr. Sigmund Rascher, the third side, evil doktor, and nutcase_tani are all
the same person, a fellow that CoS member "Dr. Joseph Mengele" took under
his wing. He got banned from #satanmuse after shit-disturbing on two
occasions. He then proceeded to "try to annoy Tani" with multiple PMs by
spamming her in private messages from #satannet.
These messages show how Robert Merciless, a long time shit-disturber on
alt.satanism and relatively new member of the CoS, slanders Tani Jantsang on
both alt.satanism and the Satannet message board.
Schlesinger Interfering with DISINFO
Here is proof of Schlesinger, acting on orders from the Corporation of Satan
(is he a PAID employee?), interfering with another Satanic organization
being in the news.
The CoS Using Spies
The CoS uses spies to investigate and harass other organizations. These
emails and message board postings from Jason Roberts show how.
Shortly after the above was published on the CoS files, Jason Roberts
attempted to have them removed by threatening Ole Wolf with a lawsuit and
later by having two people plead his case. Neither being successful, the
email correspondence now included in the CoS files between Jason Roberts,
Gretchen Bennett, Tani Jantsang, and Ole Wolf soon proved Jason Roberts to
be a liar.
However, Jason Roberts now strikes back--at the COS by admitting and proving
what they did to him, how they threatened him--which is the reason he did
everything exposed elsewhere on this site! A shocker to those who knew him
from the Council before the COS got to him.
Web Site Deleted Due to Censorship
This is an email written by evangelist Bobby Rush showing the CoS
interfering with a Christian Web site, which they had NO BUSINESS poking
their nose into in the first place.
The Suck-Ups
Not only the CoS itself, but also the suck-ups to the CoS think they can
gain points by trashing other organizations. Here is one more example of
people that just can't let other people mind their business. The CoS people
are so obsessed worrying about other organizations. Do we worry about that
other organizations are doing? Hell no: if they leave us alone, we'll gladly
leave them alone.
The suck-upery that demanded of CoS members is perhaps best illustrated by
Rocio Carrasco in this message to alt.satanism, where she openly admits to
unconditional obediance. This politically required level of obedience should
be kept in mind when reading Peter Gilmore's request that CoS members attack
other organizations.
The Chat Logs
Everyone that was ever in the chatrooms run by the CoS officials know of the
behavior of the owners. Here are logs that show it.
On the CoS and Its Policies
Active Recruitment
The CoS claims that it does not recruit members. However, Grotto Masters are
in fact encouraged to recruit members, reporting to a "headquarters" that
doesn't bother to read the reports.
Interesting legal stuff on "Corporations Sole."
The CoS is listed as a "Corporations Sole." This text illuminates what a
"Corporations Sole" legally is. Note comments inside the text.
Aquino on the CoS Funds
This information from Michael Aquino explains which documents reveal what
the CoS "forgets" to inform its membership of in terms of where the fees are
going.
The CoS Divulges Personal Membership Information
The CoS officially states that it keeps information about its membership
confident. However, as this email shows, the CoS does in fact divulge
membership information. Max Barrons, at that time, was opposing the CoS on
alt.satanism.
On the Amsterdam Whore House
The Church of Satan supported a pimp in Amsterdam who ran a brothel and sex
club, using the appeal of the Devil to lure people into his grotto. The
Church of Satan was fully aware of this business, where not all the hookers
were voluntary. Two independent sources know of this, as shown in this
document.
Fascism and Nazism
The CoS may not be a fascist/Nazi organization, according to official
policy. However, one notes that several administrators and highest-ranking
officials in the CoS are just that. Boyd Rice, Jeff Nagy, and Rex Church are
examples of officials that were given titles as Magisters and who are
notably fascist.
Two-Faced Policies of the CoS
Odal noted that by throwing people out for supporting the very same
doctrines as the CoS endorses on the official CoS Web site, the CoS employs
a two-faced policy. His email notifying the Satanic Reds proves this
two-facing.
"Last Train to Satanville"
Having spotted a clear case of two-faced policies in the CoS, Odal was
inspired to write an essay about the situation.
Did Tani Jantsang Ever Meet Anton LaVey?
Tani Jantsang has been part of the occult societies since prior to the
establishment of the CoS. Did she ever meet Anton LaVey? In this essay, Tani
Jantsang relates her first meeting with Anton LaVey.
Blanche Barton Claiming CoS Roots in Dark Doctrines
It was the insight into the dark doctrines, which constitute the foundation
of Satanism, that prompted Anton LaVey to grant Tani Jantsang and Phil Marsh
their titles. While LaVey was still alive, the CoS officially claimed that
its roots derived from these doctrines.
Similarly, Peter Gilmore uses the information embedded in the dark doctrines
on the official CoS page. However, his action of removing the very people
that gave him this information and those who agree with them from the CoS
reveals his true agenda.
Today, when Anton LaVey is dead and the CoS suddenly expels people for
adhering to the dark doctrines, evidently the CoS does not consider the dark
doctrines to form the roots of the CoS. Juxtaposed with its previous
statement, one must conclude that the CoS is thus rootless, based only on
the philisophy of one man, Anton LaVey.
The only reason this information is still on the CoS Web page is presumably
to lure people into the CoS that would otherwise have joined other Satanic
organizations, leading them to believe that the CoS embraces the dark
doctrines.
On the CoS after 1976
Michael Aquino debunks the wild claims made by William Gidney, and Tani
replies to both in this alt.satanism message. In another message, he
similarly reminds William and Ygraine Gidney of their time in the Temple of
Set.
History Revision by the CoS
Now that the dark doctrines crew has been either expelled or asked to
resign, the CoS is quick to apply revisionism to the proof that we provide.
This is one early example.
Here Kevin Filan, acting as a spokesman for the COS, is telling every other
organization out there what not to do; and we all know that if any other
organization does this (or even if they do not!) they can expect harassment
and interferenece from Andre Schlesinger, the unpaid lackey of Peter
Gilmore. You see, the COS as a corporation can't be legally attacked if
Schlesinger does the harassing. Are they sure about that? I seem to remember
the leader of an organization being financially ruined via law suits due to
the actions of three strangers that he never even met; simply because they
read his literature and then bothered people.
Preface to "Dark Force" and "Klippoths"
Some of the information pertaining to the dark doctrines on Hr. Vad's Web
site was an offshot of flames aimed at the ToS. These flames were
specifically requested by Peter Gilmore, who provided Tani Jantsang and Phil
Marsh with incomplete--or perhaps incorrect--information. A necessary
preface to these flames has now been written.
Radu Sums Up
Here Radu sums up the CoS' policies, and how it bullies its members and
other organizations. Also included is a brief discussion between Jeff Gerber
and Ole Wolf.
Blanche Barton's Statements
Rebuttal of Blanche Barton's Letter to Chris Bray
Where do members of the CoS look for "proper behavior?" Apparently Blanche
Barton takes the lead in a letter to Chris Bray about Michael Aquino.
Aquino's rebuttal is right on the money.
Blanche Barton's Misconceptions about Wicca, and Phil Marsh's Reply
Ignored by Wiccans and Pagans, Blanche Barton has a hang-up on feminism
fostered by her patriarchal, Mormon background. Her anger that a bookstore
would not print her writing spawned an article and a ritual against Wiccans
that she published in The Cloven Hoof, issue 127.
Her article was severely mistaken on several accounts, and Phil Marsh felt
compelled to educate her. His reply, which prompted Anton LaVey to grant
Phil Marsh a Magister title, is included in this document.
Regarding the Expulsions
Shane Margolin's Explanation
Shane Margolin was thrown out of the CoS for doing against Schlesinger what
Schlesinger and others in Peter Gilmore's clique are free to do to anyone.
Here is Margolin's explanation.
Justin Moss Resigns
Justin Moss sent his resignation to the CoS email address listed on the CoS
Web site. This is the reply from the CoS, followed by an immediate trolling
of Justin's guest book.
Hr. Vad to Blanche on the Revocation of Tani Jantsang's Title
Vad had been tired of the CoS' odd behavior endorsing bullies at the expense
of Satanism, and had composed a letter. He did not send this letter until he
heard of Blanche Barton's revocation of Tani Jantsang's title as Magistra
that was given to her by Anton LaVey. He then composed another letter
describing the foolishness of Blanche's action, and sent both letters to
her.
Hr. Vad Announces his Being Expelled from the CoS
After having written to Blanche describing that he disagrees with her
revocation of Tani's title and the behavior of the Peter Gilmore clique, Vad
was promptly expelled. This is his announcement of CoS' decision.
Ole Wolf Demands a Refund
Ole Wolf was expelled from the CoS for defending the dark doctrines against
those CoS members that belonged to Peter Gilmore's clique. The CoS had
endorsed the dark doctrines, which were Ole Wolf's reason for joining the
CoS in the first place; since the CoS now rejects the dark doctrines, Ole
Wolf concluded that he had joined the CoS because of deliberately falsified
information. In this letter to Blanche Barton, Ole Wolf demands a refund of
the $100 that was thus wrongly charged.
Ole Wolf Revokes Rights to Translations
While Peter Gilmore paid lip service to the dark doctrines, Ole Wolf was
supportive of the CoS, and his favors included Danish translations of
various texts included on the official CoS Web site. When Peter Gilmore's
lies had been exposed, Ole Wolf informed Peter Gilmore that he had revoked
the rights to the translations.
Ole Wolf revoked the rights to the translations shortly after two email
exchanges. The first one was an exchange between Kaiden Fox and Peter
Gilmore, and the second one a harsh email from Ole Wolf to Peter Gilmore
because of Peter Gilmore's meddling in Timothy Stewart's business.
Disgruntled Members
Morena was on Peggy Nadramia's "shit list" for being friends with Audy
Morgan. She was harassed by the CoS, and explains the events that took place
to Tani in this letter.
"Aragorn" (name withheld) sent a letter to Blanche informing her that she
will not play along with the rules of CoS. "Aragorn" had already been
disillusioned by the CoS due to its silent support of her counter-productive
ex husband at the expense of her.
Other People Involved
This section illustrates what a back-stabbing, mealy-mouthed bunch the
Gilmore clique consists of, people that gang together to hate others even
more than they hate each other.
The Last Email to "Xloptuny" (John Davis) before He Committed Suicide
John Davis ("Xloptuny") was one of the people that was allowed to harass
other CoS members (a Jew) quite vitriolically on alt.satanism. It soon
turned out that his greatest enemy was himself, and his mindless rage is
shown in the last emails he got from Tani, one of the last things this
miserable bastard did while he was alive was indulge in a screaming flame
war over what would have been a joyful thing had not the klippothic CoS
suckups chosen to involve themselves in the making of someone else's chat
room. They had to butt in. Well, at least Xloptuny finally butt out: of
life.
Ygraine Revealing that She Hates André Schlesinger
Ygraine ignores her own desires, and now defends Peter Gilmore and other
people she evidently doesn't like. Her story also shows what André
Schlesinger is made of.
Ygraine had a fit that Tani showed Peggy the email and logs she wrote about
Schlesinger and the entire story of her history with Paul Valentine and
others. The email and logs of Ygraine showing her hatred for Schlesinger got
posted on alt.satanism, and after that Paul Valentine posted his take on it.
All of it appears in this file.
From a CoS Old Timer
It is not only the new people joining the CoS that dislike it. Here are the
words of an old timer, who also dislikes the ruler/serf mentality.
Regarding Sir Chaos
Sir Chaos was one who first opposed the fascist faction headed by Peter
Gilmore, but after Peter Gilmore had lied sufficiently to Sir Chaos, Sir
Chaos suffered the selective amnesia that characterizes those who are scared
of being expelled from the CoS. In this message to alt.satanism, Amina
refreshes Sir Chaos' memory.
Amina is not the only person that dislikes Chaos. Here is a chat log with a
"CoS insider" talking about Chaos.
Anonymous Post to Lupo
Lupo is not a member of the CoS. However, it is remarkable how the CoS
condones his hostility against Peter Gilmore's opponents compared to their
actions taken against those who oppose Peter Gilmore's clique. Lupo's hating
the dark doctrines crew was caused by a flame written to someone else by a
fifteen year old gay queen several years ago. This message, by an anonymous
poster, analyzes a statement made by Lupo.
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSU.4.21.010708...@garcia.efn.org...
Mr. Scratch
> Instant replay? Each section has many links.
>
> While I think your claims against the ToS are wholly made out of
> vindictiveness, I do not think the same of Ole Wolf's claims.
My dear, I don't really care what you "think" (if the jumbled
stuttering of neurons that occurs within the recesses of your
brainpan can be considered such). Its what evidence you provide that
counts, and you have brought none.
> Most of the members of the ToS are socially fine people. Most of the
> members of the CoS are social trash.
>
> The CoS Files
>
> Last updated: February 27, 2001.
>
> This collection of files document how the Church of Satan (CoS) uses lies
Huh? What does any of this have to do with Radio FreeSetian? You seem
desperate to frame this as some sort of conflict between the ToS and the
CoS, or at least are trying to drive home a comparrison of the two
organizations. Frankly, our website has nothing to do with the CoS, pro
or con.
As for the so-called "CoS files" on the website you mention, I have no
opinion. I've glanced through them, and have failed to see why they are
considered scandalous. But then, I've only glanced through them.
Frankly, I don't care about them one way or the other. Knowing their
source, I hardly think its worth my time.
You're barking up the wrong tree, Forrester. Time to try a different
strategy.
Mr. Scratch
Priest of Set
People's Commissar
You want to try to keep these two issues separate, please?
Thank you.
TJ
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"Forrester" <mn...@itgo.com> wrote in message
news:tkic24...@corp.supernews.com...
Daimon
via email to post it.
It was not possible to miss this. It is amazing to me that you can post
both statements and sound rational and clear minded to yourself.
You said this in another message to someone here, Tez, and this is quite
unbelievable when you merge it with the text you wrote right here to
Forester:
MrS: "You have many kinds of mindless obedience
MrS: in the Temple. I suppose you
MrS: are probably too well indoctrinated to be able to
MrS: see them for what they
MrS are. I know that for a time I was."
Let's get this very clear then. It's clear to me because I've no emotional
baggage to cloud anything up. Let's get you clear on this. During the time
you were *indoctrinated* by the ToS, the White Devils and many other *CoS
members*, including Maninblack who everyone knows is Nadramia's personal
little boy wonder, who *takes orders* (sic) from the Gilmores, his bosses,
were all flaming you? MIB got one ToS member so angry that he threatened
to kill MIB. The *indoctrinated* Scratch, at that time, was in a flame war
with "Tani's friends" and other people, all defending the CoS. Now,
somehow in the *indoctrinated* mind of Scratch, the *CoS* is not highlighted
here. This is quite amazing. It does not loom large in the mind of
Scratch. How curious. Yet the W.D's openly admit they did it *for CoS*
against "evil Mikey" (while others try to hide it using good marketing,
polite newsspeak, tailor made for suckers like yourself who have already
proven they are prone to fall for such things) - and it is too well known
who really wanted this war - the Gilmores and Barton. Who the hell *else*
would have *any* reason to cheer such a thing on? Haven't figured that out
yet? Still indoctrinated, Mr. Scratch? Indeed, you are. Yes, indeed you
are. Brainwashed and blind.
