The Show Must Go On

black-mirror-white-bear

Someone on the Debate.org forum posted a topic about “Black Mirror” series. Since I didn’t watch it, I decided to give it a try. I watched a few movies, they were not bad but weren’t good either. The message is quite banal. The modern consumer society is bad. The technology is a devil blah blah blah. A little bit similar to “They Live” movie. However, one movie made an impression on me. It was “White Bear”, a fascinating and a bit disturbing movie with a surprising ending.

A woman, Victoria, wakes up in a house with a terrible headache and to her horror she realizes she doesn’t remember anything. There are bandages around her wrists and the pills scattered on the floor as if she tried to commit suicide. The TV is turned on but the screen is blank with only a strange sigil on it. She runs out of the house into some sort of sinister neighborhood where the people are constantly looking at her and filming her on their cellphones. She is then chased by the hunters wearing fancy clothes and creepy animal masks, trying to kill her but nobody is paying attention to her cries for help, except for a young woman, Jem, who helps her to escape.

Victoria carries a photo of a child with her, whom she thinks is her daughter. Apart from that, she doesn’t remember anything and is totally confused. The behavior of her neighbors perplexes her but Jem explains that the people are mesmerized by the mysterious signal appearing on TV and the internet, which turns people into sadistic murderers or zombie voyeurs, and to stop that they have to destroy the transmitter at the White Bear site.

Before they get there, they are led at a gun point by a guy who they thought was their friend to an ominous site where people hang crucified on the trees. The guy threatens to torture Victoria but Jem manages to kill him. Finally, they get to the White Bear site and to the transmitter building, where they are stopped by two hunters. Victoria shoots at one of them but the gun fires confetti. Suddenly the door opens revealing a stage and a cheering audience. Jem and the hunters bow down to the audience and it turns out that everyone except Victoria was an accomplice in an elaborate reality show.

Now it’s the time for the big revelation. Victoria learns that she together with her boyfriend kidnapped and murdered a young girl who was holding a white bear. Her boyfriend was torturing the child while she was standing by, passively watching, laughing and recording everything on her cellphone. The strange symbol Victoria saw on the screen was her boyfriend’s tattoo. After being arrested, he committed suicide in prison while she was given an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth sentence, serving as an object of entertainment for revenge hungry spectators at the White Bear Justice Park, tormented and helpless like her victim.

Victoria is then paraded in the street among the hateful crowd to the house where she woke up to have her memory wiped so that she can relive her nightmare over and over again.

I just wonder what the hell is the point the director is trying to make. That we are vengeful and blood hungry animals? That’s hardly a revelation. That technology desensitizes us to human suffering? The truth is that the executions have always been an entertainment. Long before our modern times they attracted spectators. The movie reminds me of all those gang-stalking conspiracy theories, where the supposed victims believe they are at the center of some sophisticated game with everyone around them as willful accomplices.

Anyway, Victoria’s punishment is like mythological hell; never-ending and repetitive, like Prometheus’ or Sisyphus’ torment. The funny thing is that she’s such a perfect victim, so miserable, pathetic and crying all the time. Uugh.

The Frog And The Princess

173435-3

Once upon a time, beyond the seven seas, there lived a princess who badly wanted to marry a prince. One day, when she was walking in the garden, she saw a frog. Without thinking twice (because she remembered the stories her mom read her for goodnight), she took the frog in her arms.

My dear prince – she said to it – your cruel fate is coming to an end. My love will save you.

And she carried the frog to her castle. She kissed it and… nothing happened.

But the courageous princess didn’t lose heart.

Honey – she said showering the frog with kisses – what a cruel witch put such a strong spell on you? You’re ugly as hell but I see beauty in your eyes. I will always love you!

Nothing happened.

But the princess was determined and wasn’t going to give up. “No surrender” that was her life motto.

I know what I will do – said the princess – I will give you an ultimate proof of my love.

And the princess stripped naked and did a fine belly dance before the perplexed frog.

Still the frog remained a frog.

You scoundrel! – cried the princess and in her fury she threw the frog against the wall.

You fool – moaned the frog as it was giving its last breath – Can’t you see I’m just a fucking frog?

The Weird Sister And Her Fairy Tales

image004

Hans Adolf Bühler “Homecoming”

This is a polemical response to an article written by an anonymous blogger, Wyrdsister, titled “Suspicious Propaganda.” The article is here.

The Wyrdsister refers to the former blog The Satanic Icons And The Question Of Evil, which she calls anti-Myatt propaganda, accusing me of “trying to discredit Mr Myatt.” Apparently, Mr Myatt is a sacred cow that cannot be criticized, even if the said “criticism” boils down to mere demolishing of myths and legends that surround His Unholiness.

