The Cat and Tom Show, Here on Alt.Pagan
nos...@nospam.nospam
Yo ! Cat ! Tom ! Could I borrow a moment of your time ?
Tom : "Going up a Mambo's Ass" ? I'm really happy, that you can be so open
about your sexual fantasies, but I'm pretty sure that Cat is involved with
somebody, right now. Keep the faith, though, I'm sure your back door
sweetheart is waiting for you, somewhere.
Cat : One of your own students, Rev. Tamara Siuda, the "nisut" of the
House of Netjer, has stated that traditional African world views differ so
greatly from Western ones, that to call an African Traditionalist faith
such as Vodoun "Pagan" would be inappropriate. Is it your position that
your former student didn't know what she was talking about when she said
that - repeatedly ? Or, would you agree that discussions of the merits or
flaws of "Voodo" are off-topic in alt.pagan, and should be taken
elsewhere ? Please note that I've trimmed the followup line in order to
remove alt.pagan from this discussion. Would you, and your would-be lover
Tom be willing to take that as a request, and honor it ?
Thanks a bunch,
The Evil Heathen
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/
Joshua Geller
> [...] Rev. Tamara Siuda, the "nisut" of the House of Netjer, has stated
> that traditional African world views differ so greatly from Western ones,
> that to call an African Traditionalist faith such as Vodoun "Pagan" would
> be inappropriate.
Calling well-educated, cosmopolitan, middle class, urban bunnyhuggers pagan
is inappropriate, or at least requires an amazing redefinition of the term.
It's appropriate for me to say at this point here that the good reverend if
she said what you report, is in serious error: traditional European religion
is extremely similar to traditional African religion (or traditional Asian
religion, traditional American religion, etc).
The spread of the universal religions (Christianity, Buddhism, Islam) has
masked this, but it is still obvious to the careful student.
.
annick
Joshua Geller escribió en mensaje ...
The Natural Philosopher
nos...@nospam.nospam wrote:
The origin of teh term 'pagan' is, I believe, a Roman invention to
define all those primitibve idol and other worshipping 'religions' or
systems of belief that were *not Xtian*.
Just because modern bunnyhuggers have defined themselves in a different
way and usurped the term for meanings of their own, does not change its
derivation or original meaning.
The Natural Philosopher
Joshua Geller wrote:
A point well made by Pete Crarroll, who traces everything back to
'shamanism'.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .
>
ev...@heathens.unite
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> chimed in to troll :
>> Cat : One of your own students, Rev. Tamara Siuda, the "nisut" of the
>> House of Netjer, has stated that traditional African world views differ so
>> greatly from Western ones, that to call an African Traditionalist faith
>> such as Vodoun "Pagan" would be inappropriate.
>The origin of teh term 'pagan' is, I believe, a Roman invention to
>define all those primitibve idol and other worshipping 'religions' or
>systems of belief that were *not Xtian*.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing isn't it ?
Nice try. 1400 years of subsequent usage, most of which preceded the 70
years of Wicca's existence, and which would include the entire period of
existence of the language which we are now speaking, have passed since
those times. Meanings have shifted. One implicitly acknowledges this
painfully obvious fact by the mere act of writing in English rather than
Latin. As such, the original Latin meaning, while an interesting
historical curiosity, is utterly irrelevant by now.
What matters is established English usage. In modern times, aside from a
politically motivated application of the word "Pagan" to Native American
faiths, it has invariably been applied to religions with a world view akin
to that of Hellenism, the specific religion which the word "Pagan" was
originally applied to. For example, Hinduism, which by some standards
might be argued to be polytheistic, is not generally regarded as being
Pagan; eastern religions in general are excluded. Paganism, outside of the
historical quirk of the inclusion of Native American belief systems, is,
by usage, defined to be a specifically Western phenomenon.
The question is, where is the West. If, on subsequent research, it is
found that the Kemetic world view differs far more from the Hellenic one
than the Greeks or Romans thought, then to exclude Ancient Egyptian
religion from the category of being "Pagan" is not only legitimate, but
mandatory, under the terms of current usage. If you feel that the
aforementioned Rev. Siuda does not know whereof she speaks on this topic,
then, by all means, look over her site at
and then take it up with her group at
Lots of luck, though. Rev. Siuda is a PhD student in Egyptology at the
University of Chicago. Judging from how much you seem to be struggling
with English grammar, I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that you're
not a PhD student in anything, "Natural Philosopher", and that you might
find yourself a little out of your depth.
> Just because modern bunnyhuggers have defined theselves in a different
> way and usurped the term for meanings of their own, does not change its
> derivation or original meaning.
Case in point. You can't even seem to follow a simple passage in English.
You aren't Anders Nygard by any chance, are you ? I refer to the presence
of a "Western world view", and you derive a reference to the New Age from
this ... how ? Aristotle's world view was certainly a Western one, but all
of Academia would be astonished to discover that it was a New Age one.
My advice to Anders applies equally well to you. In the future, try to
read and understand what you are replying to, instead of just firing off a
prewritten response which will probably not be on point.
ev...@heathens.unite
>>define all those primitibve idol and other worshipping 'religions' or
>>systems of belief that were *not Xtian*.
>
>A little knowledge is a dangerous thing isn't it ?
>
>Nice try. 1400 years of subsequent usage,
1400 years ? I must have been fuzzing out when I wrote that (or, more
likely, overly eager to get outside). 1600 years, give or take a few
decades, would be more like it, going back to the time when the Western
Empire died, and the Roman Imperial viewpoint started to become
irrelevant. (Obviously, one would have to go a bit further back beyond
that, to get to the time of Constantine, and then, from there, go ahead a
little bit to get to the time when the application of "paganus" to the old
Roman state religion started to become customary).
Screw this, I'm burning daylight,
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
<ev...@heathens.unite> wrote:
[...]
> Lots of luck, though. Rev. Siuda is a PhD student in Egyptology at the
> University of Chicago. Judging from how much you seem to be struggling
> with English grammar, I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that you're
> not a PhD student in anything,
Could you kplease not judge people based on there usage of the english
language? Meany People come from a non-english speeking background or
have natural disabilities which prevent them from using the english
languge to its full expressive extent.
Anyway I know alot of PHD's who wouldn't know there ass from there
mouth.
--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.
ev...@heathens.unite
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> writes :
> Joshua Geller writes :
>>>[...] Rev. Tamara Siuda, the "nisut" of the House of Netjer, has stated
>>>that traditional African world views differ so greatly from Western ones,
>>>that to call an African Traditionalist faith such as Vodoun "Pagan" would
>>>be inappropriate.
>>>
>>
>> Calling well-educated, cosmopolitan, middle class, urban bunnyhuggers pagan
>> is inappropriate, or at least requires an amazing redefinition of the term.
Really ? Mr. Geller has an issue with Pagans being well-educated and
cosmopolitan ? I'm hardly surprised, as his past posting record has
clearly shown that he is neither. (His 'work' in the "alien impregnations"
thread of a few years back is still being passed around for laughs in grad
school lounges). Urban ? Does the name "Rome" mean anything to you ?
In Antiquity, it had a population of over 1 million, almost all of whom
were worshippers of the Olympians, ie. Pagans in the original sense.
I'll leave the rest of that rant for Joshua's therapist to work out.
>> It's appropriate for me to say at this point here that the good reverend if
>> she said what you report, is in serious error: traditional European religion
>> is extremely similar to traditional African religion (or traditional Asian
>> religion, traditional American religion, etc).
Josh, give me a break. Anybody who has so much as sat an introductory
course in comparative religions can help but notice the dramatic
differences between traditional European and traditional Asian religions,
and even between different traditional Asian religions. You're repeating
your old pattern of making firm assertions about subjects which you
haven't bothered to study.
>> The spread of the universal religions (Christianity, Buddhism, Islam) has
>> masked this, but it is still obvious to the careful student.
The "careful student" is a phrase which should never be used in
combination with your name, Mr. Geller. The world affirming nature of the
"du et des" of the Religio Romana bears no serious comparison with the
world denying way of the worshipper seeking to be one with the world soul.
(Does the word "atman" mean anything to you ?)
> A point well made by Pete Crarroll, who traces everything back to
> 'shamanism'.
Really ? He manages to trace Western religions back to a time before that
of the earliest surviving writings ? This is no mean feat, unless, of
course, one happens to be a barely closeted New Ager.
--------------------------------------------------------
However, is any of this really the point ?
Let us cut through large amounts of crap, here. You folks are fighting to
reintroduce a flamewar into alt.pagan, after Tom and Cat decided to
take it elsewhere, and the 'arguments' which you've been offering are
nothing but smokescreen. Let it go. It's unlikely to happen. Tom and Cat
are both intelligent enough to have analyzed the situation, and to have
come to a realization about it. If one of them starts taking pot shots at
the other, here where we have no interest in their fight, all that the
other will have to do to 'win the argument' in our eyes, will be to do
nothing, or at least to do nothing here.
Why exert oneself, when one will only be fighting to secure victory for
one's enemy or rival ? What has one's enemy done to deserve such a gift ?
ev...@heathens.unite
Mike <sp...@mikerock.dreamhost.com> :
>i think you have a case of mistaken identity dude..
You're quite right. I stand corrected.
>Cat afaik doesnt have
>"students".. she is too busy being a publisher and a retailer. Manbo Tamara
>Siuda however *IS* an initiate of Manbo Kathy S. Grey/Bon Manbo Racine Sans
>Bout Sa Te La Da Ginen.
Thank you for clearing that up.
>But like someone else pointed out, Tamara's comments
>are probably based on her academic Egyptology creds rather than her Vodou
>training which is relatively recent in comparison.
Tamara's familiarity with the subject matter isn't confined to her
academic work. She presides over a religious organization of a few hundred
people, a number of whom come from West African and Carribean religious
backgrounds. When you hear from Rev. Siuda, you're not just hearing from
her, but from everybody that she will have consulted with, before writing
her reply, some of whom I've met in person. Odd as it may seem, there are
apparently striking similarities between ancient Egyptian religion, and
modern Yoruba religion, despite the placement of the parent cultures on
opposite sides of the Sahara desert, and opposite sides of the continent -
or, so some have claimed.
>i dont recall seeing Cat discussing anything about the merits or flaws of
>Vodou as such in this thread either
Tom sure is, though.
>... her specialty is Hoodoo, aka southern
>US folk magic. Whether such a discussion is relevant to alt.pagan is a
>matter of individual definition. YMMV.
