21 Reader Responses

1. rev max Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 12:57 pm

   Lets ship Silvermoon Ravenwolf and the League of Oppressed Wiccans over to the UK to have conscious raising sessions and denounce the burning tymes!

   Witches never do bad things, doncha know. The Law of 3 forbids it.

   /sarc

2. rev max Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 12:59 pm

   BTW, interesting srticle about sangoma here:
   
   http://www.africanenza.com/sangoma.html

3. Occult Investigator Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 1:22 pm

   i actually started reading that article the other day! i like how crazed that guy looks in the photo

   i hear this guy on coast to coast, i can’t remember his name, but he was this white guy who practiced sangoma. he was interesting as hell. who knows if he was sacrificing kids or whatever though

4. rev max Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 2:00 pm

   I read thisbook once that really influenced my by Jeffry S. Victor called “Satanic Panic.” The book was about teh Geraldo-influenced Witchcraft & Satanism scare in the US duringthe late 80s-early 90s.

   The idea was that working parents felt guilty neglecting their kids, and resented feeling guilty, and so projected their shadow onto a nonsensical and non-existent Satanic Conspiracy or blood-drinking child abusers.

   The author traced this desire to believe that there exist underground organizations who abuse kids back to the Medieval blood libel against Jews - says more aboutteh accuser than the accused.

   Lately I’ve begun to wonder if the “Rumor-panic” angle ins’t just one part of the puzzle though.

   As I have researched more and more and more about antinomian cults I have learned that human sacrifice (for example) really does go on in many parts of the world, even today. Not to Satan becessarily - to Kali, or to South AFrican Bush spirits. Part sof the world where life is cheap.

   To tell yu the truth I don’t even think that’s wrong, any more than I think cannibalism or incest is wrong, the taboos aginst these things are culturally determined.

   50% of the British are immune to Mad Cow disease because their brains cannot be infected by misshapen prions, what that shows us is that cannibalism was once very widespread and so there is a natural selection that takes place in certain populations and manifests itself in immunity to brain-eating diseases today. We are by and large ALL descended from cannibals.

   Anywho, just about all human religions are founded on some idea of human sacrifice too and cannibalism if you go back far enough, Jesus the dying and reborn savior is not that unlike the sacrificed king of primitive agricultural fertility rites.

   What is war but a mass projection of sacrifice, people want o fight to fight for “God” against other sociieties? they never think about who or what they are actually feeding with all of that blood they pour into the soil. Its just human sacrifice on a mass scale.

   Now if Bush and Saddam got together and smeared themselves in blood and chicken feathers and chased each other through the woods and got high on hallucinogens and confronted their deepest fears and then slept together in a manly embrace under the twinkling stars, maybe the world wouldn’t have so many problems.

5. alistair Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 3:47 pm

   hey rev,good job albert fish didn`t include that position in his defense at trial.the sick fuck might have walked.

6. alistair Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 3:52 pm

   when aliester crowley refered to sacrificing a child of infinite intellegence,it has been said that he was refering the to the act of masturbation in a tantric ritual.
   ted gunderson,the ex-fbi agent,is hot on the trail of high-level rings of satanists that include george bush et al.he has the ear of pro-left sites and radio.it`s not to say that nobody`s taking kids.i personally don`t think that it`s what they want it to be.although al gore has been eating something odd.

7. Occult Investigator Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 3:57 pm

   alistair, the argument goes both ways over whether crowley “really” meant sacrificing humans. I don’t know enough about his work either way. but the fact is, for one, this is an entirely different tradition we’re dealing with. and second, floating corpses that wash ashore in the Thames aren’t merely hyperbole

8. alistair Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 4:40 pm

   no,i realise that.my point was that these sadists use religion as an an excuse to brutalise people in many ways including murder and torture.i made the comment about crowley merely to suggest a way enlightenment through ritual as a contrast to extreme aculturalated violence that is justified by the involvement in a religion.some of the people involved in the practice of sangoma come from parts of africa where live isn`t worth a dollar so bodies become vessels of sacrement as easily as wine or dope or prayer.
   sorry if my prior comment didn`t make that clear.

9. alistair Says:
   June 24th, 2005 at 4:56 pm

   but furthur to my point,we get caught with our political pants down when ethnic types practice things like sharia and the above sangoma as ways to brutalise and intimidate.there are civil rights fuckwits working on arguements in toronto as we speak to continue to hold sharia trials as part of the multicultural thing we are part of here in canada,and i`m sure the stonings will continue.
   the average canadian/american/englishman has very little understanding of these “religious” practices and so take a lib/left tolerant view until,as you put it,the bodies wash up on the shore of the thames.
   i think that crowley took tremendous stick from the media and the religious right in britain in the 50`s and 60`s and was blamed for all sorts of things that happened on country estates across england at the time.
   there are those that feel the same way about ozzy osborne.

10. rev max Says:
    June 24th, 2005 at 5:50 pm

    # alistair Says:
    June 24th, 2005 at 3:47 pm

    hey rev,good job albert fish didn`t include that position in his defense at trial.the sick fuck might have walked.