The part that Ms Wyrdsister has an issue with is:

One rumor is that Myatt inspired the bomber Copeland [but] all we have is the gossip of the leftist morons from Searchlight.

The original quote is:

One of such rumors is that Myatt inspired the bomber, Copeland. Perhaps, he did. Perhaps, he didn’t. All we have is the gossip of the leftist morons from Searchlight.

What Ms Wyrdsister omitted is “Perhaps, he did. Perhaps, he didn’t.” Mr Myatt might have indeed inspired the bomber David Copeland, as some shitty Anti-Fa journalists claim, but given that the police didn’t find sufficient evidence and that it is hard, if not impossible, to prove incitement to murder, we cannot be 100% sure whether or not Mr Myatt was indeed this dangerous thug that inspired Copeland to plant bombs in London. Especially, that David Copeland told the police he was inspired by a novel “The Turner Diaries.”

Copeland told police that he was inspired — as so many right-wing American terrorists have been — by The Turner Diaries, a race war novel by William Pierce, head of America’s neo-Nazi National Alliance.

He also drew on propaganda from the neo-Nazi Aryan Nations, based in Idaho, and told officials that he sought to emulate accused American clinic bomber Eric Rudolph.

Once Again, The Turner Diaries Inspires Bloodshed

What or who really inspired Copeland will probably remain a mystery if he really needed any inspiration. As with the Muslims recruited by ISIS, the mere inspiration is not enough to turn a peaceful guy into a bloody murderer. The disposition to violence and cruelty together with a huge dose of wishful thinking must already be there. Additionally, National Socialism has a pretty violent history.

After his arrest, Copeland claimed he had been having sadistic dreams from the age of 12. He had thought about killing his classmates and had wanted to be reincarnated as an SS officer. In May 1997, he joined the British National Party. A year later, Copeland joined the National Socialist Movement. In 1998, he was prescribed anti-depressants and told his GP he was “losing his mind.” Nobody doubts Copeland was suffering from some form of mental illness, but the severity of the condition was contested.

David Copeland: a quiet introvert, obsessed with Hitler and bombs

Then Ms Wyrdsister goes on to hype David Myatt and his diabolical disposition, claiming that he was far more sinister than Anton LaVey. What Ms Wyrdsister forgets is that the blog in question didn’t compare and contrast the sinister achievements of  Myatt and LaVey, didn’t claim which of them is a troo Satanist but merely compared those two figures because of the mythos surrounding them. The mythos is spread by both the supporters and detractors.

So on one side we have the Church of Satan and Anton LaVey’s fanboys who take all of what he wrote uncritically. If you want to be a true Satanist, follow LaVey’s teachings. The CoS priesthood builds LaVey’s mythos deliberately and spreads such nonsense like that he put a curse on Sam Brody, who died because of that, or that he played the Devil’s part in “Rosemary’s Baby.” Half of Anton LaVey’s life is shrouded in mystery and subject to rumors and speculation and it’s in the interest of the Church of Satan as an organization to perpetuate the mythos.

It’s not much different in the case of Anton Long and the ONA. It’s not known for sure who Anton Long is and the life of David Myatt, himself, is also shrouded in mystery. Some of his deeds are documented but there are also rumors, speculations and conspiracy theories. Myatt’s friends denigrate LaVey and try to replace the cult of Anton LaVey with the cult of David Myatt, at the same time perpetuating the legends and rumors about him.

The point is that both the Church of Satan and the Order of Nine Angles build the cult of their founders, showing them as an example to follow, some sort of Messiahs. Just like Christianity isn’t willing to deconstruct its own mythos, both the Church of Satan and the ONA perpetuate the myths, rumors and gossip to make the organizations look more prestigious and more enticing to potential recruits.

 

 

On the Virtue of Lying

fox-catching-prey

There is this popular Polish criminal comedy titled Vabank. And there is a scene where one naive guy comes to a bank administered by a group of swindlers. They advise him to open up a bank account under a fake name in order to avoid paying taxes. The man, greedy and gullible as he is, gets lured into a trap. Later on he can’t get his money back. The whole movie is about deception, con-artists fighting each other and using dirty tricks often as a revenge.

Some deceivers are natural born predators and their lies are ominous. Just recently, something that looked like a genuine bank has turned out to be a financial pyramid. Thousands of people have lost money, often all their life savings. The pair of swindlers preyed not only on people’s gullibility but also their greed, promising them high profits from investing their money into gold. It turned out that the profits people saw on paper were non-existent; fata morgana. The swindlers were finally exposed and caught but they managed to transfer some of the money abroad, to some exotic countries, and squander the rest. The victims received only a small portion of “invested” money back. The rest was irrevocably lost.

Now this is what could be called sinister shenanigans. Something truly diabolical. Something different from posting some stupid shit on WordPress blog and calling it a test or inviting some jackasses to coffee and doughnuts party and not turning up.