Your mileage may vary ? Sorry, no, though it is interesting to see
somebody now arguing the reversed form of Ander's position. While the
category, as defined, has burst out of every attempt to contain it in a
definition that I know of, including my own
"A religion traditional to one of the cultures native to Europe,
the Americas, Africa north of the Sahara, or the Middle East, no
further east than Iraq, in which the Divine is worshipped in
multiple aspects, each of which may or may not be distinct
deities, each requiring seperate worship"
(which would exclude Vodoun and Santeria because of the Subsaharan African
element). This seemed to work just fine and dandy, until the Nisut started
pointing out the theological differences (and yes, they were pretty
glaring, and only got more glaring as I read further). The cult of Sol
Invictus, which is considered Pagan, is apparently monotheistic - and so
it goes. This is why Anders was wrong. Some words do not admit easy
definitions, and this is one of them.
However, this is not the same thing as saying that the word "Pagan" has no
definition, and can be legitimately used any way one sees fit, in some
kind of postmodernist free-for-all. Even if the dictionary can't define
this word, history most certainly can, and has. That's why the word even
exists. If somebody wants to call Vodoun a "Pagan" faith then, like the
man who wants to call his pet lizard a "songbird", he just needs to get
over it. Words exist for the purpose of communication, and if we start
granting ourselves carte blanche to redefine words at will, communication
is one thing that will break down in a hurry.
Sorry, but sometimes dogmatism is the way to go.
>Many old european faiths, such as the
>Roman, Greek, Celtic, and Germanic tribal religions, were, like modern ATRs,
>land, family, community, and ancestrally and nature based.
* Wrong * Classical Traditionalism is not "nature based". Your conditions
are a little fuzzy, anyway - Roman Catholicism and Judaism alike, have
traditionally very much been community based, and as the Romans spread the
worship of their gods into the provinces, obviously the worship of the
Roman gods was not "ancestrally based".
>in fact they have
>more in common imo than not.
Then, I'm sorry, but your opinion is wrong. These cultures are radically
at odds with each other, and it shows in their religions. There is no
Hellenic equivalent of "Wyrd", to take one of the core beliefs of Asatru,
and the Asatruar are profoundly shocked when they see a Hellenist
questioning the justice of the Olympians.
>These old european religions have long been
>referred to as "pagan".
Yes, they are, and none of them bear even the faintest resemblence to
Kemetic Orthodoxy, in which the individuality of the gods, and even
individuals after death, apparently, becomes a blurry matter.
>this is in contrast to modern neopagan religions like Wicca however, which
>purport to be universal. are not ancestrally based at least in the popular
>non-inititory forms, and lack clear roots to a particular piece of land and
>community in the same way that traditional religions possess.
* Shrug * I'm not a Wiccan, even in part, and what are we to make of the
Germanic religions, which, in many cases, belonged to tribes which were
still nomadic prior to Christianization ?
>this is all
>kind of sketchy and poorly articulated but maybe my point will get through
>in spite of my haste.
Oh, you're coming through clearly, you're just wrong. You strike me as
having been a victim of 1990s era politically correct "classroom reforms",
which tried to blur the distinctions between civilizations in the name
of avoiding "divisiveness", by leaving out or lying outright about any
details that would prove inconvenient. Having the kids read a string of
texts from a grab bag of cultures, ripped out of their original contexts,
instead of having them learn about their own civilization in depth, has
been handy in making them vulnerable to this kind of deception.
>but the reason many modern ATR folks dislike ATRs
>being referred to as "pagan" is not due to lack of affinity with [older,
>traditional] european religion, but in order to distance themselves from
>modern, assimilative, acquisitive, anti-traditional neopagan movements.
Kemetic Orthodoxy is older than any European religion known, and, like
it or not, Europeans, Africans and Middle Easterners aren't much alike.
>YMMV
I know you mean well, Mike, but lose that acronym. There is such a thing
as the truth, regardless of what fashion may now say to the contrary.
>mike
The Evil Heathen
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com
Tom
>
> > Yo ! Cat ! Tom ! Could I borrow a moment of your time ?
> >
> > Tom : "Going up a Mambo's Ass" ? I'm really happy, that you can be
> > so open about your sexual fantasies, but I'm pretty sure that Cat is
> > involved with somebody, right now.
You're out of touch. Cat does not claim to be a Mambo. An American lady
named Racine claims to be one, but it seems the Haitians who've commented
on my exchanges with her seem to think she's a fake.
Like a lot of people who regularly contribute to alt.pagan, you don't know
what you're talking about, which makes you look very stupid.
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:3CE2D29F.4000504@b.c...
>
> The origin of teh term 'pagan' is, I believe, a Roman invention to
> define all those primitibve idol and other worshipping 'religions' or
> systems of belief that were *not Xtian*.
Nope. It was a pre-Christian Roman term used to describe rustics, the
country peasants.
on behalf of Tamara Siuda
> House of Netjer, has stated that traditional African world views differ so
> greatly from Western ones, that to call an African Traditionalist faith
> such as Vodoun "Pagan" would be inappropriate. Is it your position that
> your former student didn't know what she was talking about when she said
> that - repeatedly ? Or, would you agree that discussions of the merits or
> flaws of "Voodo" are off-topic in alt.pagan, and should be taken
> elsewhere ? Please note that I've trimmed the followup line in order to
> remove alt.pagan from this discussion. Would you, and your would-be lover
> Tom be willing to take that as a request, and honor it ?
>
>
> Thanks a bunch,
>
> The Evil Heathen
> http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/
Dear "Evil Heathen,"
Tamara Siuda has never been a student of Cat Yronwode. In fact the two
have never even met.
Additionally, the statement you attribute to our Nisut (AUS) would
perhaps better be stated given your current argument with the phrase
"Neo-Pagan" rather than simply "Pagan," as the latter has different
definitions to different people; the Roman Catholic version, i.e.,
"anything which is not Jewish, Christian or Muslim," would put Vodou
into that category.
You are correct, however, in that our Nisut (AUS) does not consider
Vodou to be a pagan religion as it is founded mostly in traditions
predating the Classical invention of the word. It is also a creole
(mixed) tradition rather than one religious tradition. This is Her
personal opinion and we believe She is entitled to it.
Just passing along correct information before you invoke people who
don't even read Usenet into your arguments.
http://www.kemet.org The Kemetic Orthodox Faith
http://www.netjer.org Kemetic Orthodox House of Netjer
hetn...@kemet.org or ni...@hotmail.com
- Office of Her Holiness Hekatawy I, Nisut Tamara L. Siuda
ev...@heathens.unite
"ni...@hotmail.com" (on behalf of Tamara Siuda), ie. Criag Schaefer in all
likelihood, wrote the material quoted below. So, let me respond,
Dear Craig,
I am so tired of hearing from you, especially after your
performance in the "Egyptian Electrification" thread :
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Egyptian-electrification.html
Your habit of viewing everything as being an opportunity for you to
flex your political muscles gets a little old after a while. You
already know that the House is due for a nasty (and embarassingly
well-documented) write up on the semi-revived Agora, because I've
told you this, already. It's just a matter of finding the time
to put it all together. Say, by June 1.
Picking a fight in order to cover your ass, politically, is really
tacky. It's enough to make me wonder if the Holy City Temple wasn't
right about the House. For those who want a sneak preview, here's
a look at one of your better moments. Things are still under
construction, but there's a good taste of your style of managment :
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Netjer-idiocy.html
The prose does need to be tightened up, but it is readable. One of the
major players in that story is one "KheruSekhmetIsep", who claims to
be John R. Hagins of Erie, Pennsylvania, who went berserk and started
sending threatening messages because I wasn't willing to believe that
the ancient Egyptian goddess Sekhmet had spoken to him, and told him
to look through his girlfriend's e-mail. That, and that the ancient
Egyptians might have harnessed electricity. The whole lovely tale
is to be found at
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/kheru.html
The prior link ? I had placed a post on an old thread on your board,
mentioning that I had found the url for an article which I had promised.
The only problem was that Kheru had deleted the first article on that
thread, which left it appearing in the archives without a title. I
placed a gateway post in place to mention that I had found the article,
and to guide the reader to the thread which, owing to its lack of a
visible title, had become very difficult to locate and recognize.
Kheru, and some of his friends then argued that I had done this as
part of my evil plan to humiliate him. And, do you remember what this
horrible post was about, that Kheru was so threatened by ?
Geometry
Yes, that's right, Geometry. There's no codeword there, it was a post
about a Japanese custom of bringing geomtric proofs to their gods as
offerings. How very little difference reality makes in your world,
and Stephanie Cass' world, for that matter, quickly becomes obvious
in what follows. But of course, I did save the letters, and they're
up on display, just in case somebody thinks that I'm exaggerating.
God knows, I would.
So, you and Stephanie let reality be defined by a paranoid schizophrenic
who had a violent reaction to the fact that I wouldn't validate his
auditory hallucinations, and denied that King Tut might have had an
electric razor. I've seen some whacky stuff out of your old enemies
over in the "Reader Circuit" community, but nothing this weird.
And the seldom heard Tamara Siuda is presiding over this madhouse,
which has to say something.
You know, Craig, I really wanted to put this gently. I really didn't
want to say, "Mambo Racine, given that you are the person who
initiated that utter nutcase, Tamara Siuda, I think that alt.pagan
would be about 100 times better off without you or your friends
trolling their way through it". I even was writing, and rewriting,
trying to find a gentle way to retell the bizarre events that I saw.
But you just couldn't shut up, and let me be as diplomatic as the
circumstances allowed, could you, Schaefer ? Fine, that's your choice,
and you're entitled to it.
Now, what did you have to say ? Oh yes, this ...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Dear "Evil Heathen,"
Oh, call me Joe.
>Tamara Siuda has never been a student of Cat Yronwode. In fact the two
>have never even met.
No, but she is a student of Mambo Racine, who I had confused with Cat
Yronwode. I am far from being the first person on Usenet to have ever
found it difficult to keep the players straight without a scorecard, and I
don't appreciate the all-too-characteristically hostile tone. I even less
appreciate the effort to make political points off of an irrelevant
misunderstanding which has since been cleared up, in public. Cat Yronwode
is one of the combatants, and Mambo Racine is another, both of them
opposed to Tom. Not that I object to them taking potshots at the man,
actually I kind of like the idea, but why do it here, in alt.pagan ?