    ————–

    well i was being a bit tongue in cheek there

    your freedom to practice cannibalism ends the momemt your knife and fork come in to contact with my buttocks

11. rev max Says:
    June 24th, 2005 at 6:03 pm

    the average canadian/american/englishman has very little understanding of these “religious” practices and so take a lib/left tolerant view until,as you put it,the bodies wash up on the shore of the thames.

    ——————

    well they are religious practices though, no scare quotes required. The Thuggee and the Assasins were religious too, doesn’t mean its right.

    OTOH, The sangomas who are doing this are getting their hands dirty and have no illusions about what they are doing. It isn’t santized or psychologically distant its right there. There is no glossing over what they do as “collateral damage” or “precision bombing” for example. Rumsfeld, Bush et al puts all those guys to shame, at least in terms of pointlessness and sheer volume.

12. alistair Says:
    June 25th, 2005 at 12:36 am

    the scare quotes are because i think these sadists use the disguise of religion in and amongst a community of people who are used to the practice thier country of origin.the communities are insular within the new country already and so they are a haven for some of the atrocious things that people will do.add superstition to the mix and you have a playground for the worst in humanity,while our criminal justice system is struggling to understand the context of these crimes.
    yeah,rumsfeld,bush,clinton……the list of fuckheads goes on.
    i really like the idea of the man with no name.the vigilanty archetype.the punisher.do the stuff we don`t have the stomach for,before it`s too late.
    one can always dream.

13. Occult Investigator Says:
    June 25th, 2005 at 12:16 pm

    Alistair, I thought you just said elsewhere you believe in fighting your own battles?

14. alistair Says:
    June 25th, 2005 at 1:00 pm

    o.k. you busted me.i`m clint eastwood.i do have the stomach for it.it wouldn`t do to go around admitting that in mixed company,though,would it?
    i can remember watching clint eastwood and even john wayne when i was a boy,protecting those who were unable to on thier own.generally children,women and interestingly,clergy.
    yes,i believe firmly in fighting ones own battles.going toe-to-toe with the oppressors.i learned early on that when you stand up to the bully he becomes a crying little boy.my dad told me that,when i was being bullied at school,and so the next time,boom.and boy did richard jackson cry like a baby.dad was right.

15. Haeresis Says:
    June 26th, 2005 at 7:09 pm

    Crowley pretty explicitly explained that he was being tongue in cheek on that front. You’ll see a great many quotes that are ostensibly Crowley on child sacrifice, they are inherently dishonest, because one cannot lift that quote from his work without seeing the explanation that follows. Likewise, he also believed that ALL references prior were also veiled references to tantra, just as references such as “eye of newt” are coded references to magical plants rahter than animal parts.

16. Occult Investigator Says:
    June 26th, 2005 at 7:12 pm

    yeah i read something to that effect last night, and can easily see how the trap is sprung on people. though i havent read the book myself, they talked about how the page that quote is taken from is actually about how human sacrifice is NOT necessary. but since nobody ever reads the original source material, it just gets all bent out of whack

17. Haeresis Says:
    June 26th, 2005 at 7:13 pm

    Alistair- would you mind terribly inserting a space between sentences? At this font size, the lack is making your posts very difficult to read. Thanks.

18. Haeresis Says:
    June 26th, 2005 at 7:16 pm

    Exactly. It’s the same attitude that results in zilions of phony “founding fathers” quotes. It sounds good, so they repeat it. And, of course, Crowley, not giving two shits for what the puritans thought, remains an ever-present target…I can’t count how many articles begine “Of course, Aleiszter Crowley is the most famous Stanist yadda yadda.”

19. Haeresis Says:
    June 27th, 2005 at 4:16 pm

    Another comment: I see bad things coming out of this. In the public eye, the pres, etc., all of this is “Voodoo.” I see a lot of innocent vodouisants getting smeared over this in the near future.

20. little dynamo Says:
    June 27th, 2005 at 11:57 pm

    “Lets ship Silvermoon Ravenwolf and the League of Oppressed Wiccans over to the UK to have conscious raising sessions and denounce the burning tymes!”

    LOL!

    bit late for that, rev - i hear the Isles are already Full Up with the Professionally Oppressed

    “Witches never do bad things, doncha know. The Law of 3 forbids it.

    /sarc ”

    yah, that’s the oldest Law on the books alritee!

    v convenient one, two!!

    low blow!

    but some laws, like collective spells and the rods of uppity pharaohs, were made to be broken

21. Haeresis Says:
    June 28th, 2005 at 12:57 am

    I had one of those moments yeasterday, when one of them (I swear) posted the dictionary definition of witch (one of several listed) as one who makes a pact with the devil- and then proceeded to complain about how ridiculous and false this was, because none of the witches she knew do that. I could have cried. First they wanna be witches, then they want to rewrite the definition of witchcraft.