Australian Satanism and the Temple of THEM

[Andras]

How many of them are socks from the 600 club? I'd say you really shouldn't advertise your online "shenanigans" it's like giving opposing Generals a general layout of your battle plans! do it in private for God's sake

 

[Waren_S_Gnobe]

I wanted to answer you last night, but I waited 'till my wife leaves for town. She was bulling me the other day "hanging again with those sectarians and fanatics, wasting your time, huh?" "but, babe they're not.." SLAP! she has seven branches of seven different trees woven together into something I fear pretty much.

However, now while she's gone..

The "ordered or hierarchical structure" in question is the hermetic anados (a journey or quest or praxis) which is characterized by a sequence of nine emanations/angles (or 'realms' of being), seven of which are symbolized by spheres (the hebdomad, the Tree of Wyrd) while the remaining two are beyond the hebdomad and can be, and historically have been, symbolized in a variety of ways. Symbolized for example (i) in modern times (by Anton Long) as the causal-acausal nexus that is 'The Abyss', (ii) in Arabic mysticism, by the realms termed falak al-aflak and al-kawakib al-thabitah, and (iii) rather mystically and gnostically in the Pymander tractate of the Corpus Hermeticism as the ogdoadic physis - ὀγδοατικὴν φύσιν - and the 'immortal (i.e. acausal) existence' beyond that ogdoadic physis where a person achieves gnosis (γνῶσι&#962 and thus is united with theos, i.e. with the Unity that exists beyond the seven spheres and which those seven spheres are emanations of.

The name 'order of nine angles' therefore refers to a modern esoteric philosophy - with ancient hermetic/gnostic roots - and which esoteric philosophy concerns (i) nine emanations of "the sinsterly-numinous" unity, (ii) an anados (a praxis, a quest for wisdom) of seven stages, and (ii) an immortal (acausal) existence that might be attained by undertaking a journey through those seven spheres/stages.

This angle of observing "order of nine angles" is the most precious, I would say. So, thank you for elaborating it here, for those who might be interested in this, still ongoing, wise farting.

But, this wise farting can be very important for understanding depth of this nineangled phenomenon. There's also an interesting view of "ω9α" being representation of both, Azoth and the Stone, which, again both, contain within them formula of the Great Work. Anyhow, o9a can be viewed from very different perspectives. As stated previously, can be a platform for many causal forms within social structure and so on.

So, ok, I'm pretty much aware of how many meanings can be ascribed to this term and what it can refer to.

But, this one is also very interesting:

The name 'order of nine angles' does not therefore primarily refer to some 'entity' such as some group or organization that has 'members'.

from your previous explanation it is clear that term does not "primarily" refer to some "entity", in this case an order. But even if there's no consciously adopted form of order or organization, my opinion is that this structure of an order is somehow formed by itself, naturally.

People do have sense of belonging to that something named O9A despite the fact that there's no formal "membership". So, by this sole sense of belonging actual structure of an order is formed on its own. You have three categories of people naturally arranged through hierarchical order: newbies/initiates, external adepts, internal adepts and beyond. Here not exclusively talking about 7FW initiatory grades, but rather about someone's inner growth, and stages of that growth whatever o9a way they follow, or some variation of it. All of these three categories are interconnected and interdependent in a way. They all affect each other, or share part of the same destiny, being under the influence of the same "spell". So, even if there's no formally established order, by intention of some "authority", this order de facto, exists.

However, let us get back to the question, you sort of avoided to answer fully. What about all notions (historical and otherwise) of actual esoteric order, ONA which are more than present in writings? One can easily detect talk about actual group of people who know each other, are working together etc.

So, this Order of Nine Angles is:

1. group which once, historically, existed as old-aeon occult order, but now is defunct, and non-existent, for whatever reasons, of which one may be transforming it into new-aeon, non-structured, leaderless "order"? Or, as written at places, it simply "returned to the dark", after successful casting of spell(s)?

or

2. Something which never existed, but was just a part of Mythos, a spell ingredient - simulation of an order, which was not hard to maintain by serving deceptive notions through MSS to those adherent and to the public? Here, certain accusations by mr. Hollow can stand as being true.

True, something like the sinisterly-numinous tradition is much more readily understandable, i.e. is not as esoteric or as confusing (intentionally or otherwise) as "the order of nine angles".

Oh, I do enjoy confusion. I agree with OSHO that confusion plays great part in someone's process of stripping off the false knowledge in order to acquire Knowing. Besides that it can be fun, also can be used as some sort of protective shield against those who have no potential.