If you decide to be your usual, less-than-striaghtforward self, and deny
that Tamara ... no, deny that Tammy Siuda studied under Mambo Racine,
I'll be delighted to pull up a Dehanews url that shows otherwise.
Perhaps you've forgotten that Mambo Racine posts announcements regarding
the progress of her initiates ?
>Additionally, the statement you attribute to our Nisut (AUS) would
>perhaps better be stated
The statement I gave was a repeat of something that came directly from
Tamara's lips, and hand in conversations I had with her, and as I am not
about to start calling her "her holiness", I am not about to seek her
office's approval before quoting her, or even hers. Comprende, Craig ?
>given your current argument with the phrase
>"Neo-Pagan" rather than simply "Pagan," as the latter has different
>definitions to different people;
I now need your permission to choose a particular phrasing, Craig ?
In your dreams, buddy. No, I will not use that phrasing. It would
change the meaning to something other than what was said, as the
Western Traditionalist groups that your organization also objected to
being grouped with, aren't Neopagan, either. In fact, given your church's
stated position that the netjeru have only a subjective existence,
theologically the House is a good deal closer to being Neopagan than are,
say, the Asatruar.
> the Roman Catholic version, i.e.,
>"anything which is not Jewish, Christian or Muslim," would put Vodou
>into that category.
Um - wrong. The Roman Catholic Church has not referred to Buddhism as
being "Pagan" in living memory.
>You are correct, however, in that our Nisut (AUS) does not consider
>Vodou to be a pagan religion as it is founded mostly in traditions
>predating the Classical invention of the word.
Vodou ? Uh, huh. Please, Craig. If your group wants to claim to see
similarities between Egyptian and Yoruba practice, I will have to defer to
Tammy's greater knowledge in that area, at least until I can find
a good authority to check these claims with. But the Yoruba don't even
predate the English, much less the Romans.
That much is high school history. * groan *
>It is also a creole
>(mixed) tradition rather than one religious tradition.
Gee, Craig, you think ?
> This is Her
>personal opinion and we believe She is entitled to it.
It's not exactly a controversial one, now is it ?
OK, I have a belief that the world is roughly spherical, and I feel
that I am entitled to it ? What of it ?
>Just passing along correct information before you invoke people who
>don't even read Usenet into your arguments.
No, Craig, you dropped by to do the one and only thing that you and
Stephanie ever do - throw your insubstantial weight around. Your nisut
invited me - practically challenged me - to drop by your group, and make
up my own mind about it, in an informed fashion, and then write about it.
That's a reasonable request, one which I couldn't deny, but now I've done
so, and I don't have to put up with your passive aggressive attitude any
more. So, get it though your pin-sized head that I'm not one of your
shemsu, and I don't need your permission to speak about anything.
I hope that I wasn't too vague.
With all of the respect
you are due,
Joseph
catherine yronwode
>
> nos...@nospam.nospam wrote:
>
> > Cat : One of your own students, Rev. Tamara Siuda, the "nisut" of
> > the House of Netjer, has stated that traditional African world views
> > differ so greatly from Western ones, that to call an African
> > Traditionalist faith such as Vodoun "Pagan" would be inappropriate.
> > Is it your position that your former student didn't know what she
> > was talking about when she said that - repeatedly ? Or, would you
> > agree that discussions of the merits or flaws of "Voodo" are off-
> > topic in alt.pagan, and should be taken elsewhere ? Please note that
> > I've trimmed the followup line in order to remove alt.pagan from
> > this discussion. Would you, and your would-be lover Tom be willing
> > to take that as a request, and honor it ?
> >
> > Thanks a bunch,
> >
> > The Evil Heathen
> > http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/
>
> Dear "Evil Heathen,"
>
> Tamara Siuda has never been a student of Cat Yronwode. In fact the two
> have never even met.
I have no students.
I have never met Tamara Suda.
I am not a practiioner of Voodoo.
Tom Schuler is not (afaik) my "would-be lover."
I believe that hoodoo, as a fairly unbroken rural tradition of
folk-magic with roots extending back to non-Judeo-Christian-Islamic
cultures of Africa and North America (albeit with inclusions of some
JudeoChristian elements) is in some senses of the term "pagan" and it is
not unsurprising to me that it is of passing or even deep interest to
many modern pagans and neo-pagans who take a multi-cultural approach to
their studies.
cat yronwode
Hoodoo in Theory and Practice -- http://www.luckymojo.com/hoodoo.html
ev...@heathens.unite
"Tom" <danto...@earthlink.net> wrote :
>You're out of touch. Cat does not claim to be a Mambo. An American lady
>named Racine claims to be one, but it seems the Haitians who've commented
>on my exchanges with her seem to think she's a fake.
>
>Like a lot of people who regularly contribute to alt.pagan, you don't know
>what you're talking about, which makes you look very stupid.
Tom, shove it. The use of multiple logins by Usenet residents is standard
practice, and I'm far from being the first person to have been mistaken as
to which logins corresponded to which person.
As for your vast knowledge base ... The only commentary that I see coming
from you is that of the proverbial "Joe Sixpack", who mouths cliches as an
excuse to insult somebody else's home. Haiti, in this case.
Let's see what I've learned from reading your posts. "Living conditions in
Haiti are often harsh, and there are problems with some people acting in a
lawless fashion". NOOOOO ! REALLY ? Gee, you never see problems like that
in a third world country, so it must be the local religion, eh, Tom ?
I really did want to treat the two sides in this brain-dead frog and mouse
battle as if they were actual human beings who I could have even the
least bit of respect for, but this is what happens when one tries to be
nice, and show respect to those who don't deserve it. One always ends up
regretting the attempt, and I have no idea of why I thought this time
would be different. Wishful thinking, probably.
Obviously, gentle teasing has not gotten the point across.
So, let me put it into terms so simple, that even you can understand, you
pathetic waste of DNA. Please take this flamewar out of here, because
NOBODY CARES ABOUT IT. Why should people on this group have to wade
through a flood of spam, about a fight that means nothing to them, between
two people who make less sense than the average wino on Halstead ?
No, that's still too complicated, so how about this :
PISS OFF !!!!!
Drop by my website, and maybe I can set that up with a nice strobe effect,
so God willing, you'll go into seizures, and fucking die, so nobody here
will ever have to hear from you again.
Simple enough ? Now, just go.
Thank you.
The Evil Heathen
(and crap like this is why)
ev...@heathens.unite
"David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)" <dfor...@dformosa.zeta.org.au>
crying out against the injustices of the world, wrote :
>On Wed, 15 May 2002 23:43:06 GMT, ev...@heathens.unite
><ev...@heathens.unite> wrote:
>> Lots of luck, though. Rev. Siuda is a PhD student in Egyptology at the
>> University of Chicago. Judging from how much you seem to be struggling
>> with English grammar, I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that you're
>> not a PhD student in anything,
>
>Could you kplease not judge people based on there usage of the english
>language? Meany People come from a non-english speeking background or
>have natural disabilities which prevent them from using the english
>languge to its full expressive extent.
Great. Another victimized constituency heard from.
Dave, look closely. It's the world's smallest violin, and it's playing
just for you. The 90s are over. Get a grip on it, and quit whining.
>Anyway I know alot of PHD's who wouldn't know there ass from there
>mouth.
Somehow, I doubt that you know a lot of PhDs, period.
The Evil Heathen
Das Uber Bitch
rite show..... altho' it ain't my show......
[sorry, you people were just soooo boring!]
Joshua Geller
> The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> writes :
> > Joshua Geller writes :
> >> is inappropriate, or at least requires an amazing redefinition of the term.
> In Antiquity, it had a population of over 1 million, almost all of whom
The Romans were urban. They practiced an urban religion (actually, a set
of urban religions). They did not refer to themselves as pagans.
> ie. Pagans in the original sense.
The pagans were the people from the countryside, who practiced obscure
cults. The word means 'countryman', that is peasant, hick, hillbilly,
whatever denigrating term you like. It was an insult.
Calling someone a pagan was a decent way to get into a barfight.
Later on, when the Roman State was Christianizing, the Christian Romans
referred to the Romans who practiced their traditional religion as pagans.
This was, again, by way of being an insult.
Modern pagans would be the various Protestant Christian sects from Appalachia
and the rural South, full immersionists, snake-handlers etc.
Modern urbans would be most everyone else, definitely including the vast
majority of people who are pleased to call themselves 'pagans'.
> >> It's appropriate for me to say at this point here that the good reverend
> >> if she said what you report, is in serious error: traditional European
> >> religion is extremely similar to traditional African religion (or
> >> traditional Asian religion, traditional American religion, etc).
> [...] Anybody who has so much as sat an introductory
> course in comparative religions[...]
...has begun to absorb current dogma, if they want to have a career in
academia and if they know what's good for them.
> [....]
> >> The spread of the universal religions (Christianity, Buddhism, Islam) has
> >> masked this, but it is still obvious to the careful student.
> The "careful student" is a phrase which should never be used in
> combination with your name, Mr. Geller.
Aww, now you hurt my feelings.
> The world affirming nature of the
> "du et des" of the Religio Romana bears no serious comparison with the
> world denying way of the worshipper seeking to be one with the world soul.
> (Does the word "atman" mean anything to you ?)
> > A point well made by Pete Crarroll, who traces everything back to
> > 'shamanism'.
> Really ? He manages to trace Western religions back to a time before that
> of the earliest surviving writings ? This is no mean feat, unless, of
> course, one happens to be a barely closeted New Ager.
Better then an overeducated shithead whose fondest ambition is to string
a bunch of letters out next to their name, and doesn't have the gonads to
use a real name on usenet.
At least Carroll's done some work.
> Let us cut through large amounts of crap, here. You folks are fighting to
> reintroduce a flamewar into alt.pagan,
You're pretty full of yourself, kid.
I'll leave you to learn for yourself how to edit headers.
> The Evil Heathen
> http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/
I couldn't resist checking this out.
Here is part of what I found:
> The Shrine isn't for the Occultists, the Politically Correct, or members
> of any other anti-rational segment of society.
Who gets to define what's anti-rational?
> It is exclusively for those who are well-educated, or well on their way
> to becoming so, in college and graduate school.
Universities are repositories of knowledge.
Every student comes to the University with a little bit of knowledge.
They leave with none at all.
Thus, knowledge accumulates.