Then look at what you write to this Forester fellow (?) - you doubt the
source (Ole Wolf - a highly professional high-tech computer person)? But
forget him for a moment. You doubt proof that consists of emails from the
CoS's officials *themselves*? You doubt that the Gilmores and the CoS did
all this - when you were the victim of this and when you can see them
calling for coordinated attacks (flames) again in email that they
*themselves* wrote? You doubt the duplicity when it's there in the form of
their *own* statements? You were furthermore the victim of it when you
were *indoctrinated* by the ToS (by your own admission).
Do you see the total inconsistency? If not, you are still indoctrinated.
I don't think much of you. Brendan, who admittred he flamed the hell out of
you, was not indoctrinated at all. He was having a blast flaming any and
all for the sheer hell of it. You are prone to brainwashing? Yes. Of
course you are, 12 years of it, apparently, by your own admission. And as
such, you imagine everyone else is also prone to such nonsense? Yes? Yet
when you see horse's mouth examples of *exactly* what you are accusing the
Aquino's of on the website Forester showed you, you doubt the source, i.e.,
the horse's mouth? Lord have mercy. You are an *idiot*. A brainwashable,
brainwashed idiot, blinded, doomed to remain blind; *wanting* to be blind.
FTR, this is not Jeff or Tani. Tho this used to be Jeff's email. 'Tis mine
now.
You really *will* waste more years of your life, being as blind as you admit
you were before. It's fate.
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSU.4.21.01070...@garcia.efn.org...
Jim Foster
What the fuck are you on about, then? Clearly there are many types of
idiot... you are one of them.
> You doubt the duplicity when it's there...
See buddy, this has >nothing< to do with the CoS, or with Scratch's
old flame-fests with them when he was a member of the Temple. Period.
That's it. We're not kidding. They are two seperate and distinct
events in time. Unrelated. Barely even a causal link twixt the two.
This is what Scratch was trying to point out in the post to which you
responded. I don't recall seeing him doubt >anything< in that post,
with the exception of the topicality of Forrester's non sequiter.
Now, have we got this much clear? I'll repeat it for you, in case
you've forgotten: This has nothing to do with the CoS. This has
nothing to do with members of the CoS. This has nothing to do with
the brain-deads that tried to engage Scratch in some stupid flame war
years ago. They are unrelated (go on, sound it out, you'll get it).
You are the weakest link, piss off.
catherine yronwode
>
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Forrester wrote:
>
> > While I think your claims against the ToS are wholly made out of
> > vindictiveness, I do not think the same of Ole Wolf's claims.
>
> My dear, I don't really care what you "think" (if the jumbled
> stuttering of neurons that occurs within the recesses of your
> brainpan can be considered such).
Aw, shucks. This is getting boring. I liked it better when you presented
evidence of ToS cultism and paranoia, Mr. Scratch. Your angry dissing of
Forrester is not relevant to anyone but the two of you. Usenet is not
the WWF. Take it to email.
cat yronwode
Circe
"Live at One" <an...@anon.com> wrote in message
news:tkdmlj...@corp.supernews.com...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
GUlLLOTlNA
says:
::snip::
Hi, "Owen."
'Bye, "Owen."
You can run, but you cannot hide; your special style just shines through in
every new nick you commandeer.
>I don't think much of you. Brendan, who admittred he flamed the hell out of
you, was not indoctrinated at all. >>
Two newsflashes for you, Owenski:
1. No one gives a damn about this "Brendan" person, his doings, his sexual
orientation, his flames of days gone by. What in Hell does this have to do with
Scratch's falling-out with ToS? I mean, -really.-
2. We are all tired of the "CoS Files." Nice attempt to stir all that up yet
again, but sorry....no cigar. Is there one single thing in your sorry lives you
don't try to blame on CoS?
>FTR, this is not Jeff or Tani. Tho this used to be Jeff's email. 'Tis mine
now.>>
Yeah, *right* Owen. We're all fooled; we'll never guess your ident.
>You really *will* waste more years of your life, being as blind as you admit
you were before. It's fate.>>
And you will be out here forever, switching nicks in a futile attempt to get
your flames across to people who haven't asked for your input (well, you and
nancy, that is). Sucks to be you.
::plonk:: Have a nice day, babe.
Sincerely:
Lisa
*********
"Go ahead....make my day." -
Dirty Harry Callahan
Circe
"GUlLLOTlNA" <gulll...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010710142930...@ng-cf1.aol.com...
Try as you might ugly, your killfile stories just don't jive with your
posting to those you claim to have royally KF'd!. :::waves bye-bye:::
>
> ::plonk:: Have a nice day, babe.
>
> Sincerely:
> Lisa
> *********
> "Go ahead....make my day." -
> Dirty Harry Callahan
>
>
Wolf At Hart
I looked at this web site and I have found a lot of useful information for
anyone just plain interested in Setian Philosophy or the Temple of Set, I have
been reading your posts for some time now; the "Scratch Dialgoues" were most
entertaining for me. I never really thought of Lupo as someone to be feared by
the ToS. I think I may have been to his web site a few times and read some of
his articles on Magick and so forth. Lillith Aquinos letter was also most
entertaining. But, aside from all that which is refered to the Temple itself,
it is nice to see Independent Setians doing something with themselves outside
the Temples Wall of oppressed Freedom. As forementioned by a Ole Wolf and
CoS-File enthusiast, some would have you believe the Church of Satan is
basicly the same way. I would not agree, however, I will say; there isn't much
to deny, but even then again, it's not 'prooving' anything except they are
assholes. A Setian Manifesto... Well, not much to say there except, where the
hell is this 'orginization' and where is it based? Why not accept Don Webb as
High Priest? And most important, where did this come from? It's interesting to
read it does not, however- seem to be a credible source.
Lets Make History..
Wolf At Hart
Lupos Animi
Wolf At Hart
Mr. Scratch
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Daimon wrote:
> During the time you were *indoctrinated* by the ToS, the White Devils
> and many other *CoS members*, including Maninblack who everyone knows
> is Nadramia's personal little boy wonder, who *takes orders* (sic)
> from the Gilmores, his bosses, were all flaming you?
Mmm-hmmm. So far so good.
> MIB got one ToS member so angry that he threatened to kill MIB.
I don't recall MIB ever being threatened with his life by a ToS member.
You are probably thinking of Meinkmpf, who did receive such a statement
(the ToS member later apologized to Meinkmpf here for losing his cool).
> The *indoctrinated* Scratch, at that time, was in a flame war
> with "Tani's friends" and other people, all defending the CoS.
Correction: they were not "defending" the CoS when they were attacking
me, because I was not attacking the CoS. They were attacking me because I
was a ToSser on a newsgroup they wanted to monopolize.
> Now, somehow in the *indoctrinated* mind of Scratch, the *CoS* is not
> highlighted here. This is quite amazing. It does not loom large in
> the mind of Scratch. How curious.
My point in the previous discussion concerning Forrester's attempt to
contrast Radio FreeSetian <www.radio-free-setian.com> against the "CoS
files" is that the two are separate ideas, by separate groups of people.
More plainly, its not a choice between one being right and one being
wrong.
On this, Tani and I actually agree completely when she said:
"To Forrester,
You want to try to keep these two issues separate, please?
Thank you.
TJ"
Hear hear!
> Then look at what you write to this Forester fellow (?) - you doubt the
> source (Ole Wolf - a highly professional high-tech computer person)? But
> forget him for a moment. You doubt proof that consists of emails from the
> CoS's officials *themselves*? You doubt that the Gilmores and the CoS did
> all this - when you were the victim of this and when you can see them
> calling for coordinated attacks (flames) again in email that they
> *themselves* wrote? You doubt the duplicity when it's there in the form of
> their *own* statements? You were furthermore the victim of it when you
> were *indoctrinated* by the ToS (by your own admission).
You are confused. You have misread my statement. I'll show you where
you've slipped up.
"As for the so-called "CoS files" on the website you mention, I have no
opinion. I've glanced through them, and have failed to see why they
are considered scandalous. But then, I've only glanced through
them. Frankly, I don't care about them one way or the other. Knowing
their source, I hardly think its worth my time. " -- Mr. Scratch
Now, look it over. Do I say that I doubted the authenticity of the
messages? No. Do I say that I don't think the CoS wrote the messages on
the CoS files? No. Do I say that I doubt that Gilmore and Nadramia tried
to push non-CoSers off the newsgroup (myself very much included)? Again,
no.
All I've said is that I didn't find the accusation so scandalous
(considering all the other crap I had to deal with from Tani and her CoS
minions during that time period, it pales by comparrison). I also
indicated very clearly that I should not be considered an authority on the
contents of the "CoS files" because I hadn't read them all. How you read
that as being a denial of their contents, I have no idea.
I do additionally say that considering the source ("Ole Wolf"), I didn't
think I wanted to read them. Not because I think he's trying to be
deceitful, but because I find him boring and a bit full of himself, and
since I've already wasted anough time reading his material in the past, I
think I'll take a pass in the future. Nothing personal, its just my
preference. I'm allowed to have those now.
Now, if you *want* my official opinion on what I HAVE read (which is
pretty much limited to the "Waffen-SS" letter), I'd have to say the info
is probably authentic. I know for a certainty that the CoS did try to
drive its critics from this newsgroup by putting Tani Jantsang in charge
of massing groups of flamers to attack them. I know this in part because
I was tipped of by sympathetic CoS members about a week or two before it
happened. Then, for a period of about a year, I was the target of this
stupidity, receiving many threats to my life, and withstanding real-life
harassment from the CoS-sponsored Tani & Co. To cement the association,
some of the more obnoxious messages were posted on Tani's behalf directly
from Nadramia's email address.
Frankly, I don't find the CoS' efforts of the time as scandalous as I do
embarrassing and stupid. Keep in mind that during the time that this
harassment was occurring, I was considered one of the more intelligent and
entertaining residents on this newsgroup; thus, unleashing a pack of
vicious knuckledraggers to subdue me didn't win the CoS any beauty
pageants. Ironically, all it did was increase the number of sympathetic
CoS members out there who SUPPORTED me, who secretly fed me information
about my critics, and strengthened their efforts to remove Jantsang from
their organization.
As obnoxious as the implications of the "Waffen-SS" letter are, I think it
should be kept in mind that in the end, all it did was make losers of us
all. The CoS was made to look like a low-brow bully, devoid of justice,
and disrespectful of other's opinions. Tani and her Flying Monkeys found
that a group of disgusted critics had formed behind her own lines, and she
would eventually find herself ousted from the organization she had worked
so hard to strengthen. And me? I wasted a tremendous amount of my time
(over a year), flushed down the drain, bickering in the defense of people
I shouldn't have wasted ten minutes on. If I had it to do over again, I'd
have told Tani and the CoS "Have at!", retired from the newsgroup, and
gotten a real hobby.
To the CoS credit, it appears they have realized the foolishness of their
mistakes. I no longer see so many long CoS driven missives, or attacks on
neutral members on this newsgroup. I've even seen a few ToSsers who are
treated respectfully enough, so long as they lay off the preaching. My
secret CoS friends who supported me through their organization's acts of
injustice are still in, and have some influence in steering the Church's
course. Clearly the CoS took a step away from their past pit-bull like
endeavors when they sacked their former Field Marshal and her "White
Devil" crew.
You Taniphiles, on the other hand, haven't seemed to have learned the
error of your ways. You still seem to be hung up on me for some unknown
reason. I still receive criticism from you, and Tani insults me in
private email at lenght -- yet there seems to be no instigation from my
end to produce such hostility. Having squandered a year of my time
fighting Tani, and having no reason to waste any more time, I usually
don't even read her stuff (or that of the Flying Monkeys). What I do
read, I don't respond to. I just leave her alone. I usually don't agree
with her (though occasionally I do), but I just chalk it up to a
difference of opinion. Nothing to get excited about. I think I'm being
pretty generous with this attitude, considering what I had to put up with
from her bunch in the past.
You folks, however, just don't seem to want to let it go. Why is that?
If it is as you have said, and that you attacked me only because the CoS
wanted you to, it would seem to me that you now have no reason to continue
complaining about me. You don't even like the CoS anymore. Indeed, since
you are now so offended that the CoS would use you in such a unethical
manner, it would seem to me that the WD gang made a mistake in treating me
as they did. Considering such, you would think they would at least want
to leave me in peace.
(*Shrug*)
Frankly, I think they are probably just still stinging from the old
flames. I kinda wish they'd get over it already. I'd think they'd have
bigger fish to fry than lil' ol' me.
> I don't think much of you. Brendan, who admittred he flamed the hell out of
> you, was not indoctrinated at all. He was having a blast flaming any and
> all for the sheer hell of it.
Er...let me tell you a bit about Brendan's "flaming": it was all
death-threats and ALL CAPS SHOUTING. Hardly witty, revealing, or
formidable stuff. Brendan himself vanished away from this newsgroup like
water vapor in the Sahara when I posted on alt.satanism his personal ad
(stating that he was a transvestite, looking to suck off well hung men in
the Washington DC area). Hardly an encounter I'd be crowing about if I
were Brendan.
Now, thats about all I have to say about the CoS files, Tani, or the
Flying Monkey gang. Y'all will probably still go apeshit on over this,
even though there is nothing here that a reasonable person would take
offense at.
Oh well.
Mr. Scratch
www.radio-free-setian.com
Simon Jester
A Setian Manifesto... Well, not much to say there except,
> where the
> hell is this 'orginization' and where is it based?
From my read of it, 2 times now, 'the Cluster' [the writer's of the
Setian Manifesto] are not an ORGANIZATION per se. I take it they're a
group [small, probably] of renegade Setian priests. Based WITHIN the
TOS, current members.
Why not accept Don
> Webb as
> High Priest?
Why not NOT accept him?? Do they HAVE to accept Webb or like him? No.
Only the priests of 'The Cluster'could answer you that.......and it
looks like they ain't talking. Fact is they didn't even post the
Setian Manifesto in public, that was done by James Foster.
And most important, where did this come from?
Supposedly from a group of renegade Setian priests still IN the
TOS......and this matters to you HOW??