 

[Waren_S_Gnobe]

but let us get back to confusing (non)existent Order of Nine Angles. Previous statements/ questions I proposed about this issue, further can be analyzed, if your statement that:

Historically, the term "inner ONA" basically referred to those who, having personally followed the seven fold way, had achieved the grade of Internal Adept and who had also made some original contribution to "O9A tradition/culture".

is confronted with quotes from just one article (relatively recent one):

"The esoteric ONA, however, as their texts make clear, is manifest (a) in the ‘ancestral pathei-mathos’ and the mythos that is the sinister tradition of the ONA; (b) in those who are undertaking the seven fold way; (c) by those who have been recruited by the ‘inner ONA’ (whether or not those so recruited are following the seven fold way); (d) by the inner ONA itself; and (e) by those who, by their practical sinister deeds, by their pursuit of the aims and goals of the ONA and by their adherence to the ONA code of kindred honour, associate themselves with the ONA or who are or who have been assimilated into the ONA."

So, here it's talked about actual recruitment by inner ONA and assimilation into the ONA. In this light we can apparently talk about a group of people working on specific mutual/agreed goals. This quote also speaks against your statement that this term (inner ONA) refer simply to those who achieved grade of IA, as it is clearly said how this group is not recruiting exclusively those following 7FW. Also we can here distinguish existence of outer ("associate themselves with"), and inner ("have been assimilated into") ONA.

Other hints about ONA being organized group with very specific cabal:

"An existence and a provision of opportunities which necessitates the assimilation of others, necessitates an ‘inner generational core’, and necessitates an inner guiding cabal (a hidden hand), given that the aims of the ONA includeetc.)
.......
The guiding cabal is ‘the inner ONA’ one of whose tasks is to recruit “people in academia, the artistic professions, and suitable officers in the military, the police” [16] in order to increase the influence of the ONA and aid the aims of the ONA, with this inner ONA consisting…of individuals, known to each other personally, and from traditional nexions, of the Grade of Internal Adept and above, who possess the faculty of dark-empathy (aka esoteric empathy aka sinister empathy) and who possess certain other personal qualities. These individuals have therefore all had some personal guidance, over a period of many years. "

Here it is also clear that in question is group of people, known to each other, and organized for the purpose of fulfilling already established goals. Now, even publicly available documents of inner ONA portraits it as an organized group, holding meetings etc.

This is why, in some of my first replies I stated there is ONA and o9a, or actual esoteric Order and its exoteric forms (spells), employed by people who naturally gravitate to each other, forming spontaneously , in this way, again some sort of order.

Also, that 'hidden hand' mentioned in above quotes, can be the very same "stiff grip", as described by some and as mentioned also in some of previous replies. And this would be nothing surprising if we establish that there is actually an inner ONA with specifically arranged plans, of which only one is propagating the Mythos and creating forms for external use. Many of these plans, according to some documents of inner ONA are based on actions taking place within social structure, that is they have also their causal nature. Some of these causal plans proclaimed are creating of new human societies, including creation of Dark/Galactic Imperium etc. And this empire will not be manifested by itself. It needs cabal, action, planning, organization and synchronizations of steps (phases).

So, obviously task of ONA is not solely offering modern interpretation of ancient hermetics for the benefit of individuals who apply this philosophy and praxis in their life, i.e. creating more Adepts. ONA is considered with some causal/social goals. ONA strives for domination as much as "Magian" to who is opposed.

What in these terms of causal goals and affecting social structure is the real aim of ONA, I doubt anyone will be able to tell for sure. Through out the history we had different secret societies, occult orders which, while pretending to be against established order are actually working for that established order.

Example of a principle of how this works:

Like terrorist attacks within a state, which are actually self-inflicted. Burning of Reichstag building which was done by NS party served as an excuse for that party to deal with communists in Germany. Nero's burning of Rome so he can deal with christians. Terrorist attacks in USA, being in some part inside job, in order to provide government with an excuse for further expansion of influence and power over the globe, and so on.. Also, every government is often even creating extremist groups, sects, cults, in order to :a) have under their control those elements (people) within societey; or to b) use those creations when they need to make confusion, instill fear in general populace etc.

So, for all anyone knows, ONA could be waging war for establishment of "Magian" system, not against it.

Also think along this line: Who benefits the most from Satan and satanism than church? Who benefits the most from jew-haters than jews? Who benefits the most from terrorist attacks on its soil than America, by having an excuse to occupy more land and resources around the world?
__________

For further (dis)information of those into such subject: there's an interesting comparative article named "Mysterivm Architecture" (google it) dealing with some common elements between ONA and other secret societies (Freemasonry, in this case).

 

[kerriscott]

But even if there's no consciously adopted form of order or organization, my opinion is that this structure of an order is somehow formed by itself, naturally. People do have sense of belonging to that something named O9A despite the fact that there's no formal "membership".

In the post of mine to which you refer I did explain two things.

First, that "the name 'order of nine angles' does not primarily refer to some 'entity' such as some group or organization that has 'members'." I emphasized the word 'primarily', and I also and importantly (and perhaps pedantically) enclosed terms such as entity and members in quotation marks to suggest that they may need defining or at least may need some explanation in an O9A content.

Second, that:

The name 'order of nine angles' can also refer to - and has in the past been used to refer to - those who are in agreement with the esoteric philosophy [ of the O9A] and who also live according to the new O9A logos and who follow the O9A praxis that is the seven fold way or another O9A praxis.

Historically, the term "inner ONA" basically referred to those who, having personally followed the seven fold way, had achieved the grade of Internal Adept and who had also made some original contribution to "O9A tradition/culture".​

As for the 'inner O9A' - if we assume it exists and has 'members' - then, as some O9A texts have suggested, it may well consist only of people personally known to each other (as, for example, Myatt and Moult were personally known to each other) as it may well recruit individuals who meet certain criteria with those recruited individuals then becoming 'members' of that particular 'secret society'.

Furthermore, this particular 'secret society' may well have an aeonic agenda; some sort of 'sinister aeonic strategy' that, for reasons of comprehension, has various phases, stages, or iterations in terms of causal goals to be achieved.

in this way, again some sort of order

Yes indeed, and I never wrote anything to the contrary.

For "those who are in agreement with O9A esoteric philosophy and who also live according to the new O9A logos and who follow the O9A praxis that is the seven fold way or another O9A praxis" might well be considered to be, and have often been considered to be, 'members' of an 'entity' named 'the Order of Nine Angles'.

Thus, if we accept that definition of what being O9A - what O9A 'membership' - means, then yes there are 'members' and there is an 'organization'.

Through out the history we had different secret societies, occult orders which, while pretending to be against established order are actually working for that established order [...] So, for all anyone knows, ONA could be waging war for establishment of "Magian" system, not against it.

Yes, with this 'inner O9A' - if we assume it exists and has 'members' - then being an MI5/MI6/CIA plot, part of some "really big cunning plan" by a State or by several States colluding together. The O9A might also be part of some Zionist plan by those well-known 'Learned Elders of Zion," just as Myatt may have been a MI5/MI6 Agent Provocateur, and even now (together with his chosen O9A minions, such as yours truly) be working for the CIA or the FBI. Little wonder than that the O9A/Myatt/O9A-minions go around championing and inciting culling, neo-nazi extremism, criminality, Jihad, blah blah blah.

Obviously therefore it's for individuals to decide for themselves - based on (i) what they know/assume/believe and (ii) their own character - if any or all of the above are 'true'.

As has been revealed here - and elsewhere over the past few years - some individuals will take the easy option (no doubt because of their character and based on certain assumptions/beliefs/prejudice) and therefore declaim that such considerations are irrelevant because (i) there's no 'inner O9A' and (ii) the O9A doesn't exist and/or is just an "online mutual admiration society" and/or is "just a few trolls japing around".

 

[Waren_S_Gnobe]

As for the 'inner O9A' - if we assume it exists and has 'members' - then, as some O9A texts have suggested, it may well consist only of people personally known to each other (as, for example, Myatt and Moult were personally known to each other) as it may well recruit individuals who meet certain criteria with those recruited individuals then becoming 'members' of that particular 'secret society'.

Furthermore, this particular 'secret society' may well have an aeonic agenda; some sort of 'sinister aeonic strategy' that, for reasons of comprehension, has various phases, stages, or iterations in terms of causal goals to be achieved.

Yes, with this 'inner O9A' - if we assume it exists and has 'members' - then being an MI5/MI6/CIA plot, part of some "really big cunning plan" by a State or by several States colluding together. The O9A might also be part of some Zionist plan by those well-known 'Learned Elders of Zion," just as Myatt may have been a MI5/MI6 Agent Provocateur, and even now (together with his chosen O9A minions, such as yours truly) be working for the CIA or the FBI. Little wonder than that the O9A/Myatt/O9A-minions go around championing and inciting culling, neo-nazi extremism, criminality, Jihad, blah blah blah.

Obviously therefore it's for individuals to decide for themselves - based on (i) what they know/assume/believe and (ii) their own character - if any or all of the above are 'true'.

As has been revealed here - and elsewhere over the past few years - some individuals will take the easy option (no doubt because of their character and based on certain assumptions/beliefs/prejudice) and therefore declaim that such considerations are irrelevant because (i) there's no 'inner O9A' and (ii) the O9A doesn't exist and/or is just an "online mutual admiration society" and/or is "just a few trolls japing around".

After all of this discussion, I think we can easily come back to that conclusion I came up with at the beginning of this talk:

Wen it comes to Order of Nine Angles, you have -

a) AL or/and Inner ONA who are "casting spells upon the world", producing o9a materials and forms, in order to support their cabal, which in the end is probably something known in its entirety only by that circle.

b) O9A with so-called "collective/collection" of guinea pigs who are under the spell, doing work on field not being able to grasp full implications of such doings, due to probably narrow perspective of anyone who is under the spell (entrapped by form).

All of this time, and whenever I decide to jump into some similar discussion elsewhere, I'm pretty much amused by whining of these ****** guinea pigs, and by mental and emotional torture those "inner" players are putting them trough sometimes.

And I love this kind of spell because of it. Even if you say to people -"hey, screw you, you're just a guinea pig, a dupe, flagship disseminatior of virus" they won't believe you and they'll keep coming back in swarms, maybe even more. Maybe it's one of personal reasons I got interested in o9a. I noticed certain sadistic tone to its character, attuned to that of my nature. In this context there's one saying which goes:

"Smart people are very good at rationalizing things they came to believe for not smart reasons"

Get it? Many of those guinea pigs are not actually stupid, by mundane standards. On contrary, they are pretty smart. But because of this or that reason, they were sucked into o9a where they have to rationalize things they usually don't accept with their reason, but with more primitive (but more strong) parts of their personality. I witnessed many cases in vivo, while playing with some occult groups. You have an initiate of sane mind turning into someone who believes all kind of crap, they won't normally believe, after only a couple of months of careful programming. Because of that part of their character which draw them near to some occult or satanic group at the first place - it is easy to train them not to see things simply as they are, but always to seek some deep, "spiritual" (usually false) explanation for some action or behavior prescribed by me or some of my friends.

So most of these guinea pigs are actually smart people, in terms of "knowledge", but are very non-smart in terms of "Knowing". They are blunted in areas of personality mostly needed for achieving those standard goals of any spiritual practice - liberation and enlightenment. And those are usually trying to reason with ONA, to move it in this or that direction, or to implement their revisions and changes, based solely on their "knowledge" and causal thinking.

ah, good old Learned Elders of Zion. They actually did describe some parts of the spell very accurately .

 

[kerriscott]

a) AL or/and Inner ONA who are "casting spells upon the world", producing o9a materials and forms, in order to support their cabal, which in the end is probably something known in its entirety only by that circle.

b) O9A with so-called "collective/collection" of guinea pigs who are under the spell, doing work on field not being able to grasp full implications of such doings, due to probably narrow perspective of anyone who is under the spell (entrapped by form).

That, albeit expressed using different terminology, is similar to what one or two O9A people have hinted at over the decades. Thus:

1. In respect of your (a). In O9A-speak, (i) your "casting spells upon the world" would be "developing and propagating a mythos and a logos," and (ii) your "in order to support their cabal, which in the end is probably something known in its entirety only by that circle" is more correctly "in order to support their long-term sinister goals, which in the end are probably something that many of those outside the cabal either don't fully comprehend or don't take that seriously."

2. In respect of your (b). Replace your "guinea pigs" with terms such as 'muppets' and 'marks' and you'll get an (inner) O9A perspective, and one that - conventionally - might be considered somewhat amoral, possibly even ruthless. For example, a 'useful muppet', for many years, was a certain Christopher McDermott. Having served a useful function for those years - as for example in collecting and distributing O9A texts and generating interest in the O9A - the cabal then decided he might still be useful one last time as (i) a hint (at least to the sagacious) of what sometimes went on 'behind the scenes', and (ii) a necessary public example (again, to the sagacious at the very least) of the O9A internet pretendu crowd. Hence the rather drawn-out 'Krispy saga/dialectic', played out via the internet, with many of those who gabbled about or complained about or made assumptions about that dialectic obviously not comprehending that there was a 'sinister' intent behind it and that (re the hint) it added to rather than detracted from the O9A mythos.

3. In respect of the 'O9A cabal', mythos and logos, here's what someone wrote some months ago in a dialogue about the O9A, about the Hollow Krispy saga, and about sundry other matters:

"The esoteric reality is that a mythos developes an archetypal life of its own, after a certain point, especially if it has an 'us' and 'them' built into it and also resonates (to some) on a primal level. Which of course is where stuff like (a) culling, and (b) amoral, and adversarial, incitement, and (c) the O9A interpretation of satanism and Baphomet, and (d) the division (via a logos) into 'us' and 'mundanes', come in. It's not for nothing that someone once wrote: "In my own life, I have tried to create some things which can disrupt our societies and which can lead to the creation of strong, really dangerous, ruthless individuals – some things which are so subversive that no laws could ever outlaw them, and that attempts to restrain them, to outlaw them, would only make them more attractive to some individuals."

Also, a mythos doesn't have to be literally 'true' in all its details - which is what the latter-day satanists in their mundanity, and with their gospel, forget or don't know or can't comprehend. If a mythos was literally 'true' in all its details it wouldn't be a mythos.

What matters is that it does have a foundation in reality (for example as in praxises, and as in having historical antecedents (Hellenic hermeticism, etcetera) and as in having a 'founder' with a documented and weird life) and that - because of its mythic, occult, and 'sinister', elements - it inspires, enthuses, captivates, entices, over decades and beyond. That is, in exoteric terms it resonates - captures the imagination - of a certain type of person. A mythos presences an 'esoteric truth' and - in the case of the O9A - a logos. That's why it's aeonic sorcery; that's why it presences what it does - to resonate with a particular type of person over a long period of time who of themselves and in a natural way not only transmit it but evolve it. For it becomes a type of being living in the psyche of certain individuals and then evolves to become an archetypal (and not entirely a conscious) form [...]

If you understood aeonic sorcery, or mysticism, never mind basic sorcery and the supernatural, you'd understand just how real a mythos really is and thus be able to perceive its affects and effects in the mundane world and even in cyberspace, presenced as these are and have been in certain individuals and especially in and via their 'imagination' and what results (is presenced, manifest, created) therefrom. But of course the latter-day satanists have done away with the supernatural, have no need of mysticism, and lack the imagination to embark on a life-long occult quest.

For what matters is not the sheer number of those who endure to the very end and reach the goal of that quest, but rather (i) that a few - a creative, very small minority, over decades and longer - do, and (ii) that many more are changed or inspired or affected in some way (however small) for however short or long a time, for such small changes and such inspiration and such affects (such mutations of individual character - physis - and psyche) are, aeonically, cumulative, and thus over centuries presence - and bring into being - the logos."​

4. In respect of mythos, of an O9A cabal (real or assumed), of manipulating and using 'muppets'. In respect of aeonic sorcery and Labyrinthos Mythologicus.

Apprehended acausally, they're all emanations of and/or all presence and/or manifest the same thing. If this 'thing' is understood, then so is the O9A.

But to quote again from the aforementioned dialogue: "I'm guessing this is just way too outré for most, certainly it will be for the latter-day satanists with their materialistic world-view and their egoism."

However, despite the differences in terminology, my hunch is that you and I (or should that be "I" and "those several of you") are really on the same page.

 

[AnnaCzereda]

of manipulating and using 'muppets'.

Whenever I hear you people constantly bragging about how evil and manipulative you are, I'm reminded of this scene:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTcBgs2huRo

When you have to do something truly evil, do it, don't talk about it. If you need to go on telling everybody over and over again about how good at manipulating others you are, then you probably aren't. A professional *********** never puts his cards on the table.

For example, a 'useful muppet', for many years, was a certain Christopher McDermott.

Or he was just a guy who was enthusiastic about the ONA in the beginning but later he became fed up with it. From what he wrote in his "Psychology of Traditional Satanism" it seems he became disappointed with the ONA long before this online drama.

It happens people affiliate themselves with something but later they conclude it's not really for them. Many people joined the Church of Satan but later left it and moved on to something else. Others were excommunicated because they refused to play along or joined rival organizations. Are they all Gilmore's muppets?

Having served a useful function for those years - as for example in collecting and distributing O9A texts and generating interest in the O9A

Or he collected these texts because he was simply interested in them and they served as an inspiration to him and as a material for his blog. He wrote some nice texts. It's a pity though he disowned them. It's like an admission of defeat. However, to be fair, Myatt disowned his earlier works too.

Hence the rather drawn-out 'Krispy saga/dialectic', played out via the internet, with many of those who gabbled about or complained about or made assumptions about that dialectic obviously not comprehending that there was a 'sinister' intent behind it and that (re the hint) it added to rather than detracted from the O9A mythos.

Airing your dirty laundry and being happy that people gossip about it is rather plebeian. Certainly, drama is entertaining as hell but it won't earn you respect, only interest. And this is the kind of interest people give to the freak show. If such is your ambition...

 

[kerriscott]

Whenever I hear you people constantly bragging about how evil and manipulative you are

A fallacious assumption, possibly resulting from a misreading of what I actually wrote, or possibly resulting from something else. A prejudice, perhaps? Or perhaps you were bored and wanted to post something trollish?

Be advised that what I wrote included (i) the expression might be considered - note the word 'might' - and (ii) the word conventionally.

Thus there was no "bragging" by me, just a statement that it "might conventionally be considered to be" - by whomsoever - somewhat amoral and possibly even ruthless. Note also the conditional terms 'somewhat' and 'possibly'.

Or he was just a guy who was enthusiastic about the ONA in the beginning but later he became fed up with it

Except that he claimed - for some eight years - to actually be O9A and also claimed to run an O9A nexion.

Enthusiasm about something is not - in my universe, at least - the same as claiming (for years) to be involved with, and claiming to be knowledgeable about, that something.

From what he wrote in his "Psychology of Traditional Satanism" it seems he became disappointed with the ONA long before this online drama.

Which article by him he of course wrote after the accusations against him were made. How very convenient.

That you keep making excuses for him is quite interesting, especially given his admissions. Perhaps you've forgotten those admissions?

For sure the latter-day satanist crowd will attempt to airbrush those admissions out of the picture, or conventionally 'forget' them when they launch another 'crusade' against the O9A. So much for self-honesty and rationality then, by the person in question and by those who can remember those admissions but who prefer to either conveniently forget them or desire to propagandistically 'reinterpret' them/explain them away.

But do carry on with the propaganda, if that's what you really desire, or need, to do.

Airing your dirty laundry and being happy that people gossip about it is rather plebeian

Do please explain how exposing someone for continually making false public claims (for some eight years) is 'airing dirty laundry' and how a public dialogue between him and me - over many months - is 'gossip'. Do also explain how such a public dialogue, freely entered into, is 'plebeian', especially given that other people (yourself included) made contributions to that public dialogue. Were you therefore indulging in gossip and being rather plebeian?

drama is entertaining as hell but it won't earn you respect

Respect from whom? Anonymous people on the internet? In my universe, you can only respect someone you've met in real life and gotten to know personally over a period of time. So if you or other people who've never met me don't 'respect me' I really don't give a ****.

Perhaps you've forgotten that the person in question suggested a meeting with me, then 'bottled out' when I suggested a real meeting in the real world somewhere that would test his allegedly 'sinister' credentials. I also offered to arrange, in similar circumstances, a meeting between him and AL, but again he 'bottled out'.

In conclusion, I was under the impression that enough has been said already about this particular saga - certainly enough for people to make up their own minds about it, pro and con - but if you insist on prolonging it then who am I to deny others the pleasure of continuing to see 'us' wash our dirty laundry in public

 

[AnnaCzereda]

For sure the latter-day satanist crowd will attempt to airbrush those admissions out of the picture, or conventionally 'forget' them when they launch another 'crusade' against the O9A.

Who's launching a crusade? These are simply discussions you yourself start wherever you go.

Do please explain how exposing someone for continually making false public claims (for some eight years) is 'airing dirty laundry' and how a public dialogue between him and me - over many months - is 'gossip'. Do also explain how such a public dialogue, freely entered into, is 'plebeian', especially given that other people (yourself included) made contributions to that public dialogue. Were you therefore indulging in gossip and being rather plebeian?

I wrote that airing your dirty laundry and being happy that people gossip about it is rather plebeian. There are some things that are better done in private unless you're desperate for attention, any kind of attention.

Perhaps you've forgotten that the person in question suggested a meeting with me, then 'bottled out' when I suggested a real meeting in the real world somewhere that would test his allegedly 'sinister' credentials. I also offered to arrange, in similar circumstances, a meeting between him and AL, but again he 'bottled out'.

There are some security steps you should take before meeting in "the real world" someone you met online. First, there are some online conversations, then exchange of photos and emails, then phone conversations or video chat. The first meeting should be in some public place and at least one of your friends should know where you are. You don't arrange meetings with total strangers met online without taking all the necessary precautions. To do otherwise is not bravery but simple stupidity.

In conclusion, I was under the impression that enough has been said already about this particular saga - certainly enough for people to make up their own minds about it, pro and con

Yet I still see you **** talking him. To quote from your recent post:

In respect of your (b). Replace your "guinea pigs" with terms such as 'muppets' and 'marks' and you'll get an (inner) O9A perspective, and one that - conventionally - might be considered somewhat amoral, possibly even ruthless. For example, a 'useful muppet', for many years, was a certain Christopher McDermott. Having served a useful function for those years - as for example in collecting and distributing O9A texts and generating interest in the O9A - the cabal then decided he might still be useful one last time as (i) a hint (at least to the sagacious) of what sometimes went on 'behind the scenes', and (ii) a necessary public example (again, to the sagacious at the very least) of the O9A internet pretendu crowd. Hence the rather drawn-out 'Krispy saga/dialectic', played out via the internet, with many of those who gabbled about or complained about or made assumptions about that dialectic obviously not comprehending that there was a 'sinister' intent behind it and that (re the hint) it added to rather than detracted from the O9A mythos.

 

[kerriscott]

Who's launching a crusade?

Did you miss the future tense I used? As in "will attempt" and as in "when they launch another crusade". Note also that I (pedantically) placed the word crusade in quotation marks.

Furthermore, given that I used the term the latter-day satanist crowd it should be obvious who 'they' are, especially as that bit of O9A-speak has a quite specific meaning.

Obviously, I was assuming 'they' will, sometime whenever, make such an attempt, but that - to me at least - seems a reasonable assumption, given 'their' past form vis-a-vis the O9A over a period of a decade or more.

There are some things that are better done in private

And there are some things that are best done in public, especially if certain aims - as in providing a public example of something and as in providing a public hint about something else - required such a public dialogue.

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that some cabal - after years of telling certain suitable others (both O9A and non-O9A) in private about a certain person - did decide that the person in question had 'outlived his usefulness' and then went on to decide that he might still be usefully used, one last time, but in a very different way. This 'very different way', of necessity, would involve a public dialogue, part of which dialogue - again of necessity - would involve the person in question giving 'their side for the story'.

unless you're desperate for attention, any kind of attention

See, there you go again, making assumptions about a person's intent while apparently avoiding (or possibly trying to divert attention from) what, for me at least, was the culpability of a certain person and the admissions he made.

Did a certain person publicly and falsely claim certain things for many years, or did he not make certain false claims? If he did, then does he - or does he not - deserve at least some approbation? Did he - or did he not - during the course of a certain public dialogue make certain admissions? Those are the simple questions that some people seem to keep avoiding answering. Perhaps you would like to answer them?

