The Sinister War of the Sexes

9a0794c0c5c13618677bdce96cdea2cd--dominatrix-mistress

I find most of the blogs and articles about “sinister feminine” pretty nauseating. Wouldn’t it be better to admit that one sucks at writing stories and creating complex characters? If some alien who knew nothing about the Earth laid his hands on some piece of sinister fiction, he would think we have matriarchy here and all the males are forsaken by nature and evolution troglodytes born only to serve some clique of female chauvinists.

When one reads Deofel Quartet or other ONA tales, one can see that nearly all the male characters are pretty shallow and one-dimensional, incredibly stupid and naive, devoid of free will, thinking with their dicks, not heads, which inevitably leads them to being abused by their female superiors. An example of such a male troglodyte can be Thorold, ensnared and manipulated by Lianna, who plays the role of the Black Widow, seeking the male to impregnate her and then (when his task is complete) probably sacrifice him to ensure that her crops will grow. That would certainly improve her finances. Business is business. But I’m not really interested in victims. The depiction of a sinister initiate is what I find intriguing.

No Room 101 or Falcifer Unproven

To those not well-versed in modern British literature, let me explain that in Orwell’s “1984”, the room 101 was Winston’s final stage on his way to self-degradation or self-liberation if one prefers the interpretation of the scene by Dr Mikey Aquino. Therein Winston faces his greatest fear – the fear of rats – and under its pressure he breaks his most important principle, his biggest life taboo; he betrays Julia. Only in this way can he be reborn with a new identity, that of the loyal servant of his tormentors. He can either choose this or die eaten up by rats – his greatest nightmare. In either case he loses. It seems Orwell doesn’t free his protagonists from facing the most crucial choices… but I’m getting ahead of myself.

So let’s come back to our “hero”, Falcifer. Much like the main character of “Gruyllan’s Tale”, who is ready to have half of London blown up in order to get laid (talk about desperation), Conrad is largely bewitched by a hot-burning pussy. As an archetypal Anti-Christ, he’s a rather disappointing and dull figure. Throughout the tale, he’s constantly led by the hand, as he realizes himself, the events happen through him rather than by him. That means he’s less doing the magic himself than the magic is done through him, with Aris, the Master, being the agent, the Magician, and Conrad being merely his magic wand. His passive role of a vessel for the forces of chaos is even visible in a way he does sex. He doesn’t fuck, he is fucked. Note the passive.

Susan kissed him as they lay on the ground and Tanith kneeled beside them to caress Conrad’s buttocks and back. In the excitement of the ritual and Tanith’s touch, Conrad’s task was soon over, and he slumped over Susan, temporarily exhausted from his ecstasy. He did not resist when Tanith rolled him over, and watched, as the dancers danced around them still chanting and the light pulsed with the beat of the drum, while Tanith buried her head between Susan’s thighs. Then she was kissing him with her wet mouth before she stood to kiss each member of the congregation in salutation.

So why there is no room 101 in “Falcifer”?

Because Denise escapes.

The whole story should get a prize for its wasted potential. If Denise hadn’t managed to flee, Conrad would have faced his most arduous ordeal. He would have had to decide whether to commit real evil and kill an innocent woman who saved him (which is much different than harming the villains who well deserve it) or ruin his wedding ceremony, disappoint his mentors, possibly waste his promised destiny and be forced to leave the group he so desired to be part of. To his credit, he refuses to rape her but never makes an effort to free her. How would he behave if ordered to sacrifice her during his marriage ceremony? In which case would he get a cookie from the Devil? Should an Anti-Christ set some limits to the Evil or not?

That would complicate the whole story, right? So I started with sex and finished on conformity and the nature of good old evil. After all, they are connected.

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.

 

 

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

 

The Satanic Icons And The Question Of Evil

 

The propaganda war between the Order of Nine Angles and other forms of Satanism resembles the epic marketing war between two famous brands: Coca Cola and Pepsi. Both sides of the “conflict” tried to emphasize their uniqueness and prove to the populace that one was better than the other. The point was not only to brag about one’s superior qualities but also put down the competition. So Coca Cola tried to convince the market that Pepsi tasted like shit and vice versa. When one recalls that legendary war, it’s then easier to understand why the Old Guards of the ONA keep bashing Anton LaVey and blowing their own trumpet at the same time. It’s also easier to understand why the Church of Satan keeps denigrating its competition like Aquino or the Satanic Temple.

The cult of personality is amusing when it comes to Satanism but it’s also understandable given human nature. Charismatic individuals and visionaries (such as Anton LaVey , David Myatt and any individuals who could use the pen name of Anton Long) tend to attract followers and fanboys, often unimaginative ones. It’s also the aim of those in business to make the pasture for the sheep greener by providing more and more bullshit; building the mythos and spreading gossip.