Jerry
Simon Jester
HERE'S MUD IN YOUR EYE !!! }:-)
6&7
Radio Free Setian makes for some interesting reading. I noted a reference
to David Austen - is the Temple of Set still active in the UK?
<
6&7
GUlLLOTlNA
> http://www.radio-free-setian.com/ >>
A most interesting site...
From what I understand reading along here, then it -is- true that the "Rune
Gild" was an offshoot of the ToS? I had heard rumors to the effect that this
was so; but never seen any actual evidence.
L.
Wolf At Hart
Simon Jester wrote:
> Wolf At Hart <thevisio...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3B4BD6F...@hotmail.com>...
> A Setian Manifesto... Well, not much to say there except,
> > where the
> > hell is this 'orginization' and where is it based?
>
> From my read of it, 2 times now, 'the Cluster' [the writer's of the
> Setian Manifesto] are not an ORGANIZATION per se. I take it they're a
> group [small, probably] of renegade Setian priests. Based WITHIN the
> TOS, current members.
>
Interesting.
>
> Why not accept Don
> > Webb as
> > High Priest?
>
> Why not NOT accept him??
I don't know. That is why I asked first.
> Do they HAVE to accept Webb or like him? No.
No, they don't. Did I say they had to? No, I didn't. I was simply curious.
>
> Only the priests of 'The Cluster'could answer you that.......and it
> looks like they ain't talking. Fact is they didn't even post the
> Setian Manifesto in public, that was done by James Foster.
>
Ok..
>
> And most important, where did this come from?
>
> Supposedly from a group of renegade Setian priests still IN the
> TOS......and this matters to you HOW??
>
>
It matters to me because I read a lot into the Occult, Magick, and Philosophy in General; it just
seemed like there's still a lot of unanswered questions pertaining to this Enigmatic Group of Renegade
Setians; if there indeed is such a thing in the Temple of Set going on behind the curtain. The Temple
of Set is interesting to me in general, but according to Mr. Scratch it isn't much worth the effort,
time or money invested.
>
> Jerry
Lets Make History...
Wolf At Hart
Lupos Animi
To Know, To Dare, To Will, To keep Silence...
People's Commissar
something? A joke? It sure would be just the thing to write to sow seeds
of extreme paranoia in the TOS proper and cause suspicion to reign.
Attempts to get me/mine to start up a flame with ex-TOS people and see them
as allied to COS has failed, btw. It might have worked had y'all NOT
spoofed Jeff's email. That's still Jeff's email, tho I don't know how you
did it.
So: KNOCK IT OFF.
Thanks.
TJ
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"Simon Jester" <blackth...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:2936b9cd.01071...@posting.google.com...
Mr. Scratch
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, People's Commissar wrote:
> Attempts to get me/mine to start up a flame with ex-TOS people and see them
> as allied to COS has failed, btw. It might have worked had y'all NOT
> spoofed Jeff's email. That's still Jeff's email, tho I don't know how you
> did it.
Mmmm. Yes.
This is something I hadn't really considered, actually. There might be
something to this suspicion.
> So: KNOCK IT OFF.
Yeah, what she said.
> Thanks.
>
> TJ
Mr. Scratch
<www.radio-free-setian.com>
Mr. Scratch
This was originally posted to a single newsgroup. I've added the other
newsgroups to the headers in my response.
(Foster's address altered)
On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Public <Anonymous_Account> wrote:
> James F Foster
> 24** ****** Ave. #D1
> **********, ** *****
> United States of America
>
>
>
> ---
> This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
> It was posted with the use of anonymizing software at
> http://anon.xg.nu
> ---
I guess they've figured out that mail-bombing us with e-viruses isn't
going to work. Time for new tactics, eh boys?
Yup, pay attention now folks. This is how the ToS handles criticism: it
exposes its critic's home addresses on the internet. Pure Setianology.
It's just a confirmation of cult-like activity the ToS directs toward
former members who don't keep it zipped. See my examination of such
activities at <http://www.radio-free-setian.com/index2.html>.
Or, even better, see what Brother Lupo (who was also treated to such an
"outing" by the ToS when he didn't do as he was told) has to say about the
"dead-agent" techniques the Temple of Set has adopted. This from his
webpage somwhere, at <http://www.io.com/~ix/writing/setianetics.txt>:
-----forwarded text------
Actually, I first noticed it, and was even so kind as to manipulate
that moron Aquino into giving the world a demonstration of his
Scientology-like tactics.
For the record:
1) The ToS/ Aquino censors the public actions of members of his cult.
This happened to me during my brief magazine subscription; Aquino
demanded that I remove all mention of other Satanist groups from the
alt.satanism FAQ file because they were "dangerous" and/or "fraudulent."
It also happened to a number of publishers of independant LHP magazines,
such as James Martin, publisher of Abraxas (who Aquino accuses of being
a pedophile, which is apparently inaccurate at best),
Kerry Bolton (who later went on to found the OSV), and at least two other
'zine publishers who were affiliated with their cult.
2) The ToS/Aquino uses embarassing information obtained while people are
members of their cult to attempt to discredit or harass them later.
This is among the most odious of their tactics; I was "outed" and my
workplace posted to the nets with the suggestion that people "pay me a
visit" in an attempt to silence my criticisms of their cult, and in an
ongoing attempt to get me to modify the alt.satanism FAQ to their favor.
Nemo's (well known writer for "The Black Flame") name and address were
posted to the nets in an attempt to discredit him with _no_ provocation
whatsoever. I could name a half dozen other people this happened to;
Sterling Scarborough, Harry Mowry...
3) Aquino attempts to censor web-pages he doesn't like with SLAP style
lawsuits; this recently happened to Cliff Low's BBS; Aquino threatened to
sue him for defamation of charachter by allowing his user, Kevin FIlan,
to include in his web-page a hilarious ditty at Aquino's expense. This
has not been the first attempt to do so, but it is the first one to my
knowledge, which attempts to use the Computer Decency Act to his
advantage.
4) The Temple of Set has also unsuccessfully attempted to broach the
secrecy of the anon.penet.fi remailer, again with threats of lawsuit.
In a rather obvious analogue to the Co$ situation, their pretense was
that someone posted their copyrighted "secret documents" using the
anon-remailer.
5) The Temple of Set attempts to silence critics not affiliated with
their group via public outings (for LHP occultists, this can be an
extremely dangerous thing to do), and various dirt-digging methods.
Example; Aquino dug up as much dirt as possible about Anton LaVey's
divorce proceedings and published it far and wide in an attempt to
discredit him. Not all that different from the private detective work
done on behalf of the Co$ to get dirt on critics. Another example; an
independant publisher of the LHP magazine "Dark Lilly" published an
article Aquino and his lackeys found threatening, so he and his Nazi pal,
David Austen, decided to send her name and address some militant
fundamentalist xians. SHe had to move for fear of her safety (she's
apparently a cripple).
6) They have attempted to put "yes men" into the alt.satanism forum to
bolster their non-existant credibility. There were various posts from
allegedly "unaffiliated" LHP people, who all, strangely enough, came from
one of the Setian BBS's (fido nodes coming through gigo.com). Several
identities were so pathetically obvious as to cause regulars to laught out
loud; the "Toadal" being Mikey Aquino, "David Mitchel" being his
illiterate wife, Lillith. Balanone's anon.penet.fi incarnation was
laughably obvious; he even gave it away at one point by signing a piece of
private email to Hr Vad with his .sig.
7) More trivially, they are your typical mail-order cult in any number of
ways. They require large amounts of participation on the parts of their
members, to the extent that participation in the group becomes a central
organizing principle in their lives. They sponsor getaway
vacation/conventions which all members are required to attend. They have
strict heirarchy, a charismatic leader and apocalyptic prophecy (the
"Gifted of Set" are supposed to survive an upcoming apocalypse, according
to their Seminal document "The Book of COming Forth By Night" -though
lately they have been making noises that this is only a metaphorical
apocalypse {perrhaps to avoid legal intervention in the wake of other post
apocalytics, such as the Branch Davidians and the Solar Temple mass
suicides, and the Aum nerve gas attacks}, there was literal belief in this
passage as prophecy in the not-to recent past). They have a number of
secret documents which one must have certain levels of "attainment" to
read; much like the OT grade documents of Scientology. They have all
manner of bizarre theories about atlantis, ancient astronauts, "Tesla
Physics," a theory of creationism, holocaust revisionism, and so on...
-Lupo
----------end forwarded text------
Y'know, this might do for as a special edition broadcast from Radio
FreeSetian.
Anyway, let this serve as an example to you folks regarding the ToS'
highly touted "ethics." What a joke.
Mr. Scratch
Priest of Set
Mr. Scratch
True, flamage simply for flamage's sake doesn't build a case for much of
anything. However, "Forrester" wasn't here for rational discussion
anyway; s/he was here to stir shit up (in this case, cast the anti-ToS
website into the familiar realm of CoS vs. ToS squabbling). Provided it
doesn't take up too much space, its occasionally gratifying to administer
a public kick to the posterior to the village idiots once and awhile.
Sorry to waste yer time. All done now. :)
Mr. Scratch
Kevin Filan
>This was originally posted to a single newsgroup. I've added the other
>newsgroups to the headers in my response.
>
>(Foster's address altered)
>
>On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Public <Anonymous_Account> wrote:
>
>> James F Foster
>> 24** ****** Ave. #D1
>> **********, ** *****
>> United States of America
>I guess they've figured out that mail-bombing us with e-viruses isn't
>going to work. Time for new tactics, eh boys?
>
>Yup, pay attention now folks. This is how the ToS handles criticism: it
>exposes its critic's home addresses on the internet. Pure Setianology.
<cut to deep, dark bowels of the earth, where the Seekrit Setian Strategy
Planning Committee holds a special meeting>
DR. AQUINO:
Former Priests Hunt and Foster have set up a website called
http://www.radio-free-setian.com and everybody on alt.satanism is laughing
at
us.
MAGISTER DUBIN:
Why don't we post Foster's home address? That will make him shut up for
sure.
TRAILER-PARK LIL:
Yeah, that'll shut up the FUNDAMENTALIST PEDOPHILE!!!!
DR. AQUINO:
Splendid. Let's also create some sockpuppet accounts to argue our case.
We'll tell everybody they're "neither ToS nor CoS." They'll NEVER figure
out
it's us!
* * * * *
A common tapeworm can be trained to avoid electrified paths in a maze. If
cut
in half, the pair of tapeworms which result will each avoid shocks. The
Temple of Set is comprised of some highly intelligent people... and yet on
Usenet they display less survival skills and less learning ability than the
ass-end of your average intestinal parasite.
>It's just a confirmation of cult-like activity the ToS directs toward
>former members who don't keep it zipped. See my examination of such
>activities at <http://www.radio-free-setian.com/index2.html>.
One thing for which we can all be thankful: the ToS *wants* to be a spooky
elite psyop mindwar group, but lacks the resources or skills to do much more
than post addresses via anon remailers. That being said: if you or Mr.
Foster
are harassed offline by the Temple or its minions, I would urge you to
contact
local and federal law enforcement authorities. (Given Magister Dubin's
public
and well-known fascination with White Power groups and with Charles Manson,
I
suspect the FBI is already well aware of the Temple of Set).
For an example of "Plus ca change," let's look at Brother Lupo's text:
>-----forwarded text------
>
>Actually, I first noticed it, and was even so kind as to manipulate
>that moron Aquino into giving the world a demonstration of his
>Scientology-like tactics.
>
>For the record:
>1) The ToS/ Aquino censors the public actions of members of his cult.
>This happened to me during my brief magazine subscription; Aquino
>demanded that I remove all mention of other Satanist groups from the
>alt.satanism FAQ file because they were "dangerous" and/or "fraudulent."
>It also happened to a number of publishers of independant LHP magazines,
>such as James Martin, publisher of Abraxas (who Aquino accuses of being
>a pedophile, which is apparently inaccurate at best),
>Kerry Bolton (who later went on to found the OSV), and at least two other
>'zine publishers who were affiliated with their cult.
Obviously this hasn't changed: you still can get expelled from the Temple of
Set for having dinner with people who have criticized the Aquinos.
>2) The ToS/Aquino uses embarassing information obtained while people are
>members of their cult to attempt to discredit or harass them later.
I think Mr. Foster can attest to that, as can I. I have had several Setians
try to "out" me as bisexual and as a recovering alcoholic. I'm still not
sure
what that was intended to accomplish, as I've never made a secret of either.
Former Setian Priest Curt Rowlett claimed that according to ToS records I
had
bad personal hygeine and made a living selling my body for medical
experiments. (The first is a matter of opinion, the second demonstrably
untrue). And nobody has ever seen any evidence for James Martin's
"pedophilia," other than an alleged conversation Martin had with Aquino.
>3) Aquino attempts to censor web-pages he doesn't like with SLAP style
>lawsuits; this recently happened to Cliff Low's BBS; Aquino threatened to
>sue him for defamation of charachter by allowing his user, Kevin FIlan,
>to include in his web-page a hilarious ditty at Aquino's expense. This
>has not been the first attempt to do so, but it is the first one to my
>knowledge, which attempts to use the Computer Decency Act to his
>advantage.
After the Aquino v. Electriciti.com debacle, I don't think we'll be seeing
this technique used much anymore.
>4) The Temple of Set has also unsuccessfully attempted to broach the
>secrecy of the anon.penet.fi remailer, again with threats of lawsuit.
>In a rather obvious analogue to the Co$ situation, their pretense was
>that someone posted their copyrighted "secret documents" using the
>anon-remailer.
I wonder what would happen if all the I*, II* and III* documents of the
Temple
of Set were suddenly to become available online? This material might well
prove useful to those considering affiliation with the Temple, not to
mention
religious scholars. (It would also be useful for "Freezone Setians" who
wanted to use Setian philosophy without dealing with Setian org. bullshit).
Seeing as how several priests have departed of late, it would be
difficult-to-impossible to ascertain exactly who had breached the
copyright...
and trying to get the material pulled could quickly turn into an expensive
PR
disaster for the Setians. (Do the words "OT Scriptures" mean anything to
you,
guys?)
He who lives by the anon remailer...
>5) The Temple of Set attempts to silence critics not affiliated with
>their group via public outings (for LHP occultists, this can be an
>extremely dangerous thing to do), and various dirt-digging methods.
>Example; Aquino dug up as much dirt as possible about Anton LaVey's
>divorce proceedings and published it far and wide in an attempt to
>discredit him. Not all that different from the private detective work
>done on behalf of the Co$ to get dirt on critics. Another example; an
>independant publisher of the LHP magazine "Dark Lilly" published an
>article Aquino and his lackeys found threatening, so he and his Nazi pal,
>David Austen, decided to send her name and address some militant
>fundamentalist xians. SHe had to move for fear of her safety (she's
>apparently a cripple).
Magda Graham has MS, actually. Her outing by Austen was one of the low
points
in Temple history... but we're confident they'll sink to the occasion yet
again.
>6) They have attempted to put "yes men" into the alt.satanism forum to
>bolster their non-existant credibility. There were various posts from
>allegedly "unaffiliated" LHP people, who all, strangely enough, came from
>one of the Setian BBS's (fido nodes coming through gigo.com). Several
>identities were so pathetically obvious as to cause regulars to laught out
>loud; the "Toadal" being Mikey Aquino, "David Mitchel" being his
>illiterate wife, Lillith. Balanone's anon.penet.fi incarnation was
>laughably obvious; he even gave it away at one point by signing a piece of
>private email to Hr Vad with his .sig.
And this is STILL going on, and it is STILL just as effective as ever.
>7) More trivially, they are your typical mail-order cult in any number of
>ways. They require large amounts of participation on the parts of their
>members, to the extent that participation in the group becomes a central
>organizing principle in their lives. They sponsor getaway
>vacation/conventions which all members are required to attend. They have
>strict heirarchy, a charismatic leader and apocalyptic prophecy (the
>"Gifted of Set" are supposed to survive an upcoming apocalypse, according
>to their Seminal document "The Book of COming Forth By Night" -though
>lately they have been making noises that this is only a metaphorical
>apocalypse {perrhaps to avoid legal intervention in the wake of other post
>apocalytics, such as the Branch Davidians and the Solar Temple mass
>suicides, and the Aum nerve gas attacks}, there was literal belief in this
>passage as prophecy in the not-to recent past). They have a number of
>secret documents which one must have certain levels of "attainment" to
>read; much like the OT grade documents of Scientology. They have all
>manner of bizarre theories about atlantis, ancient astronauts, "Tesla
>Physics," a theory of creationism, holocaust revisionism, and so on...
That appears to be true, although I've not kept up with the latest in Setian
thinking since 1993 and so can't tell you for certain.
Peace
Kevin Filan
Jeff Gerber
"People's Commissar" <tanija...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:tkqcv33...@corp.supernews.com...
> I read it. The Cluster. Is it for real, or is it just a ploy or
> something? A joke? It sure would be just the thing to write to sow seeds
> of extreme paranoia in the TOS proper and cause suspicion to reign.
>
> Attempts to get me/mine to start up a flame with ex-TOS people and see
them
> as allied to COS has failed, btw. It might have worked had y'all NOT
> spoofed Jeff's email. That's still Jeff's email, tho I don't know how you
> did it.
I changed my password just in case. Oh no, I think you have this backwards.
I think it was a very good attempt to try to get former Set members to flame
the shit out of YOU in alliance with CoS people who are already repeatedly
flaming the shit out of you and who are obsessed with doing that. And I
think it partially did succeed. I do not think anyone in the Set Temple
would know enough about any of this to do this. I might be wrong but they'd
have to know this. Whoever did it even said our names, admitting he or she
is not either of us; but that is not the point. Go read it all again, all
of it. Read it carefully. Don't skim through it.
When you first got on the internet, you and I shared the SV account, people
who hated the CoS and the ADL both, were trying to say were were the same
person despite photos of ourselves to be seen. People in the CoS knew we
were two separate people and, at that time, were defending you, Tani. Does
anyone in the Set Temple know all of this?
> So: KNOCK IT OFF.
Yes, knock it off.
Jeff Gerber
>
Simon Jester
> >===== Original Message From "Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> =====
> >This was originally posted to a single newsgroup. I've added the other
> >newsgroups to the headers in my response.
> >
> >(Foster's address altered)
> >
> >On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Public <Anonymous_Account> wrote:
> >
> >> James F Foster
> >> 24** ****** Ave. #D1
> >> **********, ** *****
> >> United States of America
>
> >I guess they've figured out that mail-bombing us with e-viruses isn't
> >going to work. Time for new tactics, eh boys?
> >
> >Yup, pay attention now folks. This is how the ToS handles criticism: it
> >exposes its critic's home addresses on the internet. Pure Setianology.
>
>
> Seeing as how several priests have departed of late, it would be
> difficult-to-impossible to ascertain exactly who had breached the
> copyright...
> and trying to get the material pulled could quickly turn into an expensive
> PR
> disaster for the Setians. (Do the words "OT Scriptures" mean anything to
> you,
> guys?)
>
> He who lives by the anon remailer...
Indeedy, well said. Lets not over-look possible LEGAL stuff. Suppose,
just suppose:
1- Mister A of BS-org is KNOWN to have made public the personal info
of ex/members....documented, provable he's done it once at least.
2- Some limpdick coward like Anon makes public personal info of a
ex/member of Mister A"s BS-org.....Though it isn't provable that Mr A
_is_ Anon.
3- Now, if something un-toward would happen to the ex/member who got
private info made public, is it LIKELY Mr A would NOT have a finger of
suspicion pointed his way?? Bets are on he'd at least get Blues
ringing him up to ask some questions
Stupid is as stupid does. Get that choke-chain back on your boot
lickers, Dokter Ackweeeeeno. And "Trailer-park Lil".......LOL!!!!!
Jerry
catherine yronwode
>
> True, flamage simply for flamage's sake doesn't build a case for
> Sorry to waste yer time. All done now. :)
Indeed! Today's posting by you of Lupo's charges against the ToS,
especially in regard to Acquino instructing Lupo to limit alt.satanism
FAQ files in order to omit references to other satanist organizations
was highly interesting to me.
This is one of the reasons why alt.satanism has 6 different FAQs and, as
far as i know, is the ONLY usenet newsgroup with that many competing and
distinctly different FAQs.
I would like to suggest that Lupo or you create (or collaborate on) a
concise REF file on the subject of FAQ manipulation for archiving
alongside the multiple alt.satanism FAQs at the Lucky Mojo FAQ Archive.
The URL for the FAQ Archive is
http://www.luckymojo.com/faqs.html
in case you wish to check out the kinds of items kept there. Flammage is
not appropriate for that venue, but doumented references on topics of
interest to the occult community are. You can cross-post the file to
alt.magick.tyagi with the subject header PLEASE ARCHIVE and the
tyaginator will take it from there.
cat yronwode
The Esoteric Archive --------- http://www.luckymojo.com/esoteric.html
PoisonTongue
> This was originally posted to a single newsgroup. I've added the other
> newsgroups to the headers in my response.
>
> (Foster's address altered)
>
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Public <Anonymous_Account> wrote:
>
> > James F Foster
> > 24** ****** Ave. #D1
> > **********, ** *****
> > United States of America
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
> > It was posted with the use of anonymizing software at
> > http://anon.xg.nu
> > ---
>
My $$$ is on Magister Aaron Besson -aka- "Ludvig Prinn" who posts to
alt.satanism with an American Online account. I think \he\ is the
culprit. He licks so much boot his guts probably turned to leather
years ago.
PoisonTongue
> something? A joke? It sure would be just the thing to write to sow seeds
> of extreme paranoia in the TOS proper and cause suspicion to reign.
>
> Attempts to get me/mine to start up a flame with ex-TOS people and see them
> as allied to COS has failed, btw. It might have worked had y'all NOT
> spoofed Jeff's email. That's still Jeff's email, tho I don't know how you
> did it.
>
> So: KNOCK IT OFF.
>
> Thanks.
>
> TJ
Damn Tani. You just have to poke your nose into everything, don't you?
Are you really that needy for attention? Seems you are the sort of
person who thinks everyone on earth is waiting with bated breath and
open mouths at what you'll type next. Go take a vacation or something.
So: SHUT UP.
Circe
"PoisonTongue" <nemt...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:15927819.01071...@posting.google.com...
> "Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote in message
news:<Pine.GSU.4.21.010712...@garcia.efn.org>...
> > This was originally posted to a single newsgroup. I've added the other
> > newsgroups to the headers in my response.
> >
> > (Foster's address altered)
> >
> > On Wed, 11 Jul 2001, Public <Anonymous_Account> wrote:
> >
> > > James F Foster
> > > 24** ****** Ave. #D1
> > > **********, ** *****
> > > United States of America
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
> > > It was posted with the use of anonymizing software at
> > > http://anon.xg.nu
> > > ---
> >
>
>
> My $$$ is on Magister Aaron Besson -aka- "Ludvig Prinn" who posts to
> alt.satanism with an American Online account.
I had no idea what Ludvig Prinn's real name was, until now that is. Oh well,
another one gets outted on alt.satanism, what else is new?
I think \he\ is the
> culprit. He licks so much boot his guts probably turned to leather
> years ago.
PowerSurge
> person who thinks everyone on earth is waiting with bated breath >
The word you want, is BAITED, dearie.
So, shut up.
SOD of the CoE
50010713 VI! om Hail Satan! Hail Set! Hail Me! Happy Friday the 13th!
"Daimon" <Satanus-...@anonymous.to>:
>I'll post this since it would be a waste of time for the original questioner
>via email to post it.
omitted. interesting, Daimon, but why do you think that the CoS or the ToS
CARE so much about what is posted to this newsgroup? what is it about
ALT.SATANISM beyond its public status that has these Satanists dedicating
all their free time in trying to dominate and control its content like
schoolyard bullies trying to keep people out of their sandbox?
>It was not possible to miss this. It is amazing to me that you can post
>both statements and sound rational and clear minded to yourself.
I've wondered about the amount of time that many (including Lupo and
Mr. Scratch, both of whom I like) in this newsgroup feel inclined to
dedicate to trying to a) appear Right, b) flame others, and c) have the
last word. the amount of emphasis that shows up in org-Satanist dirt
is very interesting. I gather it means that the alt.satanism newsgroup
is important to these subcultures. this brings to me to further question
how much of their Satanism truly extends offline. ;>
blessed beast!
bobo...@satanservice.org: Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia: http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
Satanism Archive: http://www.satanservice.org/
People's Commissar
I really did NOT appreciate posting of home-info online, where I had to then
go get homestead exemption info for TWO separate people - the older one on
me, the newer one on another person (NOT a Satanist mind you), scan both
and send it to Aquino, Disinfo and quite a few other people likely to do
what I personally think they are very capable of doing: offline shit such
as vandalism.
Ludwig Prinn did this to me. Then Lupo repeated it. The point is, they
actually did it to someone ELSE.
I used to put the 6th Street ady on things I wrote as an open contact - I
see that Vad obviously removed it. I had no problem with that. But I DO
have a problem with someone endangering a person to whom I gave said
property for a large sum of money.
NEWSFLASH - doing addy traces using phone numbers is 50% or more of the time
WRONG. Doing that kind of search on Jessica Heather, for instance, produced
a WRONG and invalid address, long defunct.
TJ
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"PoisonTongue" <nemt...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:15927819.01071...@posting.google.com...
Kevin Filan
=====
>Thank you for confirming a name for me.
Shut up, Grandma. Nobody gave you permission to speak.
Peace
Kevin Filan
------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe to those who love is given sight
to pierce the veil of seeming night
and know it pure beyond all imagining.
- Bruce Cockburn
People's Commissar
intent to drag me and mine in. Yes.
So then, YOU POSTED IT?
TJ
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"PoisonTongue" <nemt...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:15927819.01071...@posting.google.com...
People's Commissar
dragging Ole and then me and Jeff into this? It's so fuckin obvious too.
TJ
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"PowerSurge" <circuit...@the666club.com> wrote in message
news:HNP37.4456$pD1.6...@nntp2.onemain.com...
People's Commissar
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"Kevin Filan" <Raks...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:3B58...@MailAndNews.com...
PowerSurge
> No one gave you permission to leave your kennel, mutt.
>
Simon Jester
> Thank you for confirming a name for me.
>
> I really did NOT appreciate posting of home-info online, where I had to then
> go get homestead exemption info for TWO separate people - the older one on
> me, the newer one on another person (NOT a Satanist mind you), scan both
> and send it to Aquino, Disinfo and quite a few other people likely to do
> what I personally think they are very capable of doing: offline shit such
> as vandalism.
>
> Ludwig Prinn did this to me. Then Lupo repeated it. The point is, they
> actually did it to someone ELSE.
Why did Lupo do this to you??
Besson doesn't surprise me, I've seen him attack people who never did
a shittin' thing to him. He's a stooge for Dokter Ackweeeeno, he'll go
on a rampage attack with slobbering jowls at a flick of Ackweeeeno's
wrist. Have seen him do the dirty work THEY don't wanna do many times.
Real stoolie stooge, that guy. Yea they got him trained REAL well. He
doesn't piss on carpet anymore, now he pisses on the LINOLEUM. He
lives in Calif., north of San Francisco, last I heard.
>
> NEWSFLASH - doing addy traces using phone numbers is 50% or more of the time
> WRONG. Doing that kind of search on Jessica Heather, for instance, produced
> a WRONG and invalid address, long defunct.
>
> TJ
Sure. So many people on the move in America. Defunct addresses no big
mystery.
Jerry
Mr. Scratch
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Kevin Filan wrote:
> I wonder what would happen if all the I*, II* and III* documents of
> the Temple of Set were suddenly to become available online? This
> material might well prove useful to those considering affiliation with
> the Temple, not to mention religious scholars. (It would also be
> useful for "Freezone Setians" who wanted to use Setian philosophy
> without dealing with Setian org. bullshit).
Interestingly, the Temple of Set is currently having a snit over just this
very possibility. They are currently attempting to ratchet down control
over their internal documents, graduating them from "Super-Seekrit" to
"Super-Duper Seekrit." The following is apparently now found on the
Scroll of Set (The ToS' bimonthly 'zine):
"This document is the property of the Temple of Set Inc. It is on loan to
active members only. It is not intended for resale and the Temple will
reimburse postage costs for its return."
So, even if it's in your possession, it isn't yours to keep.
Frankly, I believe this is just another excuse to tighten the grip of the
security arm of the Temple on its membership, to no end other than to
exercize power. It is rather similar (though on a much smaller scale,
obviously) to what occurred in the Soviet Union with the NKVD in the
1920's, when the security branch of the state ran amok, growing like a
cancer for no purpose but growth itself. Everything that remotely related
to the State or its security, even the possession of an accurate roadmap,
became "secret", with the label "spy", "saboteur", and "wrecker" (as well
as a 20 year stint in the Gulag) being assigned to anyone who let even the
smallest bit of information slip into the public. The security wing of the
Party fed on the paranoia of the USSR's bureaucratic leadership, and in
time became so contorted and bloated beyond its purpose that it devoured
it's citizens for no reason but to simply devour them.
Think about this -- there is nothing in any of the Temple's documents that
is so earth-shaking that it should warrant such extraordinary security
demands. Of the Jeweled Tablets of Set, the Crystal Tablet is about the
best of them, and it is there for anyone who wants to chip in the $65.00
for a membership. The rest of them are little more than a collection of
mumbo-jumbo, internal policies, and suggestions for how to behave, etc.
The Scroll of Set is barely readable anymore, it's so chock-full of
meandering navel-gazing. Really, there is nothing there that justifies
making them such a big secret.
In the past, the Temple's attitudes was appropriate to the contents.
They didn't make any extraordinary effort to control the documents once
they were out of the organization's hands. Oh sure, they didn't want
random people reproducing their intellectual property (and on this point,
who can blame them), but when it came to the original copies produced by
the ToS itself, if the owner left the Temple they just shrugged it off.
In my opinion, this was even the best way to keep them from being sought
after by the public, as they were not considered forbidden fruit.
Now, of course, the Magistry and Priesthood is being stacked with their
own variety of sunken-chested, weak-chinned, bespeckled Heinrich
Himmleresque spymeister wannabees, who have nothing more productive to do
in life but try to seize whatever new opportunities they find to lord it
over their charges. It doesn't matter that 90% of the Temple's material
would produce nothing more than stifled yawns from the most productive
Satanist or educated occultist, this stuff is SEEKRIT. Now they'll have a
reason to go sniffing out "leaks" and "enemies" should this pointless
Mohave-dry blathering make it into the public domain. Or, they'll go
blustering about, claiming property from ex-members that is not rightfully
theirs, and that they have no lawful or ethical power to retrieve.
Furthermore, it may be a foot in the door for more Scientology-style
tactics. As you recall, the Church of Scientology launched a series of
it's famous lawsuit assaults when its own secret internal documents were
posted to the net. Of course, the Co$ lost the suit when the courts found
that a copyright is intended to protect the commercial vaibility of
intellectual property, and not a document's secrecy, and thus the
non-profit publication of secret documents does not violate copyright law.
However, as their doomed CDA efforts and suits against anon services have
demonstrated, the simple fact that certain legal strategies are futile
does not indicate the ToS won't try it anyway.
> Seeing as how several priests have departed of late, it would be
> difficult-to-impossible to ascertain exactly who had breached the
> copyright... and trying to get the material pulled could quickly turn
> into an expensive PR disaster for the Setians. (Do the words "OT
> Scriptures" mean anything to you, guys?)
(*shrug*)
It could happen. Its a bit surprising it doesn't happen all the time, in
fact.
Note to ToS lawdogs; we of Radio Free Setian have already rejected the
idea of reproducing or redistributing Temple copyrighted material (without
commentary), even within our own private communication forums. So, if
somebody you've screwed over comes out with here with an electronic
version of Pumice Tablet of Set, don't blame us. And by all means,
don't blame yourselves -- I know you never would anyway!
> Peace
> Kevin Filan
Mr. Scratch
www.radio-free-setian.com
People's Commissar
already BEEN outed by Aquino. Well, actually Brendan was 15 and immature
about it. Jeff didn't out, he emailed Lupo at his job, or something like
that.
And so, I'm Jeff and Brendan? No, I'm not. He did it because he's that
way. He obsesses and everyone who's ever seen it knows it. Why Prinn did
it is a mystery. I did nothing to him.
Ahem, the masters in the cos and their lackeys do the same exact things as
you are accusing the TOS of doing - and they've done it all along.
TJ
--
Satanic Reds http://www.geocities.com/satanicreds/
Unique - check it out! www.darktradition.com
Member of the Satanic Council
http://www.geocities.com/sataniccouncil/mainmenu.html
Dark Doctrines part of Satanic Reds Org.
http://www.apodion.com/vad/dark/
http://satanmuse.rules.it/
SLAVA NAM! POWER TO THE WORKING PEOPLE!
"Simon Jester" <blackth...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:2936b9cd.0107...@posting.google.com...
PoisonTongue
> Interestingly, the Temple of Set is currently having a snit over just this
> very possibility. They are currently attempting to ratchet down control
> over their internal documents, graduating them from "Super-Seekrit" to
> "Super-Duper Seekrit." The following is apparently now found on the
> Scroll of Set (The ToS' bimonthly 'zine):
>
> "This document is the property of the Temple of Set Inc. It is on loan to
> active members only. It is not intended for resale and the Temple will
> reimburse postage costs for its return."
>
> So, even if it's in your possession, it isn't yours to keep.
>
> Frankly, I believe this is just another excuse to tighten the grip of the
> security arm of the Temple on its membership, to no end other than to
> exercize power
Indeed. A bluthering attempt. And were the TOS to attempt confiscation
[and just *how* would they go about accomplishing that, what with
their meager membership scattered all about] of 'their' printed
documents, would they offer financial *reimbursement* to the
confiscee? No, of course not. My understanding of the word *purchase*
is that once it is made [at least in America, Britain, and other
civilized Western nations], it is then *your* possession. But, thanks
to you, we've already seen that the TOS does not conduct itself in an
American fashion but rather like the Spanish Inquisitorial 'Courts'
or, as you have so magnificently pointed out, the Soviet system.
But I don't pity the dupes and morons who willingly subject themselves
to the black-gloved hand which ever so steadily clenches at the
throat. They deserve it.
Points well made, Mr. Scratch. -:- a toast to you -:-
Keep on with the splendid work of exposure, both you and your Radio
Free Setian friends.
SOD of the CoE
continuing discussion with Mr. Scratch (Craig Hunt, III*) regarding his
dealings with the Temple of Set hierarchy after expulsion of he and his
wife, Kerry Delph (degree?*):
Mr. Scratch:
>>> * If your organization is built for the benefit of its membership
>>> (unlike a "cult"), why does it keep files on those members' perceived
>>> wrongdoings?
is that the only reason that files are kept?
>>> * Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its
>>> members' personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
>>
>> No, because a responsible organization is made up of people who are
>> responsible. You are not of this category.
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> [to 'Tez']:
> You go on to further complain that I was not kicked out for my
> association with Lupo, yet this is in denial of Michael Aquino's
> own statements on the matter.... First, it was for my treacherously
> consorting with the enemy. When it turns out that such things make you
> look bad, now it is for bringing Lupo into the hotel driveway.
I'm not sure that this is a fair appraisal of the quotes you offer.
let's take a look, shall we?
> Here's some quotes for you:
[from Don Webb, High Priest of the Temple of Set, V*]
> {On my not informing the Gang of 9 that I'd accidentally allowed Lupo to
> know where the Conclave location was: }
># "He would have no doubt suffered great embarrassment if he had
># told us that something was wrong -- and probably he would be
># tossed out anyway -- but the spirit of the III* would have lead
># him to do so."
what is "the spirit of the III*"? why didn't you tell them something
was wrong?
[from Michael Aquino, V* and former High Priest of the Temple of Set]
># "The atmosphere {of the Co9 meeting to determine Hunt's
># expulsion} was not particularly emotional. It was more a case
># of whether Hunt's maintaining a long-standing personal
># friendship with Locklin, in disregard of the latter's
># behavior towards the Temple of Set, was in keeping with the
># Priesthood's honor and dignity.
>#
># ...
>#
># "What is perhaps most ironic about this is that the *actual*
># reasons, as detailed above, are apparently incomprehensible
># to Hunt [Mr. Scratch]; he cannot understand why his dalliance
># with Locklin [Lupo] should have been considered the least
># relevant to his sacred office. It is precisely that lack of
># sensitivity that was of decisive concern to the Council.
>#
># ...
>#
># "In this case it was the unanimous opinion of the High Priest
># and the Council of Nine that by associating yourself socially
># with someone like Locklin you had displayed your casual
># disregard, if not contempt for the Temple of Set; hence the
># HS was in your case disgraced and should be removed accordingly."
what does "the HS... should be removed" mean?
> Yup, nothing, nothing, NOTHING to do with my being friends with Lupo!
on the contrary, as you of course know in your sarcasm, it seems that
it has *everything* to do with your associations. however, it should
be admitted that nothing was DONE about it until you jeopardized the
security of the Conclave by having Lupo/Locklin drop you off at the hotel.
*then* it became actionable, and you have even apologized for this and
tried to separate your wife Kerry Delph from responsibility for this
lack of judgement on your part.
> Look folks, if you'll read the dialogues, I think it's clear that the
> reason given for my expulsion is pretty much 50/50 -- because I was
> friends with Lupo, AND because I accidentally allowed him to discover the
> Conclave location.
the two are not unrelated. your association made it POSSIBLE for this
security breach (as defined by ToS) to occur. from the position of the
Temple you were playing with fire and didn't know when to stop. not
only this, Maga Lilith Aquino explained to you that she considered
it to be contrary to the position of a ToS Priest to establish and
maintain affiliations with avowed Temple enemies. therefore they were
very LENIENT with you (and your wife) in their dealings, apparently
contrary to the wishes of Maga Aquino and perhaps others on the Co9.
> For while, the ToS chose to emphasize the former reason, making an
> example of me (perhaps as a way to indirectly warn their Setian
> dupes that if they failed to choose the right friends they might
> suffer the same fate). When this explanation turned around to
> bite them in the ass, all of a sudden they changed tune.
could you date this out for us somehow, this 'change of tune'?
when did they know about and start emphasizing the breach of
security, when did it stop, and when did they switch to
emphasizing associations?
don't you think that this is similar to the ToS policies
surrounding the lack of dual-membership in religious orgs
other than the temple for advancing members because it
constitutes a conflict of interest?
>> If the fact that you were friends with Lupo was the last straw, you
>> would've been gone years ago. Bring antagonistic anti-Christians to a
>> Sunday bible picnic, people aren't going to want you around. Bring
>> antagonistic right-to-lifers to a pro-choice meeting (and vice versa),
>> and people aren't going to want you around. Bring an antagonistic
>> anti-Setian to the Conclave hotel, and people aren't going to want you
>> around.
> Er...We're talking about the parking lot here, which is all that Lupo saw
> of the Conclave (and at the time, even seeing this, Lupo had no idea of
> what it was....
the possibility existed that he would recognize the man who was outside.
you said yourself that you'd wanted to avoid him dropping you off
at the lobby and suggested (or thought about suggesting) that he not
do this, instead letting you off some blocks from the hotel. you KNEW
there might be a compromise of Conclave security from the perspective
of the ToS officials. it wasn't important, apparently, whether Lupo
actually understood the situation. that you allowed it to come so
close with people that the ToS identified to you as security risks
is a clear indication of your untrustworthiness to temple activities.
> ...I would expect that if I pulled up in the parking lot of some
> pro-choice meeting in a right-to-lifer's car, shook hands, and let
> him drive off, I would be questioned about the nature of the
> interaction.
WERE you questioned about it? did you make a full report to your
superiors in the temple when you arrived, letting them know about
the potential security breach at the time and apologizing for it
at the time it occurred? if not, why not?
> Once it was cleared up that the whole thing was an accident, and that
> the right-to-lifer in question was never any danger to the proceedings,
> I would also expect the pro-choicers to get over it.
but in a pyramidal religious structure that may not be your position
to decide. in fact it was decided contrary to your desires, which was
their prerogative. you also didn't include a past association with
the Head Honcho's wife. ;> it may be that they were just watching for
some reason to get rid of you because of that, which you say below.
> Maybe I'd get a stern lecture on carelessness, but I wouldn't
> expect them to denounce my choice of friends, paint the encounter
> out as if my friend had shown up sporting a vest of dynamite
> sticks, and give me the flying boot.
while I don't claim to understand the attention to 'security' with the
Temple of Set, I can see that Aquino's involvement may yield military-
type security preparations and an embattled mentality. that surely was
made clear to you at various times. it was made clear that they did
not want known enemies of the temple to know about the Conclave times
or locations. perhaps this is as a result of some previous events or
'security problems', I can't be sure. in any case different orgs are
likely to react in different intensities to breaches of protocol. you
had already been 'walking the line', it seems, where Lupo was concerned,
and your choice to allow him to drop you off at the hotel was where you
crossed it. I didn't hear anyone say anything about dynamite sticks.
one of the things you may wish to consider is that the old adage of
'those who live by the sword die by the sword' may be the case in an
odd way with the ToS. since they are willing to take actions against
others (at least verbally and apparently even encouraging others to
affect non-cyber lives to the negative -- such as Lupo mentions in
his description of the temple's encouragement of people to drop into
his place of employment and identify him as a Satanist; we are never
informed that someone actually *did* this, I must add), then you can
imagine that they may feel that they are subject to the same sorts
of actions in response, however volatile.
that the ToS (and apparently, at times, the CoS too) places so much
emphasis on the doings and sayings within alt.satanism should be
another indicator that they are prone to considering "enemies" who
dis the temple to be security risks. your relationship with Lupo
is therefore likely to assume a greater character than just any
known anti-ToS former-member.
> can accept the fact that sometimes we meet people we don't like.
why the ToS chooses to consider security issues as they do has not
been explained by anyone, even you. the issue, as I see it, is not
so much whether you have the capacity to interact with enemies of
the temple, but that the temple itself doesn't want to subject
itself to these kinds of encounters. you've known this and took
actions which led to potential problems, so they booted you.
now the way *I* see it, if you truly believe that this is a cult
and a dangerous one, you should be THANKFUL that they booted you,
freeing you and your mind of unwanted indoctrination. or, is it
like others have said -- you have never escaped your indoctrina-
tion and are still reacting to it after having been rejected by
the temple you've known and loved?
> My encounters in the Temple with someone who had physically and verbally
> abused me over the course of years, and had told tremendous lies about me
> in order to diminish my reputation, were far more obnoxious than any such
> encounter with Maninblack would be. In fact, I'd say they were worse than
> any distress the Temple encountered by having Lupo in their hotel
> driveway, by a factor of ten. Yet I accepted it for what it was.
now you're talking about a somewhat different situation. you are
referring to Don Webb's present wife Jennifer Curfman (aka Guineviere,
or Guin), with whom you lived and were lovers for a period of time.
you describe this in some detail in one of your letters in 'The
Scratch Dialogues'. that you found the interaction with other temple
members (whoever they might be) difficult is apparently not a matter
which the temple wishes to address in the same manner, however.
what kinds of actions has the Temple of Set taken to facilitate
squabbling between temple members of which you are aware? you
explained why you kept silent about the character of Ms. Curfman
in your post-dismembership letter to Don Webb, the current High
Priest of the Temple of Set concerning his now-wife:
...I had little recourse for [Curfman's lies to Temple officials], beyond
countering with my own gossiping, which I declined to do. Though I did
tell my very closest friends about my relationship with her, I thought it
unfitting for a (soon-to-be) Priest to go spreading unflattering stories,
even if they were true. Besides, knowing Guin as I did, I figured she
would not be able to control her anger, and would eventually come under
more objective scrutiny from someone else; I wanted to be clear of her
when she erupted.
Unfortunately, her aberrant behavior (which I know you have been informed
of, if you haven't experienced it yourself by now) has been overlooked.
When I discovered you and she were in a romantic relationship, I redoubled
my efforts to keep silent publicly, correctly supposing that talking about
Guin's violent nature and mental illness would likely cost me my membership.
but you don't mention this issue in your discussion with Tez: that you
felt (feel?) that the decision to remove you from the membership roster
was in part fueled by the High Priest's bias against you because of what
he may have heard from Ms. Curfman and in part from what he may have
heard from you about her when she was being considered for the Priesthood.
not only this, that insider group, 'The Cluster', mentioned in their
Setian Manifesto that Don Webb was promoting inept people to the
Priesthood, and they wanted this stopped badly enough to encourage Aquino
to resume his position in place of Mr. Webb, perhaps also reacting to
Ms. Curfman's promotion in the temple hierarchy (there is no detail on
over whom The Cluster was objecting).
> I guess I don't feel you've answered this question either, about whether
> the Temple of Set is being responsible by trying to control its members'
> choices of friends.
it sounds like they *weren't* trying to control your choices of friends.
in fact, they didn't really say anything until your incident at the hotel,
from what you've laid out at your radio-free-setian website. please
correct me if I'm in error here. the issue seems to be something even you
knew was problematic: breach of Conclave security due to your poor
judgement.
> Given the above Aquino quotes, and this one regarding
> a Setian who had been expelled for undetailed reasons:
[from Bruce Ware IV*]
># "The discovery of Setian Initiates maintaining friendly and
># cordial relationships with this <ahem> 'person' will not be
># dismissed lightly. I trust I have made myself clear, and
># that a single warning is sufficient to the wise?" --
to whom was this sent? was it about Lupo to you? in any case, why is
it that sometimes members of the ToS refer to people as "Unpersons"?
does this work itself somewhere into the favoured cosmology of the
temple membership? I noticed that you and Kerry were referred to
this way when the message was sent to you that you and she were
expelled from the temple.
> It should be clear to most readers that the Temple will do exactly what
> I've accused them of, if they feel the person in question is an "enemy."
what? that they will warn against such affiliations because they might
compromise security issues like what happened with you and Lupo? maybe
their experience with you has fueled their caution.
>>> * How does the use of excommunication and "shunning" benefit the
>>> individual Setian?
>>
>> My own initiatory work is something special and intimate. I need to
>> trust the people I'm going to interact with, or it's no go. Believe it
>> or not Scratch, I have friends who are ex-Setians, one or two who
>> didn't even leave in particularly good graces. The Temple knows about
>> this and you know what else, THEY DON'T CARE!
>
> No? Maybe you just don't have the "right" friends!
or maybe they only care when you haven't been able to secure the
temple from encountering these individuals through indiscrete
association.
> Sure, lots of Setians leave the Temple under bad circumstances, and then
> remain silent on their experiences. So long as they keep their mouths
> shut, the Temple won't do anything. However, if said friend is an
> "enemy," you have a whole different story.
did you ever mention to temple members directly that you were maintaining
a friendly relationship with Lupo? did you inform your superiors in the
temple of this? if not, why not? what do you think their response might
have been? I know you said that some members must have known and yet
said nothing. maybe they said nothing because it was none of their
business and, as long as it didn't compromise temple security, didn't
constitute a problem that needed addressing.
> ...Look at what happened to Scott [Lupo] when he tried to arrange a
> business deal with Gilmore, and with George Smith when he met with
> LaVey.
in your case Lupo wasn't an agent of the Church of Satan, however.
> I'll tell you what, "Tez." You're only a few hours drive from my fine
> city. Why don't you come on over for a weekend....
> Then, once you're back, I'll pop onto a.s, and tell the world ....
> You can do the same for Ol' Scratch on Setian-L... and that we're
> the best of pals.
not completely similar. I didn't hear from you that you and Lupo were
'the best of pals', though your friendship is obvious. did you ever
publicize this in alt.satanism or elsewhere, such as in Setian-L?
did Lupo? you seem to be asking for something which Tez is not
claiming. the temple isn't interested in your personal life unless
and until it becomes a security risk. your association became such,
and you were treated accordingly. this is different than trying to
dictate your friendships from the outset (which did not happen,
from what you've shown in your website).
> Think about it. What kind of reception do you think YOU would get?
is it relevant in comparison?
>>> * If the purpose of the Temple is to promote the individual Will, why
>>> does it appear that the Temple is attempting to hammer out a
>>> philosophical conformity (beyond core Setian principles) among its
>>> membership?
litmus is not the same as conformity.
>> ...Beyond core Setian values, no agreement on application
>> is really asked for....
> ...Why are postmodernists being harassed and driven from the Temple?
because they constitute an antagonistic element to the temple's
Setianism.
> What happens to anyone who mentions on the e-lists the notion of hunting
> rituals, or defends animal testing? Why do the adherents of Xem feel
> they've been gagged, and forced into resignation? Why the current
> attitude about the IOT and Chaos Magick?
> (http://www.radio-free-setian.com/index2.html)
because it doesn't conform to core Setian principles, as indicated by
Tez.
> No, there is definitely a narrow path of acceptable philosophical
> thought, and it is getting all the narrower....
the only narrowing appears to be occurring in regions previously
not covered by Setian litmus: philosophic or practical approaches
to religion which would be antagonistic to core Setian values,
but were not covered by dual-membership in religious orgs.
>> Second of all, cults do require a mindless obedience, which is not
>> conducive to productive discussion of initiatory and magical worth,
>> which is something that the Temple is not lacking in an abundance of,
>> you'll be sorry to know.
>
> You have many kinds of mindless obedience in the Temple. I suppose you
> are probably too well indoctrinated to be able to see them for what they
> are. I know that for a time I was.
this makes you a biased source, Mr. Scatch, just as you were prior when
you were an indoctrinated member. now you seem to have a grudge against
an organization with which you've felt you were dealt harshly and
unfairly. does Kerry support your radio-free-setian website? if not,
why not? I see no testimonies from her, nor do I see correspondence
which she has seen fit to post to it in your support. I don't even
see her posting here to substantiate your contentions.
> As for "initiatory and magical worth" in the Temple....
> It is an argument built on faith and indoctrination, not on evidence.
of course, but this is always the case amongst the religious, and many
religious cultures and subcultures have their own lingo (about which
you also commented, omitted).
>>> * Why is the membership of the Temple declining at an accelerated
>>> rate?
>> Ah yes, another one from the "I sez so, therefore it is" file of
>> Maestro Scratch.
>> ...Mr. Scratch says so. "My inside sources", thats it? Not even
>> a copy of an e-mail to this effect?
>> ...
>> Once again, back it up Scratch. Give comparisons and contrasts.
>> "Accelerated rate of decline"? Compared to what. Show proof or
>> find a new line, because this one isn't taking.
> ...You can't deny the evidence,
what evidence, Mr. Scratch? I don't see any beyond the mediocre
observations of Walter Radke that membership numbers were stable.
> Well, Tez, I gained my figures from counting the names on one of your more
> recent membership rosters, which I *haven't* posted in demonstration of
> the falling membership numbers because I respect the privacy of the
> rank-and-file membership of the Temple. Still want me to post the "proof"
> on this newsgroup? I don't imagine you do.
I do. if you're going to put private correspondence up on the web, why don't
you put up a copy of the membership roster with all the names individually
blacked out, so that we can see how many you're counting, that the document
you have obtained is official or derives from real sources, etc.?
> ...you've made a more spirited defense than most of your ilk. You've even
> made a good point or two, if we put aside the fact that you evaded many of
> the questions.
I hope I have bolstered his defense considerably. I don't think that these
debates are so easily resolved as you, apparently. Tez *did* evade some of
the questions you asked. I think you've avoided responding to some of his
points, and I've tried to underscore them as a Devil's Advocate sparring
with you, trying not to take sides. I'm not of his 'ilk' (not being a
member of the Temple of Set), but I have received compliments from him in
private and so am encouraged. :>
> All in all, I think you've earned a well-deserved pat on the head from
> your masters, and if you're lucky, maybe they'll let you lick their
> hands for a moment or two!
I have no masters and hope that you will tell us more about who and
what you think Set is, what Set wants of the temple, and what Set
wants from you (you never addressed these questions from me that I saw).
do you think that Set is somehow related to Satan such that you are
posting to alt.satanism? thanks for your time and attention.
SOD of the CoE
where's that bucket of water when you need it?
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org>:
> ...They were attacking me because I was a ToSser on a newsgroup they
> wanted to monopolize.
why did and does either the CoS or the ToS wish to "monopolize"
the alt.satanism newsgroup?
> My point in the previous discussion concerning Forrester's attempt to
> contrast Radio FreeSetian <www.radio-free-setian.com> against the "CoS
> files" is that the two are separate ideas, by separate groups of people.
perhaps they are separated by time and space, but they are NOT separated
by virtue of being revelations about Satanist organizations as to their
unseemly and dirty tactics in dealing with members and others.
> More plainly, its not a choice between one being right and one being
> wrong.
I don't think anyone was attempting to promote this one-right-one-wrong
notion.
>On this, Tani and I actually agree completely when she said:
>> To Forrester, You want to try to keep these two issues separate,
>> please?...
>
> Hear hear!
the issues ARE related if org Satanism is flawed in similar ways. I'm
sure that those who have desires to love or trust organizations with
their Satanist or Setian values in association WOULD like to keep
these issues separate. I think it is valuable to contrast and compare
the two situations, even if they weren't directly related. why don't you?
> ...I didn't find the accusation so scandalous
> (considering all the other crap I had to deal with from Tani and her
> CoS minions during that time period, it pales by comparrison). ...
> I should not be considered an authority on the contents of the
> "CoS files" because I hadn't read them all. How you read
> that as being a denial of their contents, I have no idea.
ignoring their similarity of character with respect to RFSetian.com?
> ...I find [Ole Wolf] boring and a bit full of himself, and
> since I've already wasted anough time reading his material in the past, I
> think I'll take a pass in the future. Nothing personal, its just my
> preference. I'm allowed to have those now.
sure, but can you afford to? I mean, with your record of selection of
organizations and affiliations? wouldn't it *behoove* you to learn if
there are similarities of complaints? is it possible that there is
a DYNAMIC (say, of egoic aggrandizement, evidenced also in the various
occult and religious communities, but often less so because of the
ascetic regimen and adherence to humility as evidence of 'progress'
and 'worthiness of position' which Satanism and Setianism sometimes
encourage) that shows up in developing organizations of these types?
> ...the CoS did try to drive its critics from this newsgroup by putting
> Tani Jantsang in charge of massing groups of flamers to attack them.
I haven't noticed, but I am intermittently 'present' in the newsgroup.
Tani and I have remained relatively cordial, even though I've made it
plain that I disagree with many of her statements and have killfiled
her in alt.satanism. I get the occasional email from her and we have
exchanged a couple of things privately. I'm glad that she has moved
into a position where she is more reachable than having to go through
one of her acolytes like we had to in the past.
> stupidity, receiving many threats to my life, and withstanding real-life
> harassment from the CoS-sponsored Tani & Co. To cement the association,
> some of the more obnoxious messages were posted on Tani's behalf directly
> from Nadramia's email address.
it sounds like you think the CoS is far more nefarious than the ToS.
is this a fair assessment? that the CoS is more interested in having
some kind of affect against its perceived 'enemies'? why ARE 'enemies'
given such attention by these groups? is this some kind of mark of
their 'adversarial' (i.e. 'satanic') character? an obsession with
being the victim or martyr? paranoid tendencies? hostile arrogance?
> Frankly, I don't find the CoS' efforts of the time as scandalous as I do
> embarrassing and stupid. Keep in mind that during the time that this
> harassment was occurring, I was considered one of the more intelligent and
> entertaining residents on this newsgroup; thus, unleashing a pack of
> vicious knuckledraggers to subdue me didn't win the CoS any beauty
> pageants. Ironically, all it did was increase the number of sympathetic
> CoS members out there who SUPPORTED me, who secretly fed me information
> about my critics, and strengthened their efforts to remove Jantsang from
> their organization.
it sounds like it was less an organized CoS-assault and more the case of
a gang of CoS members out to contend with you and their ToS rival(s).
it seems to imply there is no organizational motivation or operation in
the CoS, as compared to the very obvious Temple of Set response to you
as a member.
> ...Tani and her Flying Monkeys found that a group of disgusted critics
> had formed behind her own lines, and she would eventually find herself
> ousted from the organization she had worked so hard to strengthen.
could we have the details, as you know them, about this ousting? is it
so unforeseeable, considering the strong statements which she and her
friends have been making about a variety of things from 'Satanist ideas'
to 'who is a Satanist', racial and cultural backgrounds, political
ideologies, etc.? what were the factors of membership removal?
while you're at it, might you say something about how Michael Aquino
'besmirched' the character of Kerry Delph (your wife as I understand
it), and why this was important?
> And me? I wasted a tremendous amount of my time (over a year),
> flushed down the drain, bickering in the defense of people I
> shouldn't have wasted ten minutes on. If I had it to do over again,
> I'd have told Tani and the CoS "Have at!", retired from the
> newsgroup, and gotten a real hobby.
why haven't you *ALREADY DONE SO*? I'm not trying to say I want you
to leave, Mr. Scratch, I like you. but I *am* saying that you seem
to be perpetuating the same thing but from a different position
now that you've been expelled from the organization you once so
vehemently defended. could there be a medium ground? I know that
I've found it, chronicling the various scandals, details from the
orgs and their detractors, and making all of it as available as
I'm able to the public. occasionally I get involved in conversa-
tions such as this one with you or other intelligent individuals
from the alt.satanism newsgroup, but I don't feel the need to
defend any New Improved Herd of Satanists, and I'm not sure what
value there would be in doing this, even in responding to very
adolescent and idiotic posts concerning me or my Satanism. there
is a *reason* that independent Satanism has its advantages.
> ...My secret CoS friends who supported me through their
> organization's acts of injustice are still in, and have some
> influence in steering the Church's course....
is it possible the Temple of Set saw clearly when they expelled
you, if you have "secret CoS friends" and they also consider the
CoS to be 'enemies of the temple'?
> ...Having squandered a year of my time fighting Tani, and having
> no reason to waste any more time, I usually don't even read her
> stuff (or that of the Flying Monkeys). What I do read, I don't
> respond to. I just leave her alone. I usually don't agree
> with her (though occasionally I do), but I just chalk it up to a
> difference of opinion. Nothing to get excited about. I think I'm
> being pretty generous with this attitude, considering what I had
> to put up with from her bunch in the past.
is it really a matter of having to have the last word, Mr. Scratch,
and you finally letting go of that? I mean, I have the same position
with respect to Tani. I read less of what she posts I'm sure, but it
gets through in quotation (which I sometimes appreciate). but what
is the fighting, really, about? why perpetuate it? I haven't seen
the value and have refrained from becoming involved. I always thought
that you and Lupo were just riling people and getting your kicks,
rather than that you considered your time "squandered" or "wasted".
I'm sorry you feel this way.
>You folks, however, just don't seem to want to let it go. Why is that?
fanatics?
> If it is as you have said, and that you attacked me only because the CoS
> wanted you to, it would seem to me that you now have no reason to continue
> complaining about me.
perhaps it has something to do with your past associations (ToS). perhaps
it has to do with your sometimes vitriolic expression (compare Lupo).
perhaps it has to do with your character and they believe that you will
read what they write and that they can 'get to you' this way? to whom are
they, in the end, complaining? certainly not to the alt.satanism ADMIN,
who ignores all criticisms of newsgroup participants! :>
who are the White Devils and who was their field marshal? care to divulge
their street names, the history of the org as you know it, etc.?
>Frankly, I think they are probably just still stinging from the old
>flames. I kinda wish they'd get over it already. I'd think they'd have
>bigger fish to fry than lil' ol' me.
no, your independence of thought and outspokenness about imbecility are
too tasty to let go, Mr. Scratch. ;>
>water vapor in the Sahara when I posted on alt.satanism his personal ad
>(stating that he was a transvestite, looking to suck off well hung men in
>the Washington DC area). Hardly an encounter I'd be crowing about if I
>were Brendan.
LOL!
>Mr. Scratch
>www.radio-free-setian.com
Priest of Set
People's Commissar
all, oh no, not all. You have some of it SO ass backwards that it causes me
to giggle.
"Mr. Scratch" <scr...@efn.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSU.4.21.010710...@garcia.efn.org...
>
> All I've said is that I didn't find the accusation so scandalous
> (considering all the other crap I had to deal with from Tani and her CoS
> minions
Hold on. Tani and one friend - and his hood friends. All kids. Nick,
Casey and Wayne also. All non-Cos (Casey HATED the cos! surprise!) The
whole rest was COS MEMBERS. All of it asked for repeatedly by Da Kaiser.
Yup. You stuck your face in it so hard - you shouldn't have. But you did.
So? Ya got flamed.
> I do additionally say that considering the source ("Ole Wolf"), I didn't
> think I wanted to read them. Not because I think he's trying to be
> deceitful,
His writings do not constitute those files. The horse's mouths constitute
them, including MeinKampf masquerading as Liz Dictator - Mag. Jeff Nagy.
Some nice Jason Roberts stuff and other horse's mouth spewings. Ole just
wrote the cover.
> Now, if you *want* my official opinion on what I HAVE read (which is
> pretty much limited to the "Waffen-SS" letter), I'd have to say the info
> is probably authentic. I know for a certainty that the CoS did try to
> drive its critics from this newsgroup by putting Tani Jantsang in charge
> of massing groups of flamers to attack them.
Nope, not quite right. I knew one person. Then 3 others I knew, 2 very
well, 1 very vaguely, got into it. The whole rest were "put up to it" by
the COS - and I did NOT know them except as "flamers against TOS." How
nice of you to make me loom so large in this, but sorry - that's wrong. Qui
bono, Scratch? Who narked to the CID false info on Aquino? Eh? Who saw
the TOS as The Biggest Threat? EH? Was it the real org that I was ALWAYS a
member of? Oh, hell no.
I know this in part because
> I was tipped of by sympathetic CoS members about a week or two before it
> happened. Then, for a period of about a year, I was the target of this
> stupidity, receiving many threats to my life, and withstanding real-life
> harassment from the CoS-sponsored Tani & Co.
How easy to make it look like "Tani and Co" when I have no way to see it and
no way to know unless someone prints it out for me? And what did I see?
Oh, about 20 pages, not more than 30 pages in all.
To cement the association,
> some of the more obnoxious messages were posted on Tani's behalf directly
> from Nadramia's email address.
COUGH COUGH. On my behalf? Ya sure about that, Scratch? I had no way to
see this. I'm beginning to believe you are indoctrinated but good and
proper.
>
> Frankly, I don't find the CoS' efforts of the time as scandalous as I do
> embarrassing and stupid.
Now that would be Brendan and his gang who thought Aquino's TOS was shit
and/but who thought that LaVey's COS was........ BIGGER SHIT. Ya didn't
figure that out yet? NOT YET? When Nadramia was being accused finally, by
Jill realizing just WHO got her to spy and do other such things, Gilmore
told me about it. I wasn't even reading it. And so, I asked him if he
wanted ME to answer FOR Nadramia (like to return the favor maybe? Ha ha.)
Oh, I answered Jill alright and made the COS and Barton look like the
BIGGEST con artist, lying rip off assholes this side of Iraq. And whenever
I wrote horrible shit like that, I made sure to sign them MAGISTRA. But
whenever I wrote good stuff or stuff I sell, that useless, meaningless title
given to me by a know nothing was NEVER to be seen. I'd deny I had it.
Yup, and Circe, just coming online seeing a "MAG" in the cos writing such a
thing flamed the hell out of me for it; she had not seen the reams of shit
that came before, tho. She undrestands it NOW, however. He he he. Can't
say I'm without an evil sense of humor there. Speak FOR them eh? OK. I'll
do that and return the favor (the scumbags....) . Needless to say, I also
SAW every stinking to rot email the Gilmores ever mailed that girl Jill.
Yet she continued to blame everyone and their brother, linking together
people that were not linked and not even involved. ONLY in the end did she
see it was Gilmore and Nadramia. She SAW it all too clearly.
Keep in mind that during the time that this
> harassment was occurring, I was considered one of the more intelligent and
> entertaining residents on this newsgroup;
You sure about that? You were seen as sticking your nose in for who knows
what reason.
thus, unleashing a pack of
> vicious knuckledraggers to subdue me didn't win the CoS any beauty
> pageants.
Good! Who would WANT a scam to get an award?
Ironically, all it did was increase the number of sympathetic
> CoS members out there who SUPPORTED me, who secretly fed me information
> about my critics, and strengthened their efforts to remove Jantsang from
> their organization.
Wrong, you got fed lies. I was NEVER IN their organization - why can't you
realize this? I HATED them and this was all too well known because it was
in PRINT, IN WRITING ages before this ever happened. "Our Stance"
paragraphs written and just recopied and modernized - AGES ago. "Myth
Exploded" OLD news from the 1980's.
>
> As obnoxious as the implications of the "Waffen-SS" letter are, I think it
> should be kept in mind that in the end, all it did was make losers of us
> all.
Um...oh no. No it didn't, babe! NO NO NO!! Lol. That email was the
watershed we wanted - ALL of us.
The CoS was made to look like a low-brow bully, devoid of justice,
> and disrespectful of other's opinions.
They were exposed for what they are, dear. And they even ASKED for it. In
fact, they whined and pleaded for it. They did that again regarding Egan's
group and I said: NO. Told them to fuck off or PAY me.
Tani and her Flying Monkeys found
> that a group of disgusted critics had formed behind her own lines,
No such thing could possibly have happened because "me and the flying
monkeys" are quite intact right now, this moment, barring most of Brendan's
friends who long found this was no longer fun. Me and mine have a very fine
organization, Scratch, one that I am MORE than proud to be part of. And it
is NOTHING like the cos or the tos. NOTHING like either. Ask Walter - you
know him. He's part of us. He is one of us.
and she
> would eventually find herself ousted from the organization she had worked
> so hard to strengthen.
I worked to what? Bwhaha, you are indoctrinated for sure, and blind as a
bat. Lemme go campaign for Bush in a black neighborhood and BRAG about him
being a racist pig that will appoint Ashcroft. Lemme go campaign for Gore
in a white, middle class, conservative area and brag about how he wants to
build low income housing in their neighborhood. Bwhaha. godDAMN you are
being SO naive here. I personally mailed Blithering Barton ALL the
exposures on the cos files I had at the time along with my posts flaming the
shit out of COS suckups - I personally handed her shit evidence of what
feces her org was, all of it. What the hell do you expect she'd do? I
handed it to her with a SMILE, to top that off. Hi Blanche, how ya doing,
blah blah. He he he. You have no idea what I'm like when I truly DESPISE
something. Offline I, for years, told good people to stay clear of the
stupid cos, it's a scam. I'd even xerox that magazine article exposing
LaVey as badly as Zeena did. But I told the wacko neo-Nazi type shit heads
to "GO JOIN." So I did what, Scratch? Think again. I can prove every word
I'm saying here. STOP being so indoctrinated then. THINK for once in your
life. I HATED THEM - from the late 1960's - I LOATHED them and what they
did, all of it. You don't even KNOW what they did, the rotten hateful
affects they had on something that was wonderful.
And me? I wasted a tremendous amount of my time
> (over a year), flushed down the drain, bickering in the defense of people
> I shouldn't have wasted ten minutes on.
Yup, you sure did. Indoctrinated, as you say.
If I had it to do over again, I'd
> have told Tani and the CoS "Have at!", retired from the newsgroup, and
> gotten a real hobby.
>
> To the CoS credit, it appears they have realized the foolishness of their
> mistakes. I no longer see so many long CoS driven missives, or attacks on
> neutral members on this newsgroup.
Oh, not quite so. The "hit list" they had against the Council orgs, the
Jason Roberts "offline terrorist threat" page. Oh, they stopped now. For
awhile. That is because of what we did - the heads reeling over it, the
mass departure and the THREATS that if they continue this shit, we'll DO
something about it, legally, maybe on the 700 club for the nation to see.
That they are a dictatorship is well enough established - and a hierarchy.
Their corporation sole status won't protect them anymore. Not after the
precedent set with Metzger. WE arranged that little detail. You bet they
dont' fuck with people anymore.
I've even seen a few ToSsers who are
> treated respectfully enough, so long as they lay off the preaching. My
> secret CoS friends who supported me through their organization's acts of
> injustice are still in, and have some influence in steering the Church's
> course. Clearly the CoS took a step away from their past pit-bull like
> endeavors when they sacked their former Field Marshal and her "White
> Devil" crew.
You have a very VERY indoctrinated view. The field marshal was Kaiser
Gilmore - and one day, you WILL realize this. For now, I could care less
what you think - but I've told ya the truth.
>
> You Taniphiles, on the other hand, haven't seemed to have learned the
> error of your ways. You still seem to be hung up on me for some unknown
> reason. I still receive criticism from you, and Tani insults me in
> private email at lenght --
EXCUSE ME? I never have sent you a private email. Produce this - and check
the damned headers. No one from our group is insulting you OR emailing you.
Tyagi is not in our group (that's boborishi). I can see, however, that YOU
were provoked into flaming me - and Circe (responding to Arnold) showed
someone mocking that out. Now now, WHO benefits from provoking that, eh?
godDAMN, and I thought you were smart; well no, actually I didn't, not
really. Welp, guess not.
> from her bunch in the past.
OPEN YOUR DAMNED EYES. Or remain blind. Your choice.
>
> You folks, however, just don't seem to want to let it go. Why is that?
> If it is as you have said, and that you attacked me only because the CoS
> wanted you to, it would seem to me that you now have no reason to continue
> complaining about me. You don't even like the CoS anymore. Indeed, since
> you are now so offended that the CoS would use you in such a unethical
> manner, it would seem to me that the WD gang made a mistake in treating me
> as they did. Considering such, you would think they would at least want
> to leave me in peace.
Who is that written to?
>
>
> Er...let me tell you a bit about Brendan's "flaming": it was all
> death-threats and ALL CAPS SHOUTING. Hardly witty, revealing, or
> formidable stuff. Brendan himself vanished away from this newsgroup like
> >water vapor in the Sahara when I posted on alt.satanism his personal ad
> (stating that he was a transvestite, looking to suck off well hung men in
> the Washington DC area). Hardly an encounter I'd be crowing about if I
> were Brendan.
He did not vanish. Brendan posted that ad for Jamilla. Bren is gay - very
openly so. JUST gay. No scenes, no dress ups. He posted that and yeah, I
saw print out of that one. You are either having a memory problem, or you
are lying now. Brendan - go ask him - couldn't give a shit what you or
anyone thinks. He DID post that for Jamilla. He was the contact. Yes.
So? He's GAY TOO. He's bigger than life in SR and a very intelligent
person. Too intelligent to ever be duped or indoctrinated, for sure.
>
> Now, thats about all I have to say about the CoS files, Tani, or the
> Flying Monkey gang. Y'all will probably still go apeshit on over this,
> even though there is nothing here that a reasonable person would take
> offense at.
Who are you posting this to?
Let me say one more time: I GOT who I wanted to get (for real) - and I got
exactly what I wanted. COS is exposed - not nearly enough, however. Jason
Yuschenko for sure, he figured it ALL out before the shit hit the fan. You
have delusions about what I "thought" of the cos, of Tony and the whole
STUPID lot of them. TOS was NEVER an issue with me - I don't know anything
about the org for it to be an issue except some doctrinal things shown by
the Gilmores - of course, selected portions of it designed to make Aquino
look insane. No problem. How the hell did silly doctrinal issues about
deities become a flame war? Ha.... I didn't do that, babe.
You are, I think, indoctrinated. I think your "closeness" with certain COS
people is helping you keep rose colored glassed on. No problem - it's not
my eyes. Or my problem.
NOW - leave me and us the fuck out of this. Brendan's picture is there on
our website for all to see - so you either were MISinformed grossly, or you
LIED. He also POSTED what he wrote you for all to see. He has nothing to
hide.
TJ
Simon Jester
> Why Prinn did
> it is a mystery. I did nothing to him.
>
Like I said, I have seen him attack and go after people who never did
him any wrong. Besson even once ADMITTED the person he was attacking
never did him wrong, also that he didn't even KNOW the person he was
attacking. Guess Dokter Ackweeeeno gave the right hand signal. Big
butt-wipe, that guy. With 'highest of life' like him walking the
earth, who the fuck needs scum? He is scum.
Jerry
Satan
Natas
"Simon Jester" <blackth...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:2936b9cd.01071...@posting.google.com...
Circe
"GUlLLOTlNA" <gulll...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010715143154...@ng-mh1.aol.com...
> x-no-archive:yes
>
> >> Seems you are the sort of person who thinks everyone on earth is
waiting
> with bated breath >>
>
> >The word you want, is BAITED, dearie.>>
>
:::laughs:: You certainly are the one that would know the difference
between "bate" and "bait"!