There are some security steps you should take before meeting in "the real world" someone you met online

I guess it depends on the character of the person involved. Some people are naturally "sensible" (perhaps read fearful/cautious?) while others might be expected to be somewhat fearless and thus 'up for such an exciting/dangerous challenge', especially if they have publicly written thousands and thousands of words in praise of a "dangerous and extreme form of satanism" and especially if they have boasted about their 'sinister' life, about their leadership of a 'sinister' group, and about their deeds of physical prowess.

Yet I still see you **** talking him

If one has an 'example' of something then it's reasonable, isn't it, to use that example occasionally and in context. A case in point being the post of mine you responded to, which post was in response to questions from someone else, and in which post a certain person was used to illustrate certain things, such as what a 'useful muppet' is or might be, with the context being a certain cabal and a certain mythos.

Perhaps you've forgotten that from the very beginning of this saga I made the point that a certain person was an example of certain things?

 

[jeff77]

There are some things that are better done in private.

It seems to me that a good reason for going public was to give Mr McD a chance to respond. He did respond many times. Didn't JB or whoever it was make this very good point on FB although no one there or anywhere else seemed to think it important or that it mattered that the O9A gave him a sporting chance like they're said to do with potential opfers.

Why has everyone ignored the opportunity he was afforded but instead attack the O9A or at least KS for going public? Isn't that biased?

I'd also like to know your answers to the questions KS asked you and which are -

Did a certain person publicly and falsely claim certain things for many years, or did he not make certain false claims? If he did, then does he - or does he not - deserve at least some approbation? Did he - or did he not - during the course of a certain public dialogue make certain admissions? Those are the questions that some people seem to keep avoiding answering. Perhaps you would like to answer them?

Here's another one for you - did he or did he not provide many "useful indicators" regarding his personal character during the course of his public interrogation?

 

[jeff77]

Who's launching a crusade? These are simply discussions you yourself start wherever you go.

Whose claims went unchallenged in public for 8 years? What was wrong about challenging those claims in public and giving the claimant many opportunities to respond?

 

[AnnaCzereda]

Did a certain person publicly and falsely claim certain things for many years, or did he not make certain false claims?

If you think these claims are false, why don't you prove it? I repeat once again. You haven't shown any evidence of Ryan's dishonorable behavior. And if anybody did any sinister deeds, like committing a crime, why would he show you the incriminating evidence? Get real.

Did he - or did he not - during the course of a certain public dialogue make certain admissions?

Yeah he said he didn't give a **** about your Code of Kindred Honor. Why should he be bound by honor to the strangers on the internet?

But look... it's been covered ad nauseam at 600. Say whatever stupid **** you want. It just doesn't add up. That you waited so many years with pronouncing him a pretender is suspicious, to say the least. That you decided to roll with the drama in public is even more suspicious. I don't buy your explanations.

the O9A gave him a sporting chance like they're said to do with potential opfers.

LMAO. This is what the sly and mischievous ONA has come to. Choosing online opfers, testing them on the internets, killing them (read: **** talking them till they get tired with it and stop responding). You should also bury them on the online graveyards for pets.

Whose claims went unchallenged in public for 8 years?

That's the BIG question. What's going on? Maybe, something has changed, maybe some power shift eh? Kerri's explanation about using Chris to distribute ONA MSS is quite lame. In fact, it's a total crap. But it's always easier to go with the flow, even if it's mud flow.

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

Let's go for 10,000 views! Come on you guys! We can do it!

[youtube]TGbwL8kSpEk[/youtube]

The real Order of Nine Angels!

Which Angel is your fave? I like Tiffany!

 

[kerriscott]

If you think these claims are false, why don't you prove it? You haven't shown any evidence of Ryan's dishonorable behavior

Anna, you seem to have conveniently forgotten my replies to you when you asked the same question again and again x months ago.

Here's the gist of my replies. It's not about someone's so-called "dishonorable behavior" - it's about (i) following or not following the O9A code, and about (ii) making claims regarding being O9A and running an O9A nexion.

Now, you yourself have admitted - ipso facto - that his claims were false, as he himself admitted they were false:

Yeah he said he didn't give a **** about your Code of Kindred Honor.

QED, regarding him making false claims about being O9A and running an O9A nexion, because following that code is what distinguishes someone who is O9A from someone who is not O9A.

Why should he be bound by honor to the strangers on the internet?

1. Not 'strangers on the internet' but other O9A folk.
2. Not 'honor' per se but kindred honor, the O9A code.
3. Which code specifies how someone who is O9A interacts with other O9A folk and with mundanes.
4. If someone who claims to be O9A doesn't interact with other O9A folk according to that code, ergo they're not O9A.
5. If someone who claims to be O9A doesn't give a **** about the O9A code, then ergo they're not O9A but one of the O9A pretendu crowd.

It was and is as simple as this.

Now, it's irrelevant what you and others believe or assume about the O9A code. The fact remains that following that code is what distinguishes someone who is O9A from someone who is not O9A.

That you seem either unable to grasp this logic or refuse to publicly admit - in a clear unambiguous manner - that the case against him is proven beyond reasonable doubt, especially given his own admission regarding ignoring the O9A code, is most interesting.

Logically, if you want to continue protesting his innocence in this matter, all you can now do is try and show that being O9A does not involve following that code of kindred honor aka presencing the O9A logos via one's living.

Good luck with that, although as a last resort you could always set up a self-declared 'O9A reformation' movement based on the idea that your 'new O9A' is following the 'authentic teachings' and that the O9A code is an 'heretical innovation' and that those who follow it are 'heretics' blah blah blah. Of course, first you would have to claim to be O9A yourself and display a monumental understanding of O9A esoteric philosophy, praxis, and 'teachings'.

Kerri's explanation about using Chris to distribute ONA MSS is quite lame. In fact, it's a total crap

Yet again - apparently in your haste to criticise the O9A and (for some reason) defend a certain person - you ignore the facts.

As I and others have mentioned many times, various people were privately informed, by some O9A people, and years before I publicly made the accusations, of the fact that a certain person was a useful muppet. One person so informed, way back in 2011, was Professor Monette who at the time was doing research into the O9A prior to writing his now published book Mysticism in the 21st Century.

So it wasn't, as you claim, my explanation, and it wasn't as you also claim 'total crap' but rather a statement of how the person in question was perceived by various O9A people long before you and I started posting stuff about the O9A on the internet.

That's the BIG question. What's going on? Maybe, something has changed

Actually that - really not so big - question has been answered x times in the past x months. Why, I do believe I answered it very early on, on the 600 club. To wit: enabling others to judge who is and who is not really O9A. Something necessary given various internet shenanigans in recent years.

But no doubt you won't accept that simple answer.

 

[kerriscott]

Let's go for 10,000 views!

Indeed. It's curious that two threads about the ONA have gotten the highest views here, on this forum, in the past year.

 

[Satan's Right Hand Man]

Indeed. It's curious that two threads about the ONA have gotten the highest views here, on this forum, in the past year.

It's like this in other forums too. Over at the 600 Club they have to regularly lock ONA threads LOL. It's a telling sign for those who have an [aeonic] eye to see.

 

[jeff77]

This is what the sly and mischievous ONA has come to. Choosing online opfers, testing them on the internets, killing them

How did you get from "giving someone a sporting chance - the opportunity, via the internet - to put their side of the story" to your "choosing online opfers, testing them on the internets, killing them"?

I get it now - you read the word opfer and immediately ignored or didn't compute that the simile was about giving someone a sporting chance and not about choosing an opfer and rushed to try and score another point against the ONA. Or maybe you were just trolling?

 

[hollow]

For historical purposes:

(1) 'The Psychology of Satanism' appeared in my second book of approximately thirty, "The Diary of a Devilworshipper: Vol II - The Rise of DWR" circa. 2004. It was a very early insight.

(2) The admission given by Hollow which the Inquisition has run with in their witch-hunt was as reads: " I’ll admit that on occasion I’ve spoken about the o9a without sufficient education or experience in some matters – my findings, theories, articles, insights are generally based on my experience, my subjective experience, including my particular psychosis (various 23 syndromes) and all, of the o9a and events and actions that have been my subjective journey. People, should, be careful believing everything I’ve written is true, does not have agenda, bias, political motivation or is not an outright lie, for mythos, ego, grandeur. etc. and rightly so. This is not new. It has been said in numerous articles by myself including our first manifesto in 2006, The Temple of THEM Manifesto, and my 2003 onward Diaries. So you may graciously accept that the traditional satanic cult in question has some legitimate bones to pick regarding information – but our difference of opinion over what is experience, speculation or mythos, widely differs."

(3) Temple of THEM threads always outstrip competition by thousands of views, even where the intrusion of the Inqi does not occur - because people are interested in us.

You know what they say about a woman scorned and ill-informed.

Carry on.

 

[hollow]

@ Anna - you wrote "There are some security steps you should take before meeting in "the real world" someone you met online. First, there are some online conversations, then exchange of photos and emails, then phone conversations or video chat. The first meeting should be in some public place and at least one of your friends should know where you are. You don't arrange meetings with total strangers met online without taking all the necessary precautions. To do otherwise is not bravery but simple stupidity."

There are; yes - but we're and I'm sick of the fear and the excuses not to meet because of not knowing who their working with, afraid of exposing themselves to scrutiny, worried about meeting psychos in remote locations and so on. I have now met personally, and alone, with eight australians offline to form an offline project. We cannot stay insulated and anonymous forever - if anything is to be done in terms of Australian Satanism - there needs to be the willingness to take risks, and jump into the unknown even if it involves personal danger. I was willing to take that risk and it has paid off in dividends. So call me simply stupid but sometimes One person has to be willing to do what others won't. Satanism and just life, involves, risk, danger, sacrifice.