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. 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.

It’s quite amusing how the ONA Old Guards keep accusing Anton LaVey of not being evil and creating a “philosophy of a rapist and a bully.” It’s hilarious not only because Satanism according to Anton LaVey has nothing to do with rape or bullying but also because it’s a contradiction. Bullying and rape are evil or, at least, they seem to be evil according to the popular understanding of evil as “morally depraved, bad, wicked, vicious, harmful, malicious, unlawful, dangerous, deadly.” This is the pop culture definition of evil and Satan embraced now by the ONA polemicists, slightly revised since “Geryne of Satan” was written. According to this brand new definition (taken straight from the horror movies and criminal stories) Mallam from “The Giving” is an embodiment of evil and a true villain since he breaks the ultimate social taboo – pedophilia. He and his comrades rape young girls and virgins on the altar of Satan. Deprived of any moral scruples, he resembles libertines as described by Marquis de Sade and as such he is antinomian, breaks the status quo, thus being the very embodiment of Satan and the left hand path.

This brings us to this great overwhelming question. What is evil? What does Satan really stand for? Isn’t there more to the antinomian evil than its cliche definition? The devil in Greek means a slanderer, a person who spreads false accusations. In Hebrew Bible Satan means a political or military opponent. In the Book of Job, Satan is a member of God’s council. He’s an adversary to Job, his accuser. He’s the one who doubts his virtue and wants to test him subjecting him to suffering. The adversity that Satan stands for shows what Job is made of. Only later in the Bible Satan becomes a tempter, an evil creature leading people to sin.

The concept of sin exists in every religion. It also existed in the ancient pagan religions; the judgement of Osiris, the torment of sinners in Tartarus, to name just the few. Though the Greek gods had all the human faults and weaknesses, a “sin” seems to be going against gods’ will. Prometheus, Sisyphus, Niobe and Arachne were all guilty of the sin of hubris; fancying themselves greater than gods and being able to outwit them. The “sin” of Prometheus is very similar to the original sin the first humans committed in Eden. Also Milton’s Satan was guilty of excessive pride.

In Xenophon’s “Memorabilia of Socrates” the goddess κακία appears who represents vice as opposed to arete (virtue). She offers Heracles an easy life full of indulgence and free of suffering and labor:

In the first place, you shall take no thought of wars or state affairs, but shall pass your time considering what meat or drink you may find to gratify your appetite, what you may delight yourself by seeing or hearing, what you may be pleased with smelling or touching, with what objects of affection you may have most pleasure in associating, how you may sleep most softly, and how you may secure all these enjoyments with the least degree of trouble.

That vision of vice is quite similar to the interpretation of vice/sin by Anton LaVey. Anton LaVey’s Devil also resembles a bit Slavic devils, Lukhavi and Chort, who embody the material/carnal world as opposed to the spiritual one.

Anton LaVey’s Satanism was a reaction to Christianity. It is evil because it opposes the Christian morality and embraces that which is regarded as sinful by the contemporary Christian society. The ONA goes much further in its antinomianism as it supports killing and the incitement to murder. However, the ONA heresy is tempered by its ethics (sinister honor) which somehow doesn’t go that far from the ethics of the modern society. Wouldn’t the majority of people applaud Lianna’s disposal of that bastard Mallam? There were a few cases in my country, when the angry mob of “decent citizens” wanted to lynch a murderer or a child abuser. It seems that the ONA repeats after Anton LaVey: “Do not harm little children.”

Does the Devil have any boundaries?

The Gift for the Prince of Dorkness

bathory4

My buddy often says that Satanists are dorks. I disagree. Some of them are really sinister like, for example, Sista Morgan of the ONA, a genuine Satanist who regularly culls fake Satanists whom she meets online and then lures them into some creepy forest to murder them and bathe in their blood, like terrible Elizabeth Batory. Oh wait. The creepy countess murdered girls. Sister Morgan hates the dudes for some reason.

Let’s now reproduce her blog which will send shivers down your spine.

“This was not what he expected. He had spent months, following his reading of The Satanic Bible, posting replies on self-described ‘satanic’ internet forums to such an extent that he – or rather his self-assumed pseudonym – had garnered a certain positive reputation among other self-described ‘satanists’ all of whom seemed to revere and regularly quote that book written as it was by a certain Howard Stanton Levey, who of course used a pseudonym in order to hide his real identity, given the plagiaristic nature of most of the contents of that mass-produced and now rather popular book.