>
> L.
Public <Anonymous_Account>
Funny, since he's been neutered, he's got these weird
impulses--keeps dry humping Peter Gilmore's leg, for instance.
PowerSurge
"GUlLLOTlNA" <gulll...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010715143154...@ng-mh1.aol.com...
> x-no-archive:yes
>
> >> Seems you are the sort of person who thinks everyone on earth is
waiting
> with bated breath >>
>
> >The word you want, is BAITED, dearie.>>
>
> Er, actually "bated" is the correct usage here.
>
> L.
Kerry Delf
> "PoisonTongue" <nemt...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Seems you are the sort of
> > person who thinks everyone on earth is waiting with bated breath
>
> The word you want, is BAITED, dearie.
>
> So, shut up.
Er, no, actually -- "bated" is correct. In fact, PoisonTongue may be among
the very first people to ever spell "bated breath" correctly on Usenet.
It's a good idea to be sure of your accuracy before whipping out
ye-old-dreaded-spelling-flame. It's *so* embarrassing when you're wrong.
- K.Delf
k...@efn.org
--
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace.
We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand
that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity
forget that you were our countrymen." --Samuel Adams
Kerry Delf
> does Kerry support your radio-free-setian website? if not, why not? I
> see no testimonies from her, nor do I see correspondence which she has
> seen fit to post to it in your support. I don't even see her posting
> here to substantiate your contentions.
Yes, Kerry does support the efforts of a group of exSetians to put up and
expand the Radio-Free-Setian website. Kerry has been involved behind the
scenes, and more of her own material will appear there as the website
grows (it is most certainly in its early stages at the moment). Kerry
hasn't been posting much on the topic to alt.satanism because she works
longer hours than Scratch does and has more time-consuming commitments, as
well as having less personal motivation; in short, she doesn't have the
time or energy to be deeply involved in these threads. However, if you do
a Deja search on Kerry's posts over the past year, you'll note that she
has indeed briefly posted on the topic.
One graf down. Next? :)
-Kerry Delf
catherine yronwode
>
> PowerSurge wrote:
>
> > "PoisonTongue" <nemt...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Seems you are the sort of person who thinks
> > > everyone on earth is waiting with bated breath
> >
> > The word you want, is BAITED, dearie.
>
> may be among the very first people to ever spell "bated breath"
> correctly on Usenet.
Yep.
Bated breath is short for abated (held, stopped) breath.
Baited breath would be breath with night-crawlers in it, i suppose.
cat yronwode
Mr. Scratch
Too many questions (some redundant) and too little time for me to get them
all; I'll try to answer the ones I sense are most important to you and the
discussion.
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, SOD of the CoE wrote:
> Mr. Scratch:
> on the contrary, as you of course know in your sarcasm, [your
> expulsion] seems that it has *everything* to do with your associations
> [with Lupo]. however, it should be admitted that nothing was DONE
> about it until you jeopardized the security of the Conclave by having
> Lupo/Locklin drop you off at the hotel. *then* it became actionable,
> and you have even apologized for this and tried to separate your wife
> Kerry Delph from responsibility for this lack of judgement on your
> part.
Let's go over the crux of the current ToS argument that I was booted for
having exposed Conclave to an "enemy," and because I failed to report said
security breach:
* From the Temple of Set's position, I consorted with an avowed enemy
(Lupo) of the Temple, and this behavior is not befitting a Priest of the
Temple. I also brought that enemy within the geographic area of the ToS
Conclave, appeared to have revealed the location to the enemy, and failed
to report the exposure to the Council of Nine. During this time they
believed that the enemy was capable of, willing, and likely to attack the
Temple in some physical or psychological manner, and that I may be a
traitor or a spy, or at least extraordinarily cavalier about their safety.
* From my position, the individual the ToS considers an enemy does not
share their feelings on an organizational level (though he is a stinging
verbal critic of its founder). In my opinion, the ToS has made a grievous
error in classifying him as such, though at the time of the incident I was
not aware of the intensity of their hatred toward him. Having known him
for many years, I've established that he is trustworthy, intelligent, and
not prone to the kind of unseemly behavior of which the ToS accuses him.
I accidentally allowed him to discover the Conclave location, but
understanding that he is not actually a 7-foot-tall skull-garland-bedecked
monster, I implicitly understood that he was not going to do anything to
disrupt the proceedings. I actually never considered the remote
possibility that he would. I did consider that he might tell someone
else, and that the information might eventually get out, so I asked him to
keep the location in confidence. So far as I was concerned, any true
threat that might have existed was resolved. It *was* an error on my part
-- but it was an exceedingly minor "boo-boo," and I didn't report the
information because, from my perspective, there was really nothing to
report.
So, now it comes down to my expulsion: did the Temple of Set do the right
thing by eliminating someone who was a traitor at worst, and a terribly
careless person at best, who allowed an enemy to discover the Conclave and
withheld information that might prevent great damage from being done?
Or: did the Temple of Set grossly overestimate the animosity of this
supposed enemy, and exaggerate the threat that he posed to the ToS's
security? In light of the possibly false basis of their classification of
Lupo as an "enemy" and his lack of willingness and effort to attack them,
did a security breach exist? If it did, was it of a scale that warranted
eliminating someone who had performed a decade's work on their behalf?
I guess it boils down to whether or not my or the ToS's opinions about
Lupo are correct, whether he constituted a threat to the Conclave, and
whether the Temple overreacted or I underreacted. The best way to
establish this is to look at the final evidence of the supposed-enemy
Lupo's exploitation of the information that fell into his hands, and
examine all the damage he wrought upon the Temple:
* Number of "do you have Prince Albert in a can?"-style prank phone calls
Lupo made to the Conclave hotel: 0
* Number of Lupo-delivered wedgies hoisted upon Michael Aquino's
Set-mandated underwear: 0
* Fluid ounces of Lupo's urine/semen found in the Conclave Working ritual
graal: 0
* Frequency of Lupo-paid strip-o-grams enacted amid the Council of Nine's
meetings: 0
* Total explosive yield of any Lupo-constructed thermonuclear devices
wheeled into the hotel lobby in a bellboy cart (in kilotons or megatons as
indicated): 0
* Number of bloody Setian skeletons found stripped to the bone in the
hotel garbage, as a result of Lupo eating them: 0
* Total population of marauding CoS/SRA-proponent/Helms-Republican army
Lupo led into battle in the hotel conference room: 0
* Total number of Lupo-initiated incidences of
hostility/revenge/spitefulness/pranksterism enacted at the Conclave: 0
So, on the whole of things, it appears my appraisal of Lupo was correct,
and the Temple's appraisal of him was not. Given this, as I tried to
point out in my letters to Menschel and Lilith, I thought it might be
worthwhile for the ToS to reevaluate its animosity toward him. The ToS
preferred to kick me out instead.
So, while it seems so very obvious to some ToSsers that I deserved to be
ejected because I allowed an enemy to know their Conclave's location, I
find that such a conclusion is based largely on whether or not the ToS is
correct in its appraisal of Lupo as an "enemy" inclined toward harming
them -- and I find it is not. I maintained then, and I do now, that
Lupo's violent animosity toward the organization exists entirely within
the confines of their own skulls: there was no security threat from him at
any time, and their tremendous fear of him (and others) is pathological.
I suppose there is no clear answer -- the final evaluation is determined
not by hard evidence, but by personal values. As such, this portion of
their justification is a matter for individuals to decide for themselves.
None of this, however, negates their own admission that my willingness to
involve myself with Lupo in any friendly social way contributed to my
expulsion (which I believe is adequately demonstrated), just that this is
the currently stated justification for actually taking action on this
perceived lack of loyalty.
Hope that answers a few questions.
[...]
> now the way *I* see it, if you truly believe that this is a cult and a
> dangerous one, you should be THANKFUL that they booted you, freeing
> you and your mind of unwanted indoctrination. or, is it like others
> have said -- you have never escaped your indoctrination and are still
> reacting to it after having been rejected by the temple you've known
> and loved?
I am somewhat satsisfied that I no longer have to conform to the confines
of the Temple, or give fealty to people who cannot use their authority
responsibly. In that sense, my separation from the Temple is a very good
thing for me. On the other hand, there is the ethical problem I must face
of having worked for many years to build and defend a despotic structure.
I can walk away, and allow them to profit from my past efforts, sucking in
more recruits (like myself when I was younger) who are dazzled by the thin
facade of pseudo-intellectualism, and the lie of respectful intercourse.
Or, I can take the knowledge that I have learned at great price, and
invest it in preventing others from making my mistakes (and also work off
my ethical debt for having bolstered such a cult, by seeing that any
profit they have made from exploiting myself and my wife is overshadowed
by the losses they are made to yield by the same).
As for those who like to throw my admission of "indoctrination" in my
face, it actually makes me chuckle a bit at their failure to comprehend
the very mechanics of indoctrination, propaganda and persuasion.
We are all indoctrinated. Every one of us, on some level. Anyone who has
any core values, holds any political or spiritual belief, or even prefers
Coke over Pepsi. You are indoctrinated. Those who deny they are
indoctrinated are actually the most indoctrinated of all, because by their
failure to see the propaganda processes at work in leading them to their
conclusions, they accept their indoctrination not for what it is, but as
"truth."
By identifying my own indoctrination, and being able to point out its
source and its mechanics, I am actually in a superior position to examine
its "truthfulness," if such a thing can be said to exist in the grand
scheme of opinion.
I'll recommend it again: _Propaganda: the Formation of Men's Attitudes_,
by Jacques Ellul.
I failed to mention the Curfman variable for a number of reasons.
For one, the whole relationship I found myself in with this person was an
embarrassing mistake, and rather Jerry Springeresque in its scope. I
addressed the issue in detail to Don Webb because I needed to get it off
my chest. Once my opinion was made known, there was little more to add.
Secondly, as I said in my message to him, I have no evidence that my
former relationship with Curfman was a factor in my dismissal. It is just
a fishy set of circumstances.
Keep in mind that I had experienced a great deal of Curfman's character
and motivations during the years I was with her. On the whole, I can say
without reservation that she was one of the most vindictive individuals I
have ever personally known. I witnessed a number of incidents in which
those who had committed some small or perceived offense against her were
later made to suffer her attentions, sometimes years after the incident.
Also remember that I too was subjected to this treatment, in the form of a
campaign of lies established to wreck my reputation.
Given this, when I learned that she was to become the High Priest's wife,
I suspected my days were numbered. And it wasn't just me; friends who
knew us both voiced the same prediction, given Curfman's character, her
reserve of spitefulness, and her methods of dealing with her targets.
From the time I discovered the existence of a relationship between Curfman
and the High Priest, I survived in the Temple of Set only a hair over one
year.
Now, consider that even if I'm totally guilty as charged from the Temple's
perspective, of the whole Lupo incident and beyond, there have been those
in the Temple who have done far, far worse, and not even suffered a
handslap. There have been people who have gone far beyond making
mistakes, and have acted with willful disregard for any kind of ethics or
protocol, and stood unapologetic before the Temple's shocked membership,
without so much as a cluck of the hierarchy's tongue to rebuke them.
But when I commited my only infraction in a span of over a decade, by
demonstrable accident, made gestures of apology (more such than I am
actually comfortable with, in fact -- I was doing everything I could
ethically think of to make it easy for them to "forgive" me, whether I
needed it or not), and demonstrated a willingness to correct many of their
perceived wrongs, I was bounced out without a word. Strangely, while
there was plenty of leniency for others in the Temple, there was none
waiting for me, no matter what I said.
Could Curfman have anything to do with this, or it is a coincidence?
Dunno. There's no proof either way, so it doesn't really matter.
That's enough for now; I've got midterms coming up. I'll try to get out
more when I'm done.
Mr. Scratch
Priest of Set
www.radio-free-setian.com
BriciMacCarbaid
> Mr. Scratch,
>
> Right to the meat of the matter:
> >
> > * Does a responsible organization demand to have control over its members'
> > personal choice of friends and acquaintances?
>
> No, because a responsible organization is made up of people who are
> people aren't going to want you around. Bring antagonistic
> right-to-lifers to a
> pro-choice meeting (and vice versa), and people aren't going to want
> you around.
> Bring an antagonistic anti-Setian to the Conclave hotel, and people
> aren't going to want you around.
One major flaw in your argument. Mr. Scratch didn't "bring" an
anti-Setian to Conclave. Lupo dropped them off at the hotel. There is
a :huge: difference between :bringing: someone to a social event
(which implies invitation to greet, meet, and mingle with others
already present) versus simply being dropped off at one's digs.
>I have friends who are ex-Setians, one or two who
> didn't even leave in particularly good graces. The Temple knows about
> this and you know what else, THEY DON'T CARE!
The TS probably doesn't care about Setians retaining ex-Setians as
friends, so long as the ex-Setians aren't critical of the TS.
> > * Is the Temple a cult? Explain your answer.
>
> Last I checked, cults don't let you leave.
With the database the TS has on its members, one has to question
whether anyone is really allowed to completely leave. Why retain
information and continue to collect information on former members
:after: they have left? That's not allowing them to leave, at least
not totally and completely. Not in my books.
> In short, cults don't leave you alone.
Some do. Ex-communication is practiced in some. You quit them, you're
forgotten forever. Unlike the TS with its database and continued
collection/data storage of members after they have left.
Then again, talk smack about
> practically anyone, and they're bound to respond.
You mean like the TS still talking smack and peddling untruths and
name-smear campaigns against persons like former Magister Dale Seago,
even nearly :two DECADES: after he resigned the TS?
> There you have it folks. The ironclad proof of the huge Setian
> diaspora: Mr. Scratch says so.
Same argument could be applied against you. You say so, people should
believe you. Try again.
>Show proof or find a new line, because
> this one isn't taking.
That's just your opinion.
> Y'know what? This is your show, run it how you like. At the end of the
> day, all you have is this list. The great thing about your assumptions
> is that you're the only one who has to live with them.
And it all apparently pissed you off supremely.
> Yes Scratch, the last word is yours. Do whatever you want with it.
>
> Adios all,
>
> Tez
Don't let the door-knob hit your ass on the way out, Lilith.
m0ok
>Or, I can take the knowledge that I have learned at great price, and
>invest it in preventing others from making my mistakes (and also work off
>my ethical debt for having bolstered such a cult, by seeing that any
>profit they have made from exploiting myself and my wife is overshadowed
>by the losses they are made to yield by the same).
What advice would you give to those who are inspired by the principles
of Xeper, feel an affinity with Set, and wish to pursue Xeper? Clearly
you would no longer point them in the direction of the Temple of Set.
Thank you.
m0ok