User blogs

Tag search results for: "fails"
"Ryan Fleming, 26, was labelled “boastful and arrogant” by the sentencing judge at Bradford Crown Court yesterday.

He was convicted by a jury after a week long trial of two offences of sexual activity with a child in 2013, and cleared of a further similar charge."

Derp or 3 years was worth the indulgence?

Telegraph Reporting



SIN_JONES Jul 30 '17 · Comments: 22 · Tags: fails, law, power, compulsion
SIN_JONES Nov 26 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 9 · Tags: fails, redundancy

If you'd rather read it than listen to it:

Book of SIN Pagan Push by SIN_JONES

SIN_JONES Nov 3 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 5 · Tags: fails
I've written plenty in the past about facing extreme challenges to your own psyche, in fact this is the overarching theme of ADM. Yet,there is another aspect to the LHP that is often given a nod of the head but seldom engaged directly, and often ignore outright..and this is pushing the boundaries of the more mundane aspects of existence.

Often it is said that there is no real sense in putting thought, time or effort into how one presents themselves on the web. After all it's just the web, it isn't the real world. Right? None of this matters, so why put out any real effort. So they say.

The same can apply, and does apply, to the 'real world'. Often I am surrounded by those that do the bare minimum to get by in any given situation, scrape past 'life lessons' without learning anything, doing things but never improving..not because they can't, but because they don't care. Why give 100% when 50% will do? So they say.

They coast through life on the path of least resistance, while they provide a support structure by making no demands of themselves, or of those around them. They facilitate mediocrity, and demonize those things which are hard, those things which take effort. They take pride in their failures, minimizing the importance of success, contextually speaking, and of improvement in general. 

They form control memes. 'obsessive', 'perfectionist', 'workaholic', while minimizing failure through memes like 'you did your best' and 'Well, I tried' when usually both are far from the truth. 

This is of course nothing new, as it describes the nomian plebe, the common man sitting on his hands waiting to die, but for the contemporary Left Hand Path, it is a sickness. A disease. 

This is why I personally feel little to no pity for those that dig their own graves though their lack of action or failure to take the reigns over their own situations. This is why I feel contempt when I see something written by one representing themselves as a Satanist that hasn't even been spell checked, or provides content that quite obviously has not been thought about, studied, or understood in even a peripheral way.

The fact that no effort has been put in seldom stops these sorts of 'nomian satanists' from expecting accolades for their phoned in efforts, nor does it stop the 'white knight' variety..which is basically the same nomian animal with an added sense of moral superiority, from trying to keep any stratification from happening. After all, demanding any sort of qualitative performance from those you surround yourself makes you an asshole, an elitist, or 'thinking you are better than everyone' 

Here's the thing, most of the time that is true. This isn't because I am smarter, or faster, or able to eat more hot dogs in a sitting than any Japanese gurgitator alive, but simply because I constantly strive to improve in everything I do, and I am sometimes successful. If I decide to do something, anything, it is with the intention of mastery. Self mastery, mastery of others, mastery of my environment. This isn't accomplished by mentally of physically sequestering ones self, but by facing the word and everything in it with full ferocity. 

People say this particular medium doesn't matter, that you don't get a full sense of a person here, and I agree. Yet, you can learn much by how one presents themselves in any medium. You see many here that through the years do not change at all, do not improve at all, make the same basic spelling errors and never seem to learn anything new.  These same people are generally the ones that talk about their Satanism existing not online, but 'in the real', yet I am always left to wonder..if these people can not even improve in a minor way, here, than how can anyone be expected to believe they are conducting serious satanism 'out there'? Should not all that 'sinister experience' out there show though some sort of trail of progression in ones words? In the fine tuning of their presentation, the streamlining of both the 'big stuff' and the details?

When you, dear reader, try to place yourself into this spectrum, where do you honestly find yourself?

Dan_Dread Nov 1 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 9 · Tags: fails, behavior

This is a word we should all be familiar with. Of it represents a danger, threat or adversity to the established order, collective a community or individual. The sinister is a nature. One possessed by the individual. It's arecognition of power and mastery. I do not fear nor deem the powerless or the vacant as "sinister", do you?

So Sinister? The mastery, threat or Adversary. This is a tool of the Satanist or darksider How do you use it? Well, how do I use it?

The sinister is a weapon upon the modern society which has become a breeding ground of dependency and addiction. The comfort zone is something I'm infamous for rebelling against. This is how I employ “sinister” practices.

But that's as far as I'll go in terms of the communal "sinister".

What I really want to discuss and reflect on is the sinister nature and exploration in the individual. Now I previously described “sinister” as a force of destruction, but reflecting back on it, it is the recognition of a driving force. When somebody is purely driven by what they stand for. When I have an absolute motivation for an ideology it will be sinister or destructive to another ideology. And don’t translate this as the victim of “sinister” as an opposing ideology. More often than not, it’s usually two forces of the identical root. An example of this is St Francis of Assissi, he was a figure in Roman Catholicism known for his drastic and extremist measures for poverty and humility. When this guy found out that one of his “brothers” had around only three coins, Francis threw them into some mud and told the guy to pick them up with his teeth. But his activism for poverty and equality had a sinister nature to the modern clerical traditions within the RCC, as well as the rising industrial relationships and establishments in Italy at the time. This was a driving force that was deemed a threat. Yet in hindsight grew to define the church again.

It is a heresy. Formed yet unknown. It can be a glorious darkness or an unruled chaos.

Can we apply the same to the individual? Is there the driving force within myself? Or is it a force I must face? Will it destroy me or will it define me? And where will that take me? The sinister is the recognition that I am a complex mechanism of thought and conscience, and through abuse of this beautiful system I have veiled a self deceit. Something to destroy. The sinister is the driving force that would appear obsessive to the observer. That the followings and beliefs I stand for are things evoking fatal pride. Destroying the very conscience that walked the path of self deceit. I am willing to destroy myself, to destroy an ideology. Through recent time I have grown to welcome others destroy me and what I present. And I am willing to destroy you.

Davidson Oct 22 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 6 · Tags: fails, behavior
It is fair to say I have been inspired as of late.  Imitation being what it is I don't think doing so makes anyone a robot or automaton.  Your nose being firmly planted in someones ass is embarrassing and I have witnessed enough of that at work and elsewhere to detest it but having worked with the same person for a number of years you do tend to take on certain personality traits when your occupational environment is akin to a domestic partnership.

One of my MO's is to take what I like from people I know or admire and incorporate that into my own methods and ideas.  This doesn't mean monkey see monkey do but few ideas are original anymore and one has to really seek to find a new vantage point which has not been explored previously. I'd like to see it as following the example by those who lead by example.  Its one thing to do as you are told, it is another to replicate the same results independently and without guidance.  This is how I view Satanism as a whole.  You are personally responsible for your own enlightenment, but having the forums, and debates so accessible makes putting them all into a context for my own personal execution much easier.  

My friend called me today and agreed when we get back together we need to find a way to get into trouble. He asked if it will end up on the news.

"Probably". I commented.


This is why I love him.

Ghostly1 Oct 21 '13 · Rate: 5 · Comments: 2 · Tags: fails
I was unaware that LttD deleted accounts if they were members of other forums or groups which might explain why I was unable to log back into their forum.

Then I read on this site that anyone who was or is a member of SIN who joined CircleOfDecent would also be banned and deleted.  

I find much of this counterproductive for them actually.  My purposes for joining more than one venue is simply out of academic necessity.  Why would I want to limit my exposure to as many differing opinions as is possible?  How am I supposed to grow and understand more about the changes I am trying to make for myself.  You would think something as petty as multiple accounts on different forums, not even multiple accounts for the same forum would spark this kind of controversy. But that is exactly what I am witnessing.  This isn't a case of working as a CEO of one company and moonlighting for your competitor.  This conflict of interest should not even come to the table.  

If an offense has not been committed, and I am deleted and banned from SIN then all I can say about that it is their loss as I know I have value.  A mover and a shaker I am least not yet.  My journey through this new chapter in my life is only several years in the making.  When I am ready I am certain more drastic, and lasting change can be made.  

