From: Zbigniew Nitecki Area: Base of Set To: Albertus Magnus 16 Aug 93 09:28:50 Subject: Another 'Satanist' UpdReq The lawyer calls on the Expert Witness on Satanic Rituals, a Sixteen year old high school student. She says she learned everything she knows from T.V. AM> Kimberly Sinkler, 16, a freshman at Reuther Central High School in AM> Kenosha said she dated Terres. She said he recently called her and AM> invited her to go horseback riding saying, "This may be the last time AM> you see me." "The defense will now call an expert witness on Satanic Ritual, Kimberly Sinkler." "So Ms. Sinkler where have you acquired your vast knowledge of Satanism." "Well... Umm. I saw "The First Power" three times and also the very informative "Omen" series." "Did I mention my High School gym teacher told me Satanist are bad people!" "Thank you Ms. Sinkler, you may step down and go back to your 4th hours class." 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Zbigniew Nitecki Area: Base of Set To: Rakshasa 16 Aug 93 09:40:44 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq From what I have heard... When intercourse is happening the male genital is filled with blood and the blood (minute amounts) seep through pores. This blood mixes with the female blood in the uh! uh! virginia. And wham AIDS has been transfered. I think the only way to transmit AIDS is through the blood. Thats why you won't get it setting on a public toilet and other such nonsense. I think we should ask the Doctor in the house. Namely Sucellos! 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Christeos Pir Area: Base of Set To: Rakshasa 15 Aug 93 21:56:26 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq -=> Rakshasa sent a message to Deep Black on 13 Aug 93 20:14:00 <=- -=> Re: Re: Free Love <=- Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Ra> Indeed... I've noted that "the 60s" have become for most a symbol. Too true. I've seen a number of op-ed articles -usually in Right-Wing publications like the Washington Times- decrying not only the 60's but also the 60's-nostalgia, as being best summed up by Charles Manson, etc, ad nauseam. The same people who hated us then are still whining about hair and clothing and pot smoking (screw you, Liddy). For the record, however, I'd like to add that Abby Hoffman was an *ssh*le who did _at least_ as much damage to the anti-war movement as he did good, IMO. Ra> Of course, nobody realizes that the hippies and radicals were Ra> always a minority; most American students in the 60s were wearing Ra> crewcuts and beehives, drinking beer, and pledging fraternities and Ra> sororities just like they do today) Scary, innit? Ra> I suppose there's a lesson to be learned here, but I'll be damned if I Ra> know what it is. Timmy Leary (and therefor R.A. Wilson) knows. ;-) Love is the law, love under will. - Christeos Pir ... Your torture increaseth as ye drink, yet still ye drink. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Mr. PSYOP MindWar Guy Area: Base of Set To: Albert Saperstein 15 Aug 93 16:02:00 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq AS> 'Nam had nothing to do with economic theories. I only wished to mention that "peace" in the latter 60's meant America's giving up it's fight against the North Vietnamese government and it's Soviet-sponsored armies. To me that equals "surrender to the Communists". The Communism to which I refer had little to do with "economic theory" and everything to do with domination of the many for the benefit of the few. I have not stated that we should have been there. However, I do know that we *were* there, and I base my opinions on that aspect of *reality* alone. I believe that the Tonkin Gulf resolution was of very poor policy. I also have grave doubts in the validity of the CIA based upon what I *think* I've come to know concerning our involvement in Viet Nam and concerning the assassination of President Kennedy. AS> Are you at all familiar with the name Reinhard Gehlen? No, and this does not indicate an unwillingness on my part to learn. "Enlighten" me. AS> You have an interesting way of sloughing off direct questions. It's called being honest and able to admit when I am venturing into territory beyond my current education. Actually the intent was not to "slough off" any direct questions but rather to steer the conversation back toward the original topic being discussed. Ted Koppel is brilliant with this strategy. Perhaps that is why he is able to actually present coherent discussions on specific issues as well as he does. AS> Perhaps you should do a little more research before pontificating on the nature of the Vietnam "police action". There's no question that I've much to learn about it, but that should not prevent me from relating what I believe I do know about it. I believe we all do this, some more frequently than others. I am not above admitting that I am not as well educated on certain issues as I probably should be. I also use the "bouncing" of ideas as an educational tool with which to learn. If you find that I am in error, I will not mind if you "set me straight", as long as I do not have what I perceive to be a more soundly-formulated understanding of the topic. (However, this is not to indicate that I will automatically accept your understanding as my own either.) AS> By the way, what IS your line on II.76? I know nothing of "II.76". Does this answer your question? You *are* "baiting" me, are you not? AS> I think you should find out who the Diggers were before you begin AS> braying about the '60s. I do too, however, I do not feel that not knowing who they were invalidates my interpretations of the events and movements of that decade! Is this one of your sacred cows? Mellow out and Support Your Local Virgins. If there aren't any nearby, do so via E-Mail. Anymore, the entire world is local. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Mr. PSYOP MindWar Guy Area: Base of Set To: Christeos Pir 15 Aug 93 16:09:00 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq CP> Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Where'd ya pick *that* up from? An early vinyl copy of Led Zeppelin III? Just kidding. I am aware. MPMG> I recently read a book from my local library entitled, "The 60's Reader" MPMG> and from that book I culled the commentary about "Free Love" that I MPMG> included in my original message. CP> This sounds like what you're saying is that you know nothing about the CP> subject, but read something you liked (for whatever personal reasons) CP> and reiterated it here as if it were your own analysis. Is this so, or am CP> I misreading your message? You are wise to give yourself an "out" there in that last question! Yes, you are misreading my message. I am no stranger to the "Free Love" movement of the 1960's. I simply have never been an advocate of it, due not to some archaic inhibitions but rather to what I consider to be very intellectually-sound and responsible reasonings which I have formulated as a result of a combination of experience and meditation. When I read the portion of the book cited, it did not introduce me to a new idea. Instead, it reinforced the conclusions which I had already accepted as reality many years before. The choice of words used to explain the idea was new to me, but the conclusion drawn was as old as "Sgt. Pepper's". MPMG> I've not experienced any of the situations you claim to have CP> And this seems to confirm my suspicions... you weren't there, haven't CP> lived it, and have no experience to back up your opinions. If *that* were any absolute kind of qualifying criteria, we'd not be able to form an opinion about anything beyond our own immediate experience! But surely we've all been known to do that from time to time, have we not? I seriously doubt that you have actively pursued a life of celibacy for the sake of a mate you've not even met, but this does not lead me to accuse you of hopeless ignorance concerning such a matter. I would hope that I am not *that* foolish! CP> Just how old were you in the 60's? -6 to +3 years old, roughly. Give or take. Why? CP> ... I will make me a little boat of my tongue, and explore the unknown Ah, the sarcasm of wit! Ah, the wit of sarcasm! 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Rakshasa Area: Base of Set To: Albertus Magnus 15 Aug 93 18:09:00 Subject: Re: Another 'Satanist' UpdReq Now let's see if Uncle Anton takes credit for this one the way he did for the San Ysidro slayings in _Secret Life of a Satanist_. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Rakshasa Area: Base of Set To: Albert Saperstein 15 Aug 93 18:11:00 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq AS> The lesson is quite explicitly spelled out by Guy DeBord in his book, AS> THE SOCIETY OF THE SPECTACLE, which (interestingly) predates the '60s AS> counterculture by some ten years. This book was a seminal influence AS> on AS> the Paris rebellion of May '68, and the entire Situationist body of AS> work is a necessary study to anyone seriously interested in the roots AS> of contemporary "countercultures" in all their variant forms. I hadn't read that yet. Of course, I'm not really all that interested in countercultures or the 60s movement, but then, I don't go making pronouncements on them from on high either. Another book which I highly recommend is Erving Goffman's _Stigma_, which discusses the need of many in our society to be "the other" and the way our society deals with "different" folks. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ali Katz Area: Base of Set To: Albert Saperstein 13 Aug 93 21:24:00 Subject: Guns UpdReq AS> The best defense is awareness of what is going on around you. Agreed. Again, I reiterate my personal belief: the only sure way to win a fight is not to be there when the damn thing happens. AS> Good running shoes help. Especially if you live in one of those godforsaken East Coast toxic wastelands where only cops and crack barons are permitted any more effective means of defense. AS> And some of you "professional" war guys might be surprised by New AS> York City someday... My first impulse was to respond in kind to the rather insulting tone of the phrase *professional war guy*, not to mention the strategic placement of the quotation marks. Since yielding to this urge would have done nothing to elevate the rapidly sinking tone of this thread, I have resisted. }; )> U Finally, for the record, I have spent more than enough time in New York City: a grand lifetime total of, maybe, eighteen (18) hours. That was enough to find out everything about the place that *I* ever want to know. The only thing that would surprise me about NYC is discovering that it had any significant redeeming qualities (other than not being New Jersey.) Wassail, Ali Katz This copy of Freddie 1.2.5 is being evaluated. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Setanta Area: Base of Set To: Mr. PSYOP MindWar Guy 15 Aug 93 18:57:52 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq MPMG> But the truth of the matter is that Free Love, especially in the MPMG> Haight-Ashbury, was nothing more than a load of men exploiting MPMG> teenage girls who'd come to check out what was happening in S.F.. MPMG> They'd pump drugs into the girls until they'd lost all their senses MPMG> and could not resist the ensuing gang-bang forced upon them. MPMG> It was a cheap, easy way to achieve rape without MPMG> having to worry about MPMG> somebody pressing charges against them for it. Quite an interesting theory. Where'd you hear this one? Actually, the concept I was speaking of is closer to actual "Free Love," such as non-monogomous relationships, sex without guilt (though still safe), etc. This does in fact exist, and it is the reaction