> The Shrine isn't for multiculturalists, or assimilationists. It has a
> decided, and uncompromisingly Mediterranean and Southern European cultural
> identity, with the emphasis being on the European shore.
And now it's Springtime for Hitler and Germany!
> Aphrodite is the goddess of love, so, yes, sexuality is an issue, here.
> As in holding mixers, not as in holding orgies. At present, we don't accept
> homosexual or bisexual members.
You're what, maybe 25?
Get some life experience, son.
Go and live poor in a third world country.
Hell, live poor here for a while.
Go join the Army, learn something practical.
Go start your own business.
Do something besides process words.
.
Puck T. Smith
> "The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
> news:3CE2D29F.4000504@b.c...
>>
>> The origin of teh term 'pagan' is, I believe, a Roman invention to
>> define all those primitibve idol and other worshipping 'religions' or
>> systems of belief that were *not Xtian*.
>
> Nope. It was a pre-Christian Roman term used to describe rustics, the
> country peasants.
This is from "The Triumph of the Moon," by Ronald Hutton:
Definition of Pagan and Heathen:
"For over a hundred years writers had commonly asserted that the Roman word
paganus, from which it had derived, signified 'rusticů' In 1986, however,
the Oxford-based historian Robin Lane Fox reminded colleagues that this usage
had never been proved and that the term had more probably been employed in a
different sense in which it was attested in the Roman world, of a civilianů
French academic, Pierre Chuvin, challenged both derivations, arguing that the
word pagani was applied to followers of the old religious traditions at a
time when the latter still made up the majority of town-dwellers and when its
earlier sense, of non-military, had died out. He proposed instead that it
simply denoted those who preferred the faith of the pagus, the local unit of
government; that is, the rooted or old religion [Pierre Chuvin, A Chronicle
of the Last Pagans (Cambridge, MA; Harvard University Press, 1990), 7-9].
His suggestion has so far met with apparent wide acceptance.
"A similar problem attends the equivalent northern European term, 'heathen.'
The frequent linkage of 'pagan' to rusticity has produced a similar popular
connection of this other word with 'heath,' as if it originally indicated
people driven to worship the forbidden old divinities in wastelands and wild
places. As the Oxford English Dictionary makes clear, however, 'heathen' is
the English version of the term used throughout the Germanic language group
in the early Middle Ages to signify a follower of a non-Christian religion.
It was coined originally by the Goths, the first speakers of a Germanic
tongue to undergo a mass conversion to Christianity. Unhappily, the
similarity to 'heath,' so apparent in modern English and German, does not
occur in Gothic. Experts have failed to discover any other likely linguistic
origin for 'heathen,' and the matter will probably remain a mystery."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time spent reading that book is time well spent.
--
Puck the Smith [p_t_smith (at) hotmail (dot) com]
http://www.smudgestudios.com/arwmfaces/ptsmith.html
***************************************************
The Earth is a witch and the men still burn her.
--Charlie Murphy
Puck T. Smith
That's usually the result when people want to be in charge of something.
Joshua Geller
> Rev. Siuda is a PhD student in Egyptology at the
> University of Chicago. Judging from how much you seem to be struggling
> with English grammar, I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that you're
> not a PhD student in anything, "Natural Philosopher", and that you might
> find yourself a little out of your depth.
This is rich.
> Aristotle's world view was certainly a Western one, but all
> of Academia would be astonished to discover that it was a New Age one.
Next time you're cracking the Aristotle, son, look up "appeal to authority".
.
Mike
c...@luckymojo.com wrote on 5/16/02 2:06 AM:
> I believe that hoodoo, as a fairly unbroken rural tradition of
> folk-magic with roots extending back to non-Judeo-Christian-Islamic
> cultures of Africa and North America (albeit with inclusions of some
> JudeoChristian elements) is in some senses of the term "pagan" and it is
> not unsurprising to me that it is of passing or even deep interest to
> many modern pagans and neo-pagans who take a multi-cultural approach to
> their studies.
>
> cat yronwode
heck i know lots of self-identified pagan folks who came by it because their
grandmother or aunt brought them up in the Root, and then as adults they
sought out other magically minded folks who could identify with country
values, living with the land, land and wildlife conservation, etc.
mike
BhP
> Let's see what I've learned from reading your posts. "Living conditions in
> Haiti are often harsh, and there are problems with some people acting in a
> lawless fashion". NOOOOO ! REALLY ? Gee, you never see problems like that
> in a third world country, so it must be the local religion, eh, Tom ?
If you don't understand the relationship between local religion and
horrid living conditions/civil rights abuses, then you need to educate
yourself. This is true for *all* countries, not just the "third
world".
Wake up.
ev...@heathens.unite
dcl...@best.com (Joshua Geller) wrote :
Nice try, Josh, but this is an argument about faÿt, not a philosophical
argument, and as such, expertise very much is a relevant issue here,
especially when the 'argument' to be rebutted, is the expression of
somebody's opinion. Like it or not, not all opinions are equal valuable.
Joshua Geller
> >> Rev. Siuda is a PhD student in Egyptology at the
> >> University of Chicago. Judging from how much you seem to be struggling
> >> with English grammar, I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that you're
> >> not a PhD student in anything, "Natural Philosopher", and that you might
> >> find yourself a little out of your depth.
> >This is rich.
> >> Aristotle's world view was certainly a Western one, but all
> >> of Academia would be astonished to discover that it was a New Age one.
> >Next time you're cracking the Aristotle, son, look up "appeal to authority".
> Nice try, Josh, but this is an argument about faÿt,
It is an argument about fayt?
> not a philosophical
> argument, and as such, expertise very much is a relevant issue here,
> especially when the 'argument' to be rebutted, is the expression of
> somebody's opinion. Like it or not, not all opinions are equal valuable.
What is an appeal to authority?
Why is it considered a logical error?
.
Joshua Geller
> ev...@heathens.unite wrote
> > Dave, look closely. It's the world's smallest violin, and it's playing
> > just for you. The 90s are over. Get a grip on it, and quit whining.
> Look closely, it's the world's smallest violin, and it's playing just
> for you.
Damn!
You guys are so witty!
.
ev...@heathens.unite
The World Wide Web may be one of the best things that has ever happened to
Usenet. Do you know why ? Because when somebody comes on, and tells a bald
faced lie, a lot of the time one can really smack it to him with a few
good urls, and confirmation is no further away than point and click. That
reality ends a lot of "is so, is not" contests before they even have a
chance to begin.
In a previous post, I responded to Tamara Siuda's spokeperson (who would
be Craig Schaefer, the seal bearer for the House) who wrote :
>> Additionally, the statement you attribute to our Nisut (AUS) would
>> perhaps better be stated
>> given your current argument with the phrase
>> "Neo-Pagan" rather than simply "Pagan," as the latter has different
>> definitions to different people;
to which I replied :
> The statement I gave was a repeat of something that came directly from
> Tamara's lips, and hand, in conversations I had with her, and as I am
> not about to start calling her "her holiness", I am not about to seek
> her office's approval before quoting her, or even hers.
> Comprende, Craig ?
Now, how do you know I'm telling the truth about what Tammy Siuda said ?
You don't even know me. Well, here's one way to resolve the mystery. Let's
go visit their homepage. Oh, and look : here's a post by none other than
Craig Schaefer himself, the 'man' whose job it is to be the spokesman
for the House of Netjer. You can find it for yourself by visiting
the House of Netjer webboard archives at
http://www.netjer.org/forums/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=qanda&Number=5134
Don't take my word for it, look for yourselves.
: RevCSchaefer Administrator
: (Kai-Imakhu)
: 02/28/01 09:46 PM
: 24.131.164.220
: Re: Kemetic Orthodoxy Neo-Paganism Question [re: Mafdet]
: > Does Kemetic Orthodoxy consider itself a part of the greater
: > Neo-Paganism (ie Druidry, Asatru, Wicca) movement? Does it
: > consider itself New Age or perhaps one of the Eastern Traditions
: > (ie Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto)?
: > I'm pretty sure it's not considered part of the mainstream
: > religions. It falls under the definition for Alternative Religion
: > (catchall term for Neo-Paganism, New Age and Eastern Traditions;
: > pretty much anything that's not mainstream), but do its
: > practitioners consider it part of it at all.
: We do not call ourselves neo-pagans, pagans, or an 'alternative'
----------------------------------------------------------------
: religion, as all three labels are essentially loaded judgments from
-------------------------------------------------------------------
: an external perspective; nor do we consider ourselves in solidarity
-------------------------------------------------------------------
: with other faiths who do accept those labels. The only "movement"
--------------------------------------------
: we are a part of is the Kemetic Orthodox movement. Insofar as being
: mainstream... Why not? Last I checked, Kemetic Orthodoxy is made up
: of blue-collar folks and millionaires, moms and dads, children and
: elderly...
: That looks pretty mainstream to me. If you really want a category,
-----------------------------
: this is an African religion (or, if you want a broader grouping, an
-------------------------------------------------------------------
: Eastern religion). Anything beyond that just muddies the waters and
-------------------------------------------------------------------
: implies connections which may not exist.
---------------------------------------
: Ankh Udja Seneb,
: Rev. Craig A. Schaefer, Hem Bast
: Sedjauty, House of Netjer
The ellipses are his, the underlining is mine. What you are seeing here,
is the entire post.
Hi, Craig, if you're reading this, you seem to be having a few problems
with logical consistency, here. (Let's remember that Craig, as the
official seal bearer of the House, is authorized to speak on its behalf,
and if Ms. Siuda felt that her or the House's position was misrepresented
by him, she has had a long time to say something about this).
So, Craig, in your post in this thread, you denied that the House took the
position that it would be inappropriate for Traditional Egyptian religion,
or "Kemetic Orthodoxy" as the House likes to call it, to be referred to as
being "Pagan". This is curiously at odds with the first letter which you
sent to the Agora staff which, naturally, was saved and will be going up
on my House of Netjer review page, for general viewing. It is also
curiously at odds with what you just said here. Take a good look at the
underlined sentences, and let's repeat them again, shall we ?
" We do not call ourselves neo-pagans, pagans, or an 'alternative'
religion, as all three labels are essentially loaded judgments from
an external perspective; nor do we consider ourselves in solidarity
with other faiths who do accept those labels. "
Am I to take it that the House is not in solidarity with itself ?
These are you own words, and they aren't especially ambiguous.