One doesn't need to be irrational and spontaneous to be considered Satanic. We still walk before we learn to run.  I will get there when I am ready.

Ghostly1 Oct 21 '13 · Comments: 8 · Tags: fails, speech, rosemont

“Don't waste your time with people who will ultimately destroy you, but concentrate instead on

those who will appreciate your responsibility to them, and likewise, feel responsible to you.” - ASL

The quote above comes towards the end of LaVey's opus, painting into light a parasitic psychological make up. If I had to explain it in two words, I would simply say “Guilt-Whores”. I think LaVey carved out a fairly strong likeness of one type of psychic vampire. That's right folks! There is, at the very least, one more kind of psych-vamp. I can count two more, one, I hate more than the other. The first obvious one is the “Drama-Whore”, which yeah, whatever. The last one... well the last one, really packs the black powder in my cannon... The Askhole.

Nothing is more tiring than repeatedly taking the time to listen, and then empathetically offer sound advice. You assume since they have sought your advice, that it is because they are uncertain in what to do. You assume, they are entrusting you with giving them a working solution. That is a pressurizing stress, one that, if it is your friend, you certainly don't mind undertaking. Sometimes it becomes obvious it isn't your advice, they are really after. 

 So in those times, what are they really after? Justification. What does that really mean anyway? They come to you, under the guise of trusted advice, and what they really looking for is; you to tell them its okay  to do, what they want to do. Why do they need that justification? If it is undoubtedly, the best course of action, why do you need to rally support?  More importantly, do they really value the responsibility you've undertaking for them?  If they constantly second guess, the council rendered; clearly, they do not trust the consult. If they misrepresent their intention to you, can you still call them an ally? 

How does this compare to the “Guilt-Whore” LaVey described? 

“They fill no useful purpose in our lives, and are neither love objects nor true friends.” - ASL

“Therefore, be wary of anyone who seems to have no real friends and no apparent interest in 

life (except you). He will usually tell you he is very selective in his choice of friends, or 

doesn't make friends easily because of the high standards he sets for his companions. (To 

acquire and keep friends, one must be willing to give of himself - something of which the 

psychic vampire is incapable.) But he will hasten to add that you fulfill every requirement and 

are truly an outstanding exception among men - you are one of the very few worthy of his 

friendship.” - ASL

I, Myself, I see a great deal of parallels between the Askhole and the “Guilt-Whore”. Both are weak and choose to crutch to their weaknesses, to suck others dry. 

So don't be an Askhole... “And if you are a psychic vampire - take heed! Beware of the Satanist - he is ready and willing to gleefully drive the proverbial stake through your heart!” - ASL

BeastXeno Oct 15 '13 · Rate: 5 · Tags: fails, fried cod with tartar sauce, amos yee

Pick this apart. Show me where my weakness is.


Thanks and enjoy my introductory piece



What is Satanism?

I've asked myself this question quite a bit lately. If you've given yourself this particular label, then hopefully you've already answered this question for yourself (or, at least, you're still figuring it out for yourself).

Is it dressing in black? Listening to “Satanic” Black/Death/Acid/Speed/Metal? Maybe it's putting on makeup or getting a shitload of tattoos/piercings to make yourself appear to “stand out” from the crowd... Or maybe it's consuming copious quantities of drugs and alcohol? Is it pissing on a crucifix? Perhaps it's cursing your family?

Or maybe it's cursing your family as you piss on a crucifix at Mass on Sunday while listening to Slipknot on your MP3 with a blazing coke-laced blunt in your overly-tattooed right hand and a copy of TSB in the other... Yeah, I think that might be it...

Ok, so I'm joking around a bit. But seriously, do you possess the critical thinking skills to truly decide what Satanism means to YOU?

You can read TSB front to back (which, by the way, if you haven't you most definitely SHOULD), but this doesn't make you a Satanist. I'm sorry, but it doesn't. It might mean that you're literate (and good on ya, mate) but being literate doesn't count for much, either, nowadays.