to this concept that I'm interested in. MPMG> Support Your Local Virgins. Sorry, but that's one organization I'll never donate my tax refund to! :) Setanta 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Mr. PSYOP MindWar Guy Area: Base of Set To: Setanta 16 Aug 93 21:20:00 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq Se> Quite an interesting theory. Where'd you hear this one? You know, I'm going to have to go back to the library and get that book that I read that featured a pamphlet or something that was circulated around the Haight-Ashbury area back in '67 that told of such activities that were going on there. I didn't realise at the time I read it that I was going to have to need it for the "debate" that has ensued ever since I posted that original note. I've been accused of reading one thing and making hasty judgements solely from it, etc... This is not the case. I already had some formulated opinions about Free Love '60's-style. That reading just gave me a more efficient way of saying what otherwise would have been a much longer message. Se> Actually, the concept I was speaking of is closer to actual "Free Se> Love," such as non-monogomous relationships, sex without guilt Se> (though still safe), etc. This does in fact exist, and it is the Se> reaction to this concept that I'm interested in. After posting my original note, I realised that you probably weren't looking for commentary on the 60's but rather for 90's talk instead. I'm going to collect my thoughts on this and post them probably in the near future. In the meantime, if you're looking for a different perspective from probably anybody else here on this, you can read one of my other messages in which I support the concept of virginity until marriage. I find that those in this echo that condemn me of making "gross overstatements" (and I don't deny that full charge) and "generalizing" way too much, are themselves committing the same "crimes" when they blast me for being more conservative than they are. I could almost assume without guilt from errancy that they have not experienced what I have experienced in my personal quest and yet that doesn't stop them from condemning *my* choice as if they were experts on the matter of celibacy. I could just as easily tell them that *they* are the ones who know nothing of my "side" of things and likewise should not speak as if they were well informed on the topic, but I am not so interested in putting others down and calling them "complete idiots" as they seem to be with me. (I'm not proofreading this as I write it, so I do hope it is coherent!) Such behaviour is tantamount to hypocrisy, but I'll not be the one to cast stones. Virgins are cool (heh heh... heh heh heh...) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Rakshasa Area: Base of Set To: Mr. PSYOP MindWar Guy 16 Aug 93 21:46:00 Subject: Re: Free Love UpdReq MP> I support the concept of virginity until marriage. I find that those MP> in MP> this echo that condemn me of making "gross overstatements" (and I MP> don't MP> deny that full charge) and "generalizing" way too much, are MP> themselves MP> committing the same "crimes" when they blast me for being more MP> conservative MP> than they are. I could almost assume without guilt from errancy that I'm not accusing you of being more "conservative" than I am. I merely pointed out that you seemed to be equating sex and guilt... something which I do not believe is true in all or even most instances. In your first and second message you stated "Free Love is rape." I disagreed with this, although I did agree that there are a certain number of sexual predators out there who use "free love" as a mating call just like some sorority girls use "Oh, I am _so_ drunk." There are people who take up a celibate lifestyle because they can't deal with their homosexual urges (many Roman Catholic priests fall into this category). For me to say that _all_ advocates of celibacy, including yourself, were closet homosexuals would be a gross overstatement. That was the point I am getting at. MP> have not experienced what I have experienced in my personal quest and MP> yet MP> that doesn't stop them from condemning *my* choice as if they were MP> experts MP> on the matter of celibacy. I could just as easily tell them that MP> *they* MP> are the ones who know nothing of my "side" of things and likewise MP> should MP> not speak as if they were well informed on the topic, but I am not so MP> interested in putting others down and calling them "complete idiots" You might want to try speaking in a more clear, coherent and concise fashion (you can download an offline mail-reader from here which will give you a chance to think about what you're saying before you say it). As it stands, MPWG, I couldn't tell you _what_ you stand for or _why_ you stand for it. All I saw was an overgeneralization which I pointed out... if you consider that a personal attack, I suggest you may be too tender for the rough and tumble world of BBSing. I've been told things (by friends, even) that would make "overgeneralization" look like a kiss on the cheek. I would certainly like to see our culture push the idea of sexual _responsibility_ more strongly. I think most 13 and 14 year olds are not ready to become parents (and I'm using _understatement_ there). I agree that abstinence is a 100% effective prevention of pregnancy and of sexually transmitted diseases. However, I doubt that I'm going to be seeing an upswing in the number of virgins at any time in the immediate future. Thus I compromise... "If you're gonna screw around, at least use some form of protection." MP> Virgins are cool (heh heh... heh heh heh...) I agree... and they should be protected. If you know any, give me their addresses and phone numbers and I'll do my best to keep the wolves at bay. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718