Plying him with praise – massaging his ego – they, using the ‘private message’ facilities on such internet forums, had enticed him here on a warm albeit cloudy day in late August. Enticed, because the messages were supposedly from a young women who had expressed an interest in him given – or so she said – his knowledge of satanism. And which messages had sometimes included a web-link to suggestive images of a certain young women.

So there he was, a mere nineteen years of age and self-assured as he was, waiting in the fading twilight for the promised tryst with that voluptuous young woman. Waiting, hoping, his head-piece filled with both sexual and egoistic dreams. There: where ancient, twisted, often moss-covered, trees of Oak had settled and grown near a long-abandoned stone quarry in the county borderland that marked the edge of the English Peak District national park.

Waited, until he could but dimly see a figure approach him. Then she and him were both smiling, if for different reasons; and he was so intent on leering at her that he neither saw nor heard the approach of those behind him: those three women who crept upon him to bind his wrists behind his back.

Of course he struggled; or tried to. Kicking out and shouting obscenities as he lay, bound, on his back. For was he not a proud satanist who believed in indulgence, in treating those who annoyed you cruelly and without mercy, in what lex talionis meant and implied? Who was he – with his youthful masculine body honed by regular training in a gym – to be subdued by mere women?

But they were mocking him before, in the twilight dark, placing a hood over his head, gagging him, and carrying him down toward a nearby narrow stream where heavy stones were placed on his legs, arms, abdomen, and chest; almost – but not quite – crushing them.

So it was that he, supine, heard a feminine voice declaim:

Here is he who believed he knew our secret:
But just look at him now and laugh
For we have so easily overcome his much-believed-in outer strength.

Now, wash your throats with sparkling wine
For Sirius returns
And we women are warm and wanton!
Before me, you were sightless:
You looked, but could not see;
Before me, you had no hearing:
You heard sounds, but could not listen.
Before me, you swarmed with men,
But did not enjoy.
But I arrived, opened my body and
Brought you lust, softness, understanding, and love.
My breasts pleased you
And brought forth darkness and much joy.

I, who crushes your enemies and who washes in a basin full of
Their blood.
For you are my daughters and a nexion to our Dark Gods:
Before you my sisters I offer you this body so that his blood
Will feed your virgin flesh.

He heard laughter, the sound of bottles of Champagne being opened, and then – not that long thereafter – felt the dreadful pain as a sharp long-bladed knife slit his throat. So he gasped, gurgled, as his life-blood drained away, some of it collected in a basin to be smeared on breasts and faces.”

https://sinistervignettes.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/not-what-he-expected/

A women or a woman? Never mind. I’m sure the Prince of Dorkness will forgive sister Morgan that small mistake.

And you, pseudo-Satanists? Tremble because the Day of the diabolical Wrath is coming. Stop prattling on your stupid forums but tear your robes and put ashes on your head. Repent! Reject your egoism and learn humility!

You fucking pseudo-intellectual faggots.

Bye Bye Beautiful

It’s not the tree that forsakes the flower
But the flower that forsakes the tree
Someday I`ll learn to love these scars
Still fresh from the red-hot blade of your words

doll-1062286_960_720

Broken dolls, broken toys, even Satanism attracts them. Actually, the darker and deeper the pit, the more of them buried in it. Some people think that the mere switching of labels and ideologies will cure them of their emotional issues. When they realize that Jesus hates them, they start searching for love in Wicca or in some New Age bullshit. If they don’t find love in Wicca, they turn to Thelema. If they don’t find love in Thelema, they turn to Atheism or LaVeyan Satanism. If LaVeyan Satanism doesn’t fulfill their need for love, they turn to theistic Satanism or the ONA thing. If they find that the theistic Satanism or the ONA thing don’t love them, they fly to some other mystical or pseudo-mystical mambo jambo. The usual reason is: People are bad, they don’t like me here. Perhaps, they will like me if I “reinvent” myself. Sometimes, those broken dolls return to Christianity as new-born Christians, ready to preach the gospel of love to everyone, if only to drown out their own inner demons.

Meanwhile, the tumor of self-hatred grows and grows, feeding regularly on ever-present guilt and shame. External circumstances and other people merely activate what is already festering inside.

There are consequences for even minor kind of non-compliance. Conformity is often rewarded but defiance is punished. Always. Whether you go against social norms, someone’s expectations or your own habits or principles. There are no exceptions to this and there will never be, even if you think it should be otherwise. As one smart guy once wrote “Life sucks, and yes, people do suck. Fuck forbid you also suck... The devil is not an advocate of pleasure, at least, not without tribulation. One must earn their horns and hooves. Endure some of what Hell has to offer, and baby if you do it right, you’ll come back on fire, and smokin’ hot.” The social rejects sometimes join the Satanic or other avant-garde groups, temples or orders expecting to be rewarded for their naughtiness and freakishness, to get some cookies for their Satanic rebellion. Perhaps, the Devil was lying when he lured you to the dark side promising cookies.