Nor is this :
" If you really want a category, this is an African religion (or, if
you want a broader grouping, an Eastern religion). "
Now, you're telling me that despite the fact that you've just insisted, in
this passage, that the House IS practicing an African religion, and that
in the previous one, in effect, that the House wasn't practicing a Pagan
one, that the position that Traditional African religions are Pagan is
logically compatible with the House's positions ? Uh, huh.
I trust that you know what a syllogism is. I'm about to set one up, using
some of your own working assumptions, and this new assumption which you
say is compatible with those of the House :
All who are Kemetic Orthodox, practice an African
Traditionalist religion.
All who practice an African Traditionalist religion, are Pagan
Thus : All who are Kemetic Orthodox, are Pagan
But : You have already made clear that Kemetic Orthodoxy, the
religion of the House of Netjer, isn't a Pagan religion.
Therefore : introducing this new assumption, that African
Traditionalists are Pagan, creates a logical inconsistency;
the new assumption is not logically compatible with the ones
which the House had previously expressed.
Craig, you knew that I was a Mathematician. Did you think that I wasn't
going to pick up on this ? Boxing the opposition into a logical corner,
is a fundamental part of my job. For God's sake, man, this is Basic
Logic 100. Do you enjoy looking foolish ?
Craig ended his post by closing on :
> Just passing along correct information before you invoke people who
> don't even read Usenet into your arguments.
clearly implying that I was lying. Hmmm. OK, let's take a look at Tammy
Siuda's own writings from Netjer.org's sister site, Kemet.org. In the
House's own "frequently asked questions" file (ie. FAQ) at
http://www.kemet.org/faq/FAQ-01.html
one finds the following passage :
" The concept of Netjer bears some similarity to that of another
indigenous African religion: the "Orisha" of Nigeria's Ifa religion,
and to the concept of "Lwa" in the Afro-Caribbean syncretic religion
of Vodou. ...
Because Kemetic society predates the "Western" mode of thought that
-------------------------------------------------------------------
is the basis of most modern religions, it is difficult to explain
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kemetic religion within a Western framework. Kemetic Orthodoxy falls
--------------------------------------------------------------------
neatly between a number of dichotomies Westerners commonly draw in
------------------------------------------------------------------
discussing religion. It recognizes that the human intellect is
-------------------
inadequate to comprehend Netjer in Its totality. Netjer is both hidden
and unknowable, according to ancient texts. Yet, how can humans
interact with an unknowable being? The Kemetic worldview, in
similarity to some Eastern systems, finds an interesting way around
this limitation; the same workaround expressed in Hinduism: monolatry,
or the belief that Netjer manifests in countless expressions -- where
Deity is one unknowable power expressed in human terms in subjective,
plural manifestations we can commune with and make sense of ... It is
important to realize that monolatry is neither monotheism (one god)
nor polytheism (many gods) oriented -- it permits the believer to
focus on the divine either as a singularity (Netjer) or in pluralities
(the Names), and sometimes both at the same time! "
Again, this passage is hardly ambiguous. Let's take a look at that
underlined section :
" Because Kemetic society predates the "Western" mode of thought "
ie. the Western world view
" that is the basis of most modern religions, it is difficult to
explain Kemetic religion within a Western framework. Kemetic
Orthodoxy falls neatly between a number of dichotomies Westerners
commonly draw in discussing religion. "
Craig, it's a little hard to argue that Tammy isn't calling Kemetic
Orthodoxy a non-Western religion. In fact, she comes out and says that it
is practically unexpressible in terms of the Western philosophical
tradition - the very one that was initiated by Classical (Graeco-Roman)
civilization, including the very people who coined the word Pagan, by
Tammy's own admission. Do I need to try to dredge up her old e-mail, or
take another trip through your archives to find a post where you or
Stephanie Cass said as much ?
Let's squeeze that one down : "Paganism", by Siuda's own words, is a
Western Category, which Kemetic Orthodoxy would fit very poorly into.
Tammy Siuda, your nisut, the very person on whose spiritual authority your
church and your own individual clerical status rests, has objected to the
use of the word "Pagan" to describe Kemetic Orthodoxy. Not New Age, not
Neopagan, the specific word she objected to when she wrote to me was
"Pagan", at a time when the Neopagan and Traditional Pagan listings in the
Agora had already been seperated, and the House being listed along with
Neopagan groups would not have even been an issue. And, as I'm sure that
you've already guessed, I held onto copies of most of the mail she sent
me, and they'll be going up, too.
Let it never be said that I'm not thorough.
In my correspondence with her, I did raise the issue of original meaning,
"Pagan" initially referring to Non-Judeo-Christian religions found within
the Roman Empire, of which Egypt was a part. If I did not know you, I
would be astounded at the breakdown in communications which must have
occurred in the House, for you to be denying what your own nisut had said,
when speaking behalf of your own group. Tammy Siuda quite rightly pointed
out why my initial approach, in defining "Paganism", was a wrongheaded one
- it was a category invented by a post-pharaonic people, who didn't
necessarily understand, or even want to understand, Kemetic Orthodoxy
when placing it in this category.
When I am actually wrong, I do appreciate being corrected, so long as the
correction is honest and sensible, two things that Siuda's initial
responses were. What I don't appreciate, is this online game of "Red
Rover", in which you and Tammy write to me, succeed in winning me over to
your point of view on a subject, and then use my online support of that
position as a pretext for attacking my credibility in public. I even less
appreciate the nakedly dirty politics that I'm seeing, when you pull a
stunt like this in order to defuse criticism that you've already been
given fair warning is coming.
Craig, that sucks. But, then again, in general, so do your ethics, as
we get to see at
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Netjer-idiocy3.html
which follows off of that bizarre incident mentioned at
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Netjer-idiocy.html
Your cowardly willingness (as well as that of Stephanie Cass), to roll
over on somebody, merely for having come under attack, and to let the
loudest trolls on your board define reality, could not better be
illustrated, than it is by the absurd incident chronicled at the above
urls. Far from being worthy to claim clerical credentials, you aren't
even worthy to call yourself a man.
Anybody who goes through these pages will find that the review page itself
is, at this time, half sketched in. But, let me fast forward you to
my general conclusion regarding your group. Regardless of the merits which
Kemetic Orthodoxy, as an idea, may have, in practice when one removes the
manipulative politics from accounts of what one has seen occur on your
boards, relatively little remains. These, by your own admission, are the
main meeting places for the House, and so they define its character.
Your 'nisut', Tammy Siuda, claims a status which some would refer to as
being that of a prophet. She claims to carry within her the "kingly ka",
that of Heru, which would sort of make her the embodiment of courage and
justice itself. Justice is one thing that I've never even seen attempted
on those boards, and as for courage - please ! I've never claimed to be
especially brave, much less the embodiment of kingly courage, but even I
can handle my own e-mail. Judging from what I saw in that incident, Siuda
can't, feeling the need to hide between you and Stephanie Cass, the
quivering twin towers of jello, in the 'city of God' that is the House.
If a man such as you can be the 'king's' defender, what does that say
about the courage of the king ? If the spirit of a being like Heru had
come anywhere near Tammy Siuda, she would be more like him than the common
man, not less. As is the usual fate of a mathematician, as I box the
opposition into a logical corner, I find that I am myself boxed into a
conclusion, whether I like it or not. In this case, I definitely don't
like it, but the facts allow me no escape. Tamara Siuda is no prophet, and
if she truly believes she is one, then she is deluded.
"Her holiness", indeed. She's no holier than our paper boy.
> You are correct, however, in that our Nisut (AUS) does not consider
> Vodou to be a pagan religion as it is founded mostly in traditions
> predating the Classical invention of the word.
Uh, huh. Thanks for being straightforward at least once in your life.
I hope that it didn't kill you. Why should fate have all of the fun ?
"The Evil Heathen"
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/
When you see what passes for
sweetness and light these days,
it's hard not to long for
the darkness.
------------------------ Previous Rant ------------------------------
Dear Craig,
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Egyptian-electrification.html
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Netjer-idiocy.html
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/kheru.html
Geometry
God knows, I would.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
.... and the reader can go look up the rest of my previous post (which
this one is a follow-up to) in the Google Groups/Dejanews archives, if he
so wishes. Have I beaten this subject to death adequately, yet ?
The Evil Heathen (still)
Joseph
A Tomcat lost in a Ferbois?
ev...@heathens.unite
I wrote, with a little help from a computer :
] Joshua Geller (dcl...@best.com) wrote :
] >ev...@heathens.unite wrote:
] >
] >> Rev. Siuda is a PhD student in Egyptology at the University of
] >> Chicago. Judging from how much you seem to be struggling with
] >> English grammar, I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess that
] >> you're not a PhD student in anything, "Natural Philosopher", and
] >> that you might find yourself a little out of your depth.
] >
] > This is rich.
] >
] >> Aristotle's world view was certainly a Western one, but all
] >> of Academia would be astonished to discover that it was a New Age
] >> one.
] >
] > Next time you're cracking the Aristotle, son, look up "appeal to
] > authority".
] Network Error: connection lost
Ah ! There's nothing like a system failure to get your day going ! :)
Nice try, Josh, but the rules of inference will not shield you from a
bruised ego. The logical prohibition against an "appeal to authority"
is only applicable in the case of a rebuttal to a substantive argument. It
does not apply when what is at issue is a matter of cited fact, and
the 'argument' to be rebutted is the statement of a personal opinion.
Whether you like it or not, not all opinions are of equal value.
That you feel threatened by those who are better educated, has already
been made clear by your sneer at the thought of "well-educated" Pagans,
seen on another thread. What can I say, other than "tough" ? The 1990s
are over, little one, and "sensitivity at all costs" is out of fashion.
Deal with your personal demons on your own time.
Joshua Geller
> In fact, many people still use 'pagan' to refer to 'primitive non Xtian
> religions' Just as they use 'gay' to mean happy and carefree.
> Only in tiny little self absorbed circles bounded only by ignorance, do
> self-styled 'pagans' use the term to refer to a hotch potch of scrambled
> up ideologies and practices which are, at heart. basically Christian
> morality, plus a bit of naturism, and a whole lot of Nu Age bollox
> wrapped up in teh guise of being a return to something more significant
> and older.
> I sympathise with teh dsires and intents behind such yearnings, but not
> the pseudo-intellectual crap hat it comes bundled with.
Welcome back, Leo!
.
Tamara L. Siuda
ev...@heathens.unite wrote in message news:<hwIE8.14$y31....@newsfeed.slurp.net>...
> "ni...@hotmail.com" (on behalf of Tamara Siuda), ie. Criag Schaefer in all
> likelihood, wrote the material quoted below. So, let me respond,
Perhaps in your likelihood, but you must not understand much of my
temple's organization. Rev. Craig is the chief priest of the temple
and is not one of my personal scribes. I am responsible for the
"material quoted below," which I dictated to one of my personal
scribes. I'm not going to name that person, because then he or she
will just turn into yet another name on your increasingly long list of
grievances with us -- grievances I have no idea where they came from
or why.
(snipped note to Rev. Craig, since he had nothing to do with this)
> You already know that the House is due for a nasty (and embarassingly
> well-documented) write up on the semi-revived Agora, because I've
> told you this, already. It's just a matter of finding the time
> to put it all together. Say, by June 1.
When did you tell us this? The last we had heard from you was after
we asked you and another guest to stop arguing on our public boards,
which you took as a personal affront and ran off to post on your own
website about how unfair we were. I fail to understand how well
documented would be embarrassing. I do not believe anyone under my
direction did anything wrong in that particular instance (and, before
you even start that complaint, "Kheru" was not, and is not, under my
direction -- he like you was a guest at our website, and since we have
public boards, he was welcome there just as you were subject to
certain expectations of civility).
> Picking a fight in order to cover your ass, politically, is really
> tacky.
Clarifying an error you posted here (i.e., that I somehow have
something to do with this argument you are having with Cat and Tom) is
hardly "picking a fight to cover my ass," pardon my French. It is
simply stating facts. I have no interest in picking a fight with you
or anybody. I DO have interest in not being dragged about Usenet when
I don't even normally read it, and have nothing to do with what is
being discussed.
(snip Kheru rant - again, I am no more responsible for his rantings
than yours or anyone else's, as long as I want our board to be public
and freely discussed)
> So, you and Stephanie let reality be defined by a paranoid schizophrenic
> who had a violent reaction to the fact that I wouldn't validate his
> auditory hallucinations, and denied that King Tut might have had an
> electric razor. I've seen some whacky stuff out of your old enemies
> over in the "Reader Circuit" community, but nothing this weird.
> And the seldom heard Tamara Siuda is presiding over this madhouse,
> which has to say something.
Yes, it does say something. It says I am a very, very busy person at
the moment, with far better things to do than sit on Usenet all day or
write websites about how people I don't even know slighted me in some
way, when all they did was say "hey, you guys are guests here and we'd
rather you stopped arguing." Asking people to stop arguing is just
that. It doesn't validate either side of the argument -- it says stop
arguing.
> You know, Craig, I really wanted to put this gently. I really didn't
> want to say, "Mambo Racine, given that you are the person who
> initiated that utter nutcase, Tamara Siuda, I think that alt.pagan
> would be about 100 times better off without you or your friends
> trolling their way through it". I even was writing, and rewriting,
> trying to find a gentle way to retell the bizarre events that I saw.
> But you just couldn't shut up, and let me be as diplomatic as the
> circumstances allowed, could you, Schaefer ? Fine, that's your choice,
> and you're entitled to it.
Again, "Schaefer" had nothing to do with this, and he's never done
anything rude to you either. Nice to know you know me well enough to
call me an "utter nutcase." Congratulations, you've now stooped to ad
hominem. Guess it doesn't matter what I have to say in my own
defense. And I had no interest in trolling usenet in the least --
wouldn't even have known about it had you not decided to name me in
something I have nothing to do with. You can thank yourself for that.
> Now, what did you have to say ? Oh yes, this ...
> >Dear "Evil Heathen,"
> Oh, call me Joe.
> >Tamara Siuda has never been a student of Cat Yronwode. In fact the two
> >have never even met.
>
> No, but she is a student of Mambo Racine, who I had confused with Cat
> Yronwode.
Okay, then. I was clarifying facts; I do not even know Cat though I
do not have any problems with her. I was indeed initiated at a kanzo
by Mambo Racine Sans Bout, last summer.
>I am far from being the first person on Usenet to have ever
> found it difficult to keep the players straight without a scorecard, and I
> don't appreciate the all-too-characteristically hostile tone.
What's hostile about "no, Tamara isn't Cat's student, she doesn't even
know her?" I think you're reading hostility where none exists. The
only hostility between us is clearly not emanating from me.
>I even less
> appreciate the effort to make political points off of an irrelevant
> misunderstanding which has since been cleared up, in public. Cat Yronwode
> is one of the combatants, and Mambo Racine is another, both of them
> opposed to Tom. Not that I object to them taking potshots at the man,
> actually I kind of like the idea, but why do it here, in alt.pagan ?
Actually, no, it's not political at all. I was told that someone was
claiming I was Cat's student, and I got a copy of the post, and then
told one of my people (most people at my level of work do have
assistants; it's not some evil conspiracy) to send a note correcting
that as well as the statement about Vodou being Pagan. Simple
statement of facts. I do not read the Usenet, so I apologize if I
didn't know that the confusion had already been cleared up. This was
the only post I was addressing -- the post that named me when I don't
even read these lists.
> If you decide to be your usual, less-than-striaghtforward self, and
deny
> that Tamara ... no, deny that Tammy Siuda studied under Mambo Racine,
> I'll be delighted to pull up a Dehanews url that shows otherwise.
> Perhaps you've forgotten that Mambo Racine posts announcements regarding
> the progress of her initiates ?
Why would anyone lie about that? It's in my official biography -- and
I am proud to have been initiated kanzo with Roots Without End; I
practice Vodou to honor my ancestors, though it is not my primary
religious calling, and the House of Netjer does interfaith work with
the peristyle even now.
Additionally, I would appreciate not being called "Tammy"; it is not,
nor has it ever been, my name, and it suggests a familiarity here that
does not exist. I met you in real life one time, and thought you were
a pleasant and intelligent person -- not the person deliberately
baiting me and being generally rude right now, alas.
> >Additionally, the statement you attribute to our Nisut (AUS) would
> >perhaps better be stated
>
> The statement I gave was a repeat of something that came directly from
> Tamara's lips, and hand in conversations I had with her, and as I am not
> about to start calling her "her holiness", I am not about to seek her
> office's approval before quoting her, or even hers. Comprende, Craig ?
Not Craig, and quite comprende. I wasn't trying to argue. I was
corroborating that I do personally believe that Vodou is not properly
considered "Pagan." That is my belief. You can believe I'm wrong; I
accept that others have different opinions.
> >given your current argument with the phrase
> >"Neo-Pagan" rather than simply "Pagan," as the latter has different
> >definitions to different people;
> I now need your permission to choose a particular phrasing, Craig ?
> In your dreams, buddy. No, I will not use that phrasing. It would
> change the meaning to something other than what was said, as the
> Western Traditionalist groups that your organization also objected to
> being grouped with, aren't Neopagan, either. In fact, given your church's
> stated position that the netjeru have only a subjective existence,
> theologically the House is a good deal closer to being Neopagan than are,
> say, the Asatruar.
Nope, you don't need my permission (again Craig has nothing to do with
this). However, given that people seemed to not understand my
original statement, I thought it was appropriate to elaborate on my
reasoning. If that's not necessary, then don't use it. We reserve the
right to define ourselves. If you don't agree with our definition,
that's fine. You don't have to accept it.
> > the Roman Catholic version, i.e.,
> >"anything which is not Jewish, Christian or Muslim," would put Vodou
> >into that category.
> Um - wrong. The Roman Catholic Church has not referred to Buddhism as
> being "Pagan" in living memory.
I will admit to not being up on official Catholic doctrine.
> >You are correct, however, in that our Nisut (AUS) does not consider
> >Vodou to be a pagan religion as it is founded mostly in traditions
> >predating the Classical invention of the word.
>
> Vodou ? Uh, huh. Please, Craig. If your group wants to claim to see
> similarities between Egyptian and Yoruba practice, I will have to defer to
> Tammy's greater knowledge in that area, at least until I can find
> a good authority to check these claims with. But the Yoruba don't even
> predate the English, much less the Romans.
>
> That much is high school history. * groan *
It depends on who you talk to; people in modern-day Nigeria go back
quite a bit further than the high-school books. And this is my
opinion. Again, you are more than welcome to disagree with it. I'm
not stating a fact -- I'm stating my opinion. I don't think Vodou
needs to be considered "Pagan."
(snipped)
> No, Craig, you dropped by to do the one and only thing that you and
> Stephanie ever do - throw your insubstantial weight around. Your nisut
> invited me - practically challenged me - to drop by your group, and make
> up my own mind about it, in an informed fashion, and then write about it.
> That's a reasonable request, one which I couldn't deny, but now I've done
> so, and I don't have to put up with your passive aggressive attitude any
> more. So, get it though your pin-sized head that I'm not one of your
> shemsu, and I don't need your permission to speak about anything.
This letter came from me though it was actually typed and uploaded by
someone else -- so I was throwing my own weight around, if any weight
was being thrown around at all. However, I think you've really
misread the letter. Nothing was intended beyond a simple statement of
who I am a student of (or not) and my own position on a statement you
have attributed to me. If someone else showed up on Usenet purporting
to speak for you, I'm sure you would also wish to make your own
statement. There is no "passive aggressiveness" here, there is no
hostility here. You don't need permission to speak about anything --
you DO have to realize that other people can and do have the right to
clarify the words you put into their mouths.
Tamara
PS: You'll have to email me privately if you have anything to discuss;
I really do not have time to be around the Usenet. Anyone else here
who needs anything clarified may also write, though they need to
understand that it could be some time before they get a response
(since I will wish to respond personally given the current suggestion
that I can't answer for myself).
Tamara L. Siuda
To reiterate, as I have also posted in an "Open Letter to Joseph":
1. Rev. Craig Schaefer had nothing to do with yesterday's letter. He
doesn't even know this is going on yet, as I haven't spoken with him
since yesterday.
2. The original discussion was about whether or not we considered
Vodou Pagan (we don't). How did this then become your critique of
whether or not Kemetic Orthodoxy is Pagan, and whether or not our
opinion, which is that it isn't, is correct?
(snipped)
> In a previous post, I responded to Tamara Siuda's spokeperson (who would
> be Craig Schaefer, the seal bearer for the House) who wrote :
Rev. Craig is one of many spokespeople for the Kemetic Orthodox House
of Netjer. He was not the writer of the post you are taking apart;
that was dictated by me to an assistant and is representative of my
own words and opinions only.
(snipped)
This is indeed the correct post, and I agree with what Rev. Craig
wrote.
(snipped)
> Now, you're telling me that despite the fact that you've just insisted, in
> this passage, that the House IS practicing an African religion, and that
> in the previous one, in effect, that the House wasn't practicing a Pagan
> one, that the position that Traditional African religions are Pagan is
> logically compatible with the House's positions ? Uh, huh.
>
> I trust that you know what a syllogism is. I'm about to set one up, using
> some of your own working assumptions, and this new assumption which you
> say is compatible with those of the House :
>
> All who are Kemetic Orthodox, practice an African
> Traditionalist religion.
>
> All who practice an African Traditionalist religion, are Pagan
>
> Thus : All who are Kemetic Orthodox, are Pagan
>
> But : You have already made clear that Kemetic Orthodoxy, the
> religion of the House of Netjer, isn't a Pagan religion.
>
> Therefore : introducing this new assumption, that African
> Traditionalists are Pagan, creates a logical inconsistency;
> the new assumption is not logically compatible with the ones
> which the House had previously expressed.
>
> Craig, you knew that I was a Mathematician. Did you think that I wasn't
> going to pick up on this ? Boxing the opposition into a logical corner,
> is a fundamental part of my job. For God's sake, man, this is Basic
> Logic 100. Do you enjoy looking foolish ?
I (not Craig, he had nothing to do with this) don't enjoy looking
foolish any more than you do, but I don't think I look foolish here,
only misunderstood from your perspective. Your syllogism would work
fine, except that I (and I set the teaching of the Kemetic Orthodox
movement as its founder and Nisut) do NOT believe African Traditional
Religions are pagan, either, nor do I believe I have ever said so.
A person who does believe ATRs are pagan, would indeed be likely to
follow and define Kemetic Orthodoxy as pagan. They are entitled to do
so, and in fact some of our membership do prefer to consider
themselves part of the Pagan spectrum. That's their choice. I myself
do not believe ATRs to be part of the Pagan spectrum, and fully admit
my definition of "pagan" is different from yours. As to who is
"right", I don't believe that question only has one answer. I think
that all religious movements should be permitted to define themselves
as religion is a personal matter even when organized groups are
involved.
(snip)
> clearly implying that I was lying.
Nope. Clearly implying that if you put words into someone else's
mouth, you should expect them to come and correct you if you are
incorrect. It's possible to be in error without lying. I wanted to
correct what I perceived to be an error, and I did not attribute any
malicious intent to the mistake. Should I have? Your subsequent
behavior is making me wonder.
(snip intro to my own words on a kemet.org FAQ):
> " The concept of Netjer bears some similarity to that of another
> indigenous African religion: the "Orisha" of Nigeria's Ifa religion,
> and to the concept of "Lwa" in the Afro-Caribbean syncretic religion
> of Vodou. ...
> Because Kemetic society predates the "Western" mode of thought that
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> is the basis of most modern religions, it is difficult to explain
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Kemetic religion within a Western framework. Kemetic Orthodoxy falls
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> neatly between a number of dichotomies Westerners commonly draw in
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> discussing religion. It recognizes that the human intellect is
> -------------------
(snip)
> Again, this passage is hardly ambiguous. Let's take a look at that
> underlined section :
> " Because Kemetic society predates the "Western" mode of thought "
>
> ie. the Western world view
>
> " that is the basis of most modern religions, it is difficult to
> explain Kemetic religion within a Western framework. Kemetic
> Orthodoxy falls neatly between a number of dichotomies Westerners
> commonly draw in discussing religion. "
>
> Craig, it's a little hard to argue that Tammy isn't calling Kemetic
> Orthodoxy a non-Western religion.
Where was that argued? It is a non-Western religion, it's always been
stated as such. The discussion you started this flamewar over was
about Vodou -- not Kemetic Orthodoxy. Or did I miss a post? And why
are you continuing to call me "Tammy?" If it's designed to annoy me
or to give me disrespect, that takes away from the strength of your
arguments. It's not my name.
(snipped)
> Let's squeeze that one down : "Paganism", by Siuda's own words, is a
> Western Category, which Kemetic Orthodoxy would fit very poorly into.
> Tammy Siuda, your nisut, the very person on whose spiritual authority your
> church and your own individual clerical status rests, has objected to the
> use of the word "Pagan" to describe Kemetic Orthodoxy. Not New Age, not
> Neopagan, the specific word she objected to when she wrote to me was
> "Pagan", at a time when the Neopagan and Traditional Pagan listings in the
> Agora had already been seperated, and the House being listed along with
> Neopagan groups would not have even been an issue. And, as I'm sure that
> you've already guessed, I held onto copies of most of the mail she sent
> me, and they'll be going up, too.
> Let it never be said that I'm not thorough.
I have absolutely no arguments with these statements. They are true.
I do not believe Kemetic Orthodoxy is pagan, and I never have, though
I am aware that some people do believe it is so. However, again, this
is drawing away from the original post, which was supposedly about my
statement on Vodou, not on Kemetic Orthodoxy.
> In my correspondence with her, I did raise the issue of original meaning,
> "Pagan" initially referring to Non-Judeo-Christian religions found within
> the Roman Empire, of which Egypt was a part. If I did not know you, I
> would be astounded at the breakdown in communications which must have
> occurred in the House, for you to be denying what your own nisut had said,
> when speaking behalf of your own group. Tammy Siuda quite rightly pointed
> out why my initial approach, in defining "Paganism", was a wrongheaded one
> - it was a category invented by a post-pharaonic people, who didn't
> necessarily understand, or even want to understand, Kemetic Orthodoxy
> when placing it in this category.
This is my position, yes (that "pagan" is a word that is newer than
Kemet and therefore not a useful one in my mind). The letter written
yesterday did not deny any of this in the least. It was speaking about
your attributing a comment to me about Vodou, not Kemetic Orthodoxy,
two very separate religious traditions.
> When I am actually wrong, I do appreciate being corrected, so long as the
> correction is honest and sensible, two things that Siuda's initial
> responses were. What I don't appreciate, is this online game of "Red
> Rover", in which you and Tammy write to me, succeed in winning me over to
> your point of view on a subject, and then use my online support of that
> position as a pretext for attacking my credibility in public. I even less
> appreciate the nakedly dirty politics that I'm seeing, when you pull a
> stunt like this in order to defuse criticism that you've already been
> given fair warning is coming.
Joseph, who attacked your credibility? I corrected your mistake, that
Cat was a teacher of mine -- and then pointed out that my assertion
that Vodou is not Pagan is a personal belief, and that those who are
offended by it might need to understand that I define pagan
differently -- the way I define it most people call "Neo-pagan."
There is no dirty politics, no stunts. There WAS a correction of a
mistake you made, which I would've asked to be done no matter who said
it -- and in fact, until I read the post I didn't even know it was you
who had made the mistake, so this was not a case of "let's go get
Joseph." You are seeing knives in the hands of people who have none.
Neither I nor anyone associated with me bears you any ill will, though
from the tone of these letters, it sounds like you certainly bear us
some.
> Craig, that sucks. But, then again, in general, so do your ethics, as
> we get to see at
Ad hominem, and nothing to do with the discussion of my letter.
Doubly so because Craig had nothing to do with any of this, though he
certainly seems to be a target of your ire.
(snipped)
> Your cowardly willingness (as well as that of Stephanie Cass), to roll
> over on somebody, merely for having come under attack, and to let the
> loudest trolls on your board define reality, could not better be
> illustrated, than it is by the absurd incident chronicled at the above
> urls. Far from being worthy to claim clerical credentials, you aren't
> even worthy to call yourself a man.
Does screaming on the Usenet "define reality"? Does the Usenet make
people whose opinions differ from the moderators go away? The House
of Netjer boards are just that -- public. We permit anyone to come
and say whatever they please so long as it remains within our posting
policies, which are openly presented at the opening of the boards.
Our policies revolve around respectful behavior, not "only letting the
people who are right post." You came to our boards and dredged up old
arguments that had been dead for over a year (had you looked at the
dates of those posts you might've noticed they were quite dead). You
got into an argument with another member of the board with whom you
had a personal disagreement. The board moderator, Rev. Stephanie,
asked BOTH of you to cease and desist. You left the boards.
This is the history. I agree, the whole thing was (and your continued
distress about it long after the fact is) absurd; both of you only
needed a deep breath to step back from the argument; after being asked
to post productively rather than continue personally attacking another
person, you could've continued to be a welcome addition to our boards.
You're still allowed to sign in as well -- we did not ban you, we
simply asked you to remember our posting policy. (We also asked the
other person to do the same). We do not censor people on those boards
for other than obscenity; they are places for people to talk in a free
manner. People are entitled to their own opinions.
(snipped)
> Your 'nisut', Tammy Siuda, claims a status which some would refer to as
> being that of a prophet. She claims to carry within her the "kingly ka",
> that of Heru, which would sort of make her the embodiment of courage and
> justice itself. Justice is one thing that I've never even seen attempted
> on those boards, and as for courage - please ! I've never claimed to be
> especially brave, much less the embodiment of kingly courage, but even I
> can handle my own e-mail. Judging from what I saw in that incident, Siuda
> can't, feeling the need to hide between you and Stephanie Cass, the
> quivering twin towers of jello, in the 'city of God' that is the House.
Last time I checked, real debate didn't continually sink to ad hominem
levels, and I will not sink to it with you. I don't think you realize
just how large this organization is. My "quivering twin towers of
jello" do work that I do not have the time to do myself, as I am
rather busy with the spiritual work of this temple. They do so with
my blessing and with much experience. I don't understand what sort of
"justice" you wanted on our boards that you didn't get, other than
that you decided that some person was too crazy to be on our boards,
and we didn't immediately throw him offline at your request. When you
run your own message boards, you will be welcome to let in and throw
out whomever you like. My boards are open to anybody who can speak
civilly to anyone else; whether or not they're "right" is secondary.
The boards in which you were having those discussions are not official
teaching boards and therefore we do not "police" them for
Joseph-acceptable opinions.
> If a man such as you can be the 'king's' defender, what does that say
> about the courage of the king ?
Joseph, if you have a problem with me, take it up with me. You have
met Rev. Craig once as well, and this man does NOT have anything to do
with the post that happened yesterday, nor to my knowledge has he ever
done anything unkind towards you (unless I consider his asking you and
another person trolling our boards to stop arguing unkind), yet you
seem obsessed with attacking him.
> If the spirit of a being like Heru had
> come anywhere near Tammy Siuda, she would be more like him than the common
> man, not less. As is the usual fate of a mathematician, as I box the
> opposition into a logical corner, I find that I am myself boxed into a
> conclusion, whether I like it or not. In this case, I definitely don't
> like it, but the facts allow me no escape. Tamara Siuda is no prophet, and
> if she truly believes she is one, then she is deluded.
> "Her holiness", indeed. She's no holier than our paper boy.
Holiness is relative, and we've all got it. :) I don't consider
myself any holier than a paper boy. A paper boy performs a valuable
service to his fellow people, and that's something I also try to do.
Perhaps you might also benefit from trying to be more open to
accepting others, rather than ascribing to them hatred and disdain and
conspiratorial motives.
Joseph, I am heartfully sorry that you have taken what was meant to be
a routine "hey guys, be nice to each other" action on our web-boards
as a personal affront. I am additionally sorry that you have decided
we must all therefore be evil and nasty and whatever else you seem to
be attributing to us. I'm sorry that you took that away from your
interaction with us, as I had hoped it would be different. As I said
in my other letter, I was impressed with you when I met you, and am
very surprised things have gone this way. Perhaps it is the faceless
nature of Internet that makes enemies of strangers; perhaps this is
why my church spends less and less time in it as time goes by, and why
I will be removing myself from the Usenet now that I've said my piece.
I wish all of you well in your spiritual endeavors and apologize for
wasting bandwidth if you care not to read this.
-Tamara
ev...@heathens.unite
Now, in Stereo ! :)
Hi, Tammy. I decided that if you could put your manipulative little post
in two different threads, that I could do the same with my rebuttal.
---------------------------------------------------------
Tammy, shut up.
I had suspected that the behavior I had seen out of Craig and Stephanie
was a reflection of you, and now I know it was.
Your spokesperson accused me of misrepresenting yours, and the House's
position. Point by point, I have gone into the House's own site, and shown
that this is not the case. Your response ? You lie about what was said
before, and cover your own worthless, pseudo-clerical ass.
Lying seems to be your style. As the reader can easily see by visiting
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Netjer-idiocy.html
you story, as it currently stands, has one huge and glaring hole in it.
The "Netjer and Geometry" thread, which I had created the gateway post
back to, WASN'T AN ARGUMENT. Nor did any argument take place during it.
The only thing that the reader was directed back to, aside from the old,
argument-free thread, were two new posts I put up, showing the reader
where to go to find a Scientific American article which I had promised to
locate. Where is the "trolling" in that ?
Kheru then responded by getting a few of his friends together, to bitterly
complain about how I had archived some of his non-embarassing posts on the
Geometry thread on my site, just to embarass and attack him. One small
problem with that argument, aside from the fact that there was nothing in
that thread, for him to be embarassed by. The file on my site linked to,
did nothing more than link back into your own archives. It's sole reason
for existence was the fact that urls on your webboard are unbelievably
long, even by the standards of other webboards, and routing traffic this
way allowed me to use cut and paste, instead of having to enter that huge
url by hand. This, Stephanie Cass declared to be a personal attack, with
you, now, seconding that unbelievable position.
Incredible. If I am accused of writing a post in order to attack Kheru,
and I should fail to deny this, then I am guilty of attacking Kheru,
because I am admitting it. If, on the other hand, I post a denial, then
I'm still guilty in your group's topsy-turvy little world, because a
rebuttal to an accusation, is defined to be a form of personal attack. In
other words, once the accusation is made, conviction in your little court
is automatic, no matter what the accused may say on his own behalf.
There's an expression for that kind of system, Tammy. It's called a
Kangaroo court. Where is the justice in that, oh mighty carrier of the
kingly ka of Heru ?
As for your affected humility, your own comically absurd trip to Egypt to
be coronated the successor to the pharoahs should serve as sufficient
rebuttal, "your highness", but your own site serves even better. By your
own clergy, you are called "Her holiness", "Her" or "She" invariably being
capitalized when you are written of. I assure the reader that this is a
title that is not bestowed upon all who visit your group, as, again, he
can see for himself merely by visiting your boards. A wise choice indeed,
as the results would prove most strange. "That will be $ 5.97, your
holiness, and thank you for shopping at Sam's" "Um, sorry, your holiness,
but I think that you owe me another quarter in change." "Oops, sorry about
that your holiness". But then, strange is your middle name, now.
Only now. I am willing to believe that there was once a very sensible, and
very decent woman named Tamara Siuda, who founded a group out of a genuine
desire to serve God. I see her, sometimes, in some of your earlier
writings. But she made the mistake of accepting exaggerated honors, and
that isn't healthy. Your people cite your essays as if they were holy
scripture, the mere quotation of which would be enough to trump all
counter-argument. And why not ? I have not once, ever seen you object to
being treated as if you were the voice of God, Himself, and your own
mythology encourages this. When you speak of Heru's presence being within
you, how do you expect the shemsu you get to react ? And when you accept
this absurd adultation as if it were your due, what has become of your
sense of reality, and what will ?
Delusions are living things, and they will fight to survive. Your own
rewriting of the recent historical record shows as much. The embarassing
truth is that you aren't even a very good "king", much less a god. A good
king would have recognized opportunism when she saw it; you only go into
denial. Look at the man who has managed to manipulate your system, your
clergy, and yourself. KheruSekhmetIsep.
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/kheru.html
This man is no Rhodes scholar, and he's not especially slick. If he can
manipulate the House, who can't ?
I could discuss your poor hospitality. I was on your board by your own
personal invitation, one which you renewed after I left. To stand up for
one's guests is the first duty of hospitality; when Kheru can threaten me
by way of your own messaging system, in response to my refusal to believe
in such absurdities as ancient Egyptian electrification and him hearing
the voice of the goddess Sekhmet telling him to look through his
girlfriend's e-mail, and your House has no objection to this, what has
become of hospitality ? I would ask, what has become of sanity, but look
at who I'd be asking - the woman who thinks that she is a god, or the
next best thing.
I could discuss the way in which the House first suggests that I have
misrepresented your position, and its, and after I have documented, point
by point, that I have done nothing of the sort, even after you grant each
point which you have been cornered into, neither you nor the House
retracts this charge. How could you have known what was going on ? The
letter that Craig Schaefer responded to, was sent to you ! It went right
to your personal e-mail account at
the very account which you wrote to me from, when you asked me to drop by
in the first place. I'd ask you "who do you think that you're fooling",
but I have the uneasy feeling that your name would appear on the list.
Like I said, I'm perfectly willing to believe that there used to be a
decent and reasonable woman named Tamara Siuda, but hubris always has its
price. Your sense of reality was lost somewhere along this royal road you
have layed out for yourself, stolen from you my your adoring crowd, and
when your now treasured illusions are threatened, your integrity becomes
the next thing to be lost. I wish I could have met Tamara Siuda. I'll bet
she was worth knowing. But she's dead and gone, now, replaced by this
Hekatawy I person who she gradually became, and the last thing I need to
waste my time on, is the company of yet another megalomaniac.
Joseph
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/
Your post has been left below, unedited.
> Re: The Cat and Tom Show, Here on Alt.Pagan
>
> From: t-siu...@alumni.uchicago.edu (Tamara L. Siuda)
> Reply to: Tamara L. Siuda
> Date: 17 May 2002 14:53:41 -0700
> Organization: http://groups.google.com/
> Newsgroups:
> alt.pagan,
> alt.magick,
> soc.culture.haiti
> Followup to: newsgroup(s)
> References:
> <D80F8.1$id3...@newsfeed.slurp.net>
David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)
<ev...@heathens.unite> wrote:
> "David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus)" <dfor...@dformosa.zeta.org.au>
> crying out against the injustices of the world, wrote :
[...]
>>Could you kplease not judge people based on there usage of the english
>>language? Meany People come from a non-english speeking background or
>>have natural disabilities which prevent them from using the english
>>languge to its full expressive extent.
>
> Great. Another victimized constituency heard from.
>
> Dave, look closely. It's the world's smallest violin, and it's playing
> just for you. The 90s are over. Get a grip on it, and quit whining.
I'm not victimized and I'm not whining. It was simply a request to
judge people based on there ideas rather then on there spelling. This
is not a radical or new idea. Indeed the view that ab homin arguments
are invalid has sprung up in most socities that value rational
argument as a method of exchanging ideas.
Of cause if you wish to continue to base your views on how people
write, its little skin off my nose. If you miss out on someone's good
ideas because they haven't satisfied your legal of spelling and
writing I guess that your the one worce off from it.
>>Anyway I know alot of PHD's who wouldn't know there ass from there
>>mouth.
>
> Somehow, I doubt that you know a lot of PhDs, period.
Ok goto this web page
http://www.arch.usyd.edu.au/nwfa/people/
Scroll down untill you reach "David Formosa". Thats me, I work in a
universty. I am constently involved with people with PHDs.
--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.
Joshua Geller
> Now, in Stereo ! :)
> Hi, Tammy. I decided that if you could put your manipulative little post
> in two different threads, that I could do the same with my rebuttal.
You have potential, Joe.
You are not as witty as you think you are, but that is OK.
You are at least half as witty as you think you are, and
that's more of a start than a lot of people ever get.
.
Autumnmoon
"Joshua Geller" <dcl...@best.com> wrote in message
news:ff6b3639.02051...@posting.google.com...
M Gauthier
> We do not censor people on those boards
> for other than obscenity; they are places for people to talk freely.
You don't say ! Let's check the facts :
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/tammy.html
> I don't understand what sort of
> "justice" you wanted on our boards that you didn't get,
I imagine that not getting censored based on a fabricated charge
would have rated high on his list. He's said as much :
http://chipagan.freewebsites.com/Netjer/Netjer-idiocy.html
> other than
> that you decided that some person was too crazy to be on our boards,
> and we didn't immediately throw him offline at your request. When you
> run your own message boards, you will be welcome to let in and throw
> out whomever you like. My boards are open to anybody who can speak
> civilly to anyone else;
Define civilly. Joseph was sent threats on your board, because he posted
something that "KheruSekhmetIsep" disagreed with. If that isn't uncivil,
what is ?
You and the truth have never been close friends, have you Tamara ?
M. Gauthier
Former Editor
The Agora