Is deception a Satanic virtue as some “sinister” types say? I guess it’s so human. Everyone is a liar. We all lie, sometimes even unconsciously, to others and to ourselves. Sometimes lying is accompanied by good intentions. Your friend asks you: “How do I look like in my new dress?” You know she looks terrible but you don’t want to hurt her so you lie and tell her she looks great. If some “sinister” propagandist keeps bashing Anton LaVey saying he was against lying, then what bullshit is that? That person ignores everything that was written by LaVey about the Lesser Magic, which is nothing else than manipulation. What does it mean “responsibility to the responsible?” Does it mean that willful deception should be rejected because it’s immoral?

Every idiot can lie but when does deception become an art? Like an illusionist enchanting the unaware audience with its “magic” tricks, lying is an art until it becomes exposed. Deception is a diabolical art as long as nobody knows or suspects they are being deceived. If the audience sees through the illusionist’s tricks, then he’s a poor magician indeed. That means that if you are going to lie, then do that properly. So that nobody knows that or even suspects that you are lying.

But what happens if you are caught lying? When does responsibility come into the picture? If you are caught lying once, twice or three times, then you lose credibility. That means that everything you say and do becomes red-flagged. Once the reputation of a deceiver sticks to you and people become aware of your lies, then they will no longer believe you even if you tell the truth for a change. Like playing cards, you can cheat as long as others at the table don’t know you are cheating. Because if they know, then the game is over.

Once I went to one of the local shops which I regularly frequent and was so lost in my thoughts, or tired perhaps, that I forgot to take the change. Then the shop-keeper shouted after me: Hey Miss you forgot your money! Damn, I was grateful to her. But why did she do that? She cold have kept the money. Is this because she liked me? Because she was kind and honest by nature? Perhaps. But perhaps, she simply wanted me to keep coming to her shop. She wanted people to think she is honest, that she is kind. She was building customer trust and loyalty so that people will chose her shop and not competition.

There is a proverb: A lie has short legs. It can be no problem for a skillful swindler to build some financial pyramid, dupe as many people as possible in relatively short time and then take the money and flee abroad and hide far away before the people realize they have been duped and the cops catch him. But if your aim is to set up a business or whatever venture that is going to last for decades, then credibility is something very important.

That eventually brings us to those “mischievous” and super-evil, and super duper “misleading” and “deceitful” and “sly” ONA WordPressers who post crap after crap on their blogs and call it “the Satanic Art of Deception.” But for fuck’s sake, how can that be an art if even an average idiot knows it’s deception? Who the hell are they fooling if everyone already knows they are being fooled? What is the worth of the bullshit if everyone knows it’s fucking bullshit? Are they masters of Satanic deception? No, fuck, no. They are simply bullshitters who failed their own sinister bullshit test.

The next thing those amateur manipulators say is: “I don’t give a damn about having the respect of strangers.” That’s too bad because respect is often accompanied with awe. People will more easily bend to your Will if they respect you. Unless you can put a gun to their heads, then it’s always better to have their respect than not even be taken seriously by them. If one has an aim to influence people in one way or another, then it’s hard, if not impossible, to do it once you have a reputation of a bullshitter and all your ideas get red-flagged. They will be simply rejected, simple as that.

Kill Me Once, Kill Me Twice, Kill Me Many Times.

You have to help me!

What do you want me to do?

I want you to kill me.

Kill me!!!

Fay Forrester, an attractive young lady wants to escape from her violent and jealous boyfriend Vince. So she hires Jack Andrews, a second class private investigator to arrange her death. She wants to restart her life with a new identity and the money she robbed together with Vince. Because of Jack’s financial problems he joins Fay after her fake death. Unfortunately Vince finds out that Fay’s still alive…

I watched this movie years ago. Now it’s on my mind again when I’m reading about poor David Myatt’s “death.”

It Is With Regret

It seems that the internet social experiment called the Order of Nine Angles enters a new phase. We will see what these diabolical clowns of Sinister Polemics are up to pretty soon.

Mad As A Hatter

I’m nuts, baby, I’m mad,
The craziest friend that you’ve ever had
You think I’m psycho, you think I’m gone
Tell the psychiatrist something is wrong
Over the bend, entirely bonkers
You like me best when I’m off my rocker
Tell you a secret, I’m not alarmed
So what if I’m crazy? The best people are
All the best people are crazy, all the best people are

Where is my prescription?
Doctor, doctor please listen
My brain is scattered
You can be Alice,
I’ll be the mad hatter.

mad_hatter_funny_motivational_quote_post_cards-rd6aa26177e6b483e85736ac54f540baf_vgbaq_8byvr_512

Imagine you’re a kid or a teenager at school and you are at a gym. Some child wants to play ping pong but no one wants to play with him. Since you like ping pong yourself, you agree to play but in the middle of the game it turns out that the child actually doesn’t know how to properly play ping pong and altogether he sucks at it. “Come on” the child finally says “Why do you take yourself so seriously?” You reply “But you wanted to play ping pong.” “But it’s just a game. It aint important. Cheer up. Why be so serious?” Now you start thinking that the child might be a bit mentally challenged.