*      *      *

It’s really amusing when some ONA kiddies, when they feel unloved and unappreciated, get all neurotic and have an emotional meltdown. For the purpose of this blog, let’s assume their all too embarrassing meltdown is for real. Then they start complaining about Uncle Myatt being an asshole, so full of himself and surrounding himself with ass-kissers. Now, what if they are right? Suppose Uncle Myatt, despite all of his poems and mystical writings, is really an asshole, has always been an asshole and has never stopped being an asshole. Why should the guy who is said to have founded the Satanic order be like Virgin Mary? Especially if we take into account that many Holy Fathers of the Catholic Church were most perverted libertines, it is quite strange that some expect Satanism to attract guys with the heart of a dove. Satan was an asshole himself, a pathetic fuck, who refused to serve in heaven because he was… so full of himself. So he was cast into the fiery pit where he was served and adored by his minions, still being proud and arrogant.

I can’t really blame the chap if he likes others adoring him. I would go even further and claim that he founded the Order of Nine Angles for the sole purpose of having his sinisterly-numinous Ass worshiped. If someone does his job of ass-kissing well, no wonder he is rewarded. Now let’s push even further and assume that all the orders, Satanic or otherwise, exist only for the worship of their founders’ asses. Let’s now entertain even braver conspiracy theory that Anton LaVey was in fact a Christian and invented Satanism to con gullible people who thought of themselves as special snowflakes but, in fact, were searching for the peer approval. Would any reasonable person trust a bald guy, with the goat’s beard, who was moreover stinking like a foul goat?

Ass-kissing is a true Satanic ritual of initiation, kinda like the one the witches at Sabbath were practicing when they were kissing the Devil/Goat’s ass in a truly religious frenzy and sexual ecstasy. The Devil is no gentleman, he’s no aristocrat, don’t be fooled. He has no manners, he’s a foul stinking and evil creature having no consideration for anyone. Even old guys indulging in “mystical peregrinations” and Greek translations can be perverted sociopaths. To err is human.

Does that a lil bit exaggerated picture strike a nerve with you, dear reader? It’s because you deny darkness in yourself and in other people. You focus only on the light, ignoring the shadows. Thus you miss the Whole that is a human being. You idealize people because you need to have some perfect and pure idol, a sacred cow that you can put on a pedestal and worship. You are a natural follower who gets furious when your idol doesn’t live up to your sentimental expectations. You are disappointed and denigrate the mythos because you were deluding yourself that the real people were as beautiful and fucking romantic as their mythos. The mythos exists for its ow sake. It’s real as long as it continues to inspire. And real people… well, they probably suck. As you suck. As I suck. As we all suck. Enlightenment is nothing else than shattering your illusions.

 

The ONA Troll Carousel

Or in other words: Peasants Disguised as Aristocrats

5616

The Inner ONA clowns again decided to amuse the internet peanut gallery with the staged show. The ONA Old Pricks hired the younger ONA kids (or rather one kid who divides and multiplies into a multitude of sock accounts as usual) to perform what they call Sinister Dialectic. To those who read too many ONA MSS and think that it has something to do with culling, infiltration, causing chaos and then global change, influencing history, Aeonic magic etc, then you all couldn’t be more wrong. Sinister Dialectic, according to all the Pointy Hats, is simply flinging poop on various blogs and forums in a light-hearted and child-like manner with the hope that such poop flinging will produce an alchemical change in the participants. Pathei mathos and all such jazz.

Unfortunately, the Inner ONA bullshitters lack creativity and for more than three years they have been repeating the same tired narrative about the true ONA and fake ONA, pretenders, plebeians and pseudo-Satanists, pretending to insult Myatt or masquerading as Myatt and asking each other questions like the Bridge Keeper in the Monty Python movie. Since no ONA initiates seem to give a rat’s ass about their childish “Sinister Games”, they create fake blogs and sock puppets, talking to themselves, fighting themselves, insulting themselves and questioning themselves in a truly schizophrenic display of narcissistic self-adoration.

Now this is the true picture of the elite… during the Carnival. The beggar became a king, peasants dressed up as aristocrats and are having fun. The Carnival has its privileges. At other times, everything is as it should be. A little fringe group of weirdos fantasizing about evolving humanity.

Now, something about ONA questions: