Your thoughts on Dr. Michael A. Aquino

[jeff77]

I gave the quotes in the previous posts.

You simply wrote that:

He also repeatedly criticized Aquino and his Temple, blah blah blah

Which statement by you is in fact is (i) irrelevant to your claim about AL's motives, and (ii) irrelevant to your claim that {quote} AL didn't find understanding in the Temple of Set...He was also disappointed, if not pissed, the Temple of Set's grand pooh-bahs treat him in a patronizing manner {/quote}.

Which are the claims, by you, that we are now discussing. So yet again you've committed the fallacy of ignoratio elenchi. So, I ask again, where is your evidence for such claims? For the burden of proof lies with you.

 

[AnnaCzereda]

Which statement by you is in fact is (i) irrelevant to your claim about AL's motives, and (ii) irrelevant to your claim that {quote} AL didn't find understanding in the Temple of Set...He was also disappointed, if not pissed, the Temple of Set's grand pooh-bahs treat him in a patronizing manner {/quote}.

I already explained that in my previous posts. AL wrote that the Temple of Set's officials treated him like a pupil, that he didn't have anything against the positive discussion, the dialectic of learning, but he felt treated in a patronizing way.

And if he wasn't hoping Aquino would understand his position, then why write explanation letters to Aquino? For propaganda he could have simply written a few MSS and publish them.

 

[jeff77]

I already explained that in my previous posts. AL wrote...

What AL actually wrote - as distinct from your prejudiced interpolations - anyone can discover for themselves by simply reading the correspondence, which is here https://omega9alpha.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/onathesataniclettersofstephenbrowni.pdf and here https://omega9alpha.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/onathesataniclettersofstephenbrownii.pdf

why write explanation letters to Aquino? For propaganda he could have simply written a few MSS and publish them.

As someone once wrote, here: do you have comprehension issues? Or are you just addicted to writing propaganda in order to propagate your magpie (and plebeian) interpretations of the O9A and of AL?

For the "why" has already been explained to you, several times: the writing of and then the subsequent publication of such letters and the replies received was far more effective propaganda than just writing some MSS, given that Aquino was then (and still is) a well-known public figure associated with satanism.

That you obviously fail to understand this is most indicative. Unless, of course, you're just being an insufferable plebeian bore addicted to indulging in ignoratio elenchi and argumentum ad nauseam

Furthermore, it's both hilarious and indicative that you've still not provided any evidence whatsoever for your claim that {quote} AL didn't find understanding in the Temple of Set...He was also disappointed, if not pissed, the Temple of Set's grand pooh-bahs treat him in a patronizing manner {/quote}.

 

[AnnaCzereda]

I already quoted the proper passages. If it's not enough for you, then it's not enough for you.

I'm still waiting for the evidence of mutual admiration between AL and Aquino.

 

[jeff77]

I already quoted the proper passages

No, you gave some magpie quotes that had nothing whatsoever to do with the specific claims you made regarding AL, one of which claims was: {quote} AL didn't find understanding in the Temple of Set...He was also disappointed, if not pissed, the Temple of Set's grand pooh-bahs treat him in a patronizing manner {/quote}.

So, I ask you yet again, where is the documented, published, evidence that supports your claims about AL? If you cannot give documented, published, evidence for your claim then just admit it's only your personal opinion and an opinion which has no evidence to support it.

Can you do that? Or will you just treat us to more argumentum ad nauseam and thus claim that you've already provided such evidence when it's so obvious that you've done nothing of the sort?

On past form, we all know you won't provide evidence, won't admit it's just your personal opinion, but will indeed treat us to more argumentum ad nauseam.

 

[Adramelek]

Since I started this thread I am going to speak up here. Look Anna and Jeff don't you think its time that you both realize that your never going to see eye to eye on this subject? That you both are going to continuously go around in circles arguing back and forth ad nauseam? Why not move on to something else? Please! This is a thread about Dr. Michael Aquino, not Anton Long or David Myatt or who ever the hell he is.

 

[AnnaCzereda]

Look Anna and Jeff don't you think its time that you both realize that your never going to see eye to eye on this subject? That you both are going to continuously go around in circles arguing back and forth ad nauseam?

Oh I'm sure Jeffie agrees with me. He only pretends to be ignorant so I may appear wiser than him.

 

[jeff77]

Look Anna and Jeff don't you think its time that you both realize that your never going to see eye to eye on this subject? That you both are going to continuously go around in circles arguing back and forth ad nauseam?

I entirely agree. Plus, the O9A has already been discussed here for so long over so many threads with what Anna and I have posted having already been said elsewhere by Anna, by myself, and by others.

Time therefore for both of us to stop going round in circles.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Old mikey has spoken on the subject of Myatt/Long and the o9a many times during his years at the club.

Respect and admiration aren't exactly the words I would use to sum up his position.

 

[ONAoutsider]

Seems this thread which originally dealt with Aquino will keep on derailing!

 

[Hollow2015]

Tsk. Stop being a whiny little ***** - or pretending to tell me what to do and what I can post. One of THEM is higher than that grade and detested Aquino but found the comments relevant, if we go by your silly claim that being a high grade (il)legitimizes the essay, then you've already lost. I'm taking the high ground, and just because you see no comparison, doesn't illegitimize my comparison. A decent discussion of Aquino could be had here if you let it.

 

[Adramelek]

Tsk. Stop being a whiny little ***** - or pretending to tell me what to do and what I can post. One of THEM is higher than that grade and detested Aquino but found the comments relevant, if we go by your silly claim that being a high grade (il)legitimizes the essay, then you've already lost. I'm taking the high ground, and just because you see no comparison, doesn't illegitimize my comparison. A decent discussion of Aquino could be had here if you let it.

Keep it up, Hollow.

 

[Hollow2015]

Of course I will. I'm not a modern castratee who prides himself on conforming to ridiculous rules and being told what to do. Banned from a forum, oh no, whatever shall I do, what will become of me after this shameful degradation by my peers? LOL

 

[Adramelek]

Of course I will. I'm not a modern castratee who prides himself on conforming to ridiculous rules and being told what to do. Banned from a forum, oh no, whatever shall I do, what will become of me after this shameful degradation by my peers? LOL

No your standard ONA material. Good riddance.

 

[Hollow2015]

I'm done. Cya man.

 

[Adramelek]

Hasta la vista, man.

Speaking of the Nine Angles, here is a very cool rendition of Dr. Michael Aquino's original design for the Insignia of the Order of the Trapezoid in the ToS. A complete embodiment of the phi ratio. The Four (trapezoid) and the Five (inverse pentagram) are the Nine Angles. A concept originated and developed by Anton LaVey and Michael Aquino in the late 1960's - early 1980's ce.

 

[Adramelek]

The evolution of the insignia of the Order of the Trapezoid:

Evolution of the Order of the Trapezoid Insignia

 

[Quagmire]

***Mod Post***​

​

Thread closed for review. ​