The Old Geezers, who now pretend to be novices (Good, they have never looked like adepts anyway) farted out another lame blog where they trumpeted out success because some mythical Satanists respond to their polemics. Those mythical Satanists are just Anna Czereda, who isn’t even a Satanist but a Pollock Christian. Since the beginning of the +O+ drama they debated with no Satanist except for the author of this blog and continue to produce piles upon piles of “educational” crap obsessing over Ryan Anschauung (this guy must be really hot) and the above-mentioned cat lady.

So here there comes the first turd: “our anti-o9a critics feeling compelled to respond.” The Mad Pointy Hatters could check the word “dialectic” in their dictionary. In plain words it simply means a debate between two or more people, an exchange of ideas. It’s a dialogue, not a monologue. It’s only natural that when you drop an argument, your opponent in a discussion offers a counter argument. It’s great if everything is within the confines of logic but when you debate a bullshitter and a propagandist, the verbal ping pong often involves sharp retorts and even humorous insults instead of logical arguments. It’s quite laughable when a person who prides himself/herself on being a university scholar can’t write properly a logical syllogism. So what did the Mad Pointed Hatters, who started a smear campaign against Hollow and anyone who questioned their bogus claims, think? That someone will just lie face down on the ring and humbly take the beating, kicking or spitting? They could just take a stroll in the park and kick the rocks.

They keep bragging they have fun at other people’s expense and it doesn’t even enter their heads that they are themselves a source of free entertainment for those who enjoy heated arguments or writing satires. To retort suddenly means to be provoked. To respond suddenly means to be upset or annoyed. I wonder who is here more annoyed. Why are Czereda’s opinions suddenly so important? Why dedicate a blog after a blog to them? And of course calling Ms Scott Liddell out is considered by her and her buddies, who regard her as a troo Mistress, to be an attack on the whole O9A. Now Ms SL could repeat after Luis XIV: “L’etat c’est moi.” The country is me. The ONA is me.

The next turd: “they make mundane and quite laughable assumptions about us.” So say the people who themselves cast judgements on the people whom they have never met. Do unto others as they do unto you. You might be a moron online and a well of wisdom offline. I don’t know you and I don’t care to get to know you better since you yourself don’t care to understand other people’s points of view or motivations. It’s really hilarious when someone publicly humiliates you, ridicules you, calls you names, uses ad hominems in response to your arguments but when you pay them back with the same shit they cry that it’s unfair or that it’s rude, or that you have no manners. Sorry. Are we on the Christian forums? But you are a Christian, they will say. And how do you know? Never trust the words on the internet Anton Long says.

Another brain fart taken out of its original context: “One of the least-known but important signs of a genuine Adept of our Dark Tradition, our sinister way, is the ability to not take one’s self too seriously – to laugh, at one’s self.” I’m not going to laugh at myself, my dear chihuahuas, I’m going to laugh at your goofy asses and mock the shit out of you. Why? Because it’s fun. Dunno if it’s sinister fun but for sure it is fun.

Now it’s time for another turd again taken out of context: “Knowledge is numinous, a part of one’s life, whereas information – that which is presented/communicated by such an ephemeral medium as the world wide web – is lifeless, causal, an outer form…” So says a person who on the Religious Forums wrote that an online debate/dialectic is a “harsh experience”, which can lead to “pathei mathos” and resulting from it “self-honesty.” Oh how idiotic. Ms Scott Liddell and Mr Parker thought that shit-talking Mr RA (this hot Australian dude, you know) will be “harsh experience” that will teach him a lesson in self-honesty. And self honesty according to SL and Mr Parker is nothing else that accepting their crap at face value.

Finally the crazy Pointy Hatters write: “That it has provoked so much reaction so far is testament to the physis of those who have been provoked and have responded on forums and/or on their own blogs.” LOL. No comments. Now you can figure out someone’s physis on the basis of their blogs and forum posts. So much for the “sinister empathy” and “personal knowing.”

I’m pretty sure the Mad Hatters will respond with the standard narrative. Oh Czereda, you’re so mundane, you failed our internet test. But your plebeian rants serve the ONA. You’re spreading ONA memes on your super duper popular blog and on one forum which as many as ten usual Satanic whackos attend. That’s what you call Aeonics. Perhaps, some Mormons could teach the Old Geezers how to spread the Good Word play the Sinister Game.

Agios oh Modemoiselle Baphomet!!!

To be continued…

penny-witch