And here's the awesome thing about it. I can't tell you what it is for you. (I am Frustrating, aren't I?) You see, due to the intrinsically individual nature of this “religion” the ONLY person who can figure this out for you, is, well, it's YOU.

Now, I can kind of give you a few hints as to what Satanism most probably is NOT. (I know, this is pretty pretentious, isn't it?) It's not in how you dress, what music you listen to, or how many tattoos you have. You're not a Satanist simply because you choose to do drugs (or not to do them). You're not a Satanist if you tell your parents to go fuck themselves. You're not a Satanist if you wear a cross upside down, or an inverted pentagram pendant. And you're certainly not a Satanist if you piss on a cross at Mass on Sunday (although, that probably WOULD be kind of funny.)

Well, dammit, Shadow, how do I know if I'm a TRUE Satanist or not? How can you tell me what it probably isn't without at least giving me a clue as to what it might be?”

Alright, that's a fair question, but as I stated earlier, I can't tell you what it means for you, so I guess I could let you know what it means for me, as an individual.

First things first, it's probably a good idea to go ahead and obtain a definition so as to give some context.

Satan, at least as far we understand here in the west, is also known as the ADVERSARY.




    noun: adversary; plural noun: adversaries

    1. 1.

      one's opponent in a contest, conflict, or dispute.

      "Davis beat his old adversary in the quarterfinals"

      synonyms: opponent, rival, enemy, antagonist, cambatant, challenger, contender, competitor, opposer;

Ok, so we've got a reasonable definition to work with here. Basically, someone who is a Satanist is someone who challenges authority; someone who questions the why and the how of an idea and will pick it apart until they get to the very core of that idea. A true Satanist is someone who doesn't spend much energy at all in getting others to like them-they don't need approval or adoration from the masses-nor do they want it. Someone who challenges and questions the status quo of society simply because it seems no one else really is.

A Satanist would be someone who is willing to fight with others (whether it be rhetorically or physically) in order shake others out of their own zombie-like stupor. (Or just because they feel like it)

Basically, a Satanist, a true Satanist, is someone who opposes society (and those who enforce the rules associated with society) at every turn simply because it exists and represents what the majority thinks/feels/does.

But a true Satanist doesn't just oppose the status quo without first determining what that actually is. You'll need to possess an all-consuming hunger for knowledge, a never-quenched thirst for understanding.

If you want to truly be an Adversary, you'll first need to know and understand that which it is you're going to oppose.

Aligning yourself with the Adversary doesn't necessarily mean you're going to be popular with the masses, primarily because you're constantly shoving their own ideas back into their faces and demanding that they explain how they came to the conclusion that they're defending. (The masses don't generally appreciate that, by the way.)

By now, perhaps you're probably beginning to realize that being an Adversary isn't really easy, nor is it all that much fun. It can be painful, and lonely. It takes bravery to question authority, and, generally, you won't be rewarded for engaging in Adversarial behavior.

Your peers will probably think that you're an asshole. Your family will definitely think you're “weird” and probably “crazy”. Those in power will most certainly fear you because you're not acquiescing to their rules and regulations.

In essence, a Satanist is someone who thinks for himself, who questions authority (ALL authority) who won't back down when a fight is started with him. Who will go against the grain just because it stirs up the “shitpot”

Hopefully, this has given you something to think about as to how to determine what Satanism means to you.

But a final thought to mull is this: The “Status Quo” or “Society” is always changing. It is malleable. It ebbs and it flows. It's very fluid and moves much like the waves on the ocean. That which is considered a societal norm today, won't be next week. So, it keeps you on your toes, always questioning, ever challenging, constantly opposing that which others consider to be “mainstream”


Necromancy will be used to describe a particular set; drawing a minor relative reference to its established understandings. The descriptor, Necromancy was chosen due to its association to ‘invocation’ of (working of) past/alternate spirits. It is should be easily concluded that, we are drawing upon its synonymous interchangeability with ‘nigromancy’; meaning ‘black divination’; at least upon the completion of this text. It should be understood, that there is a special context in which ‘invocation’, ‘spirit’, ‘divination’, and other such ‘hot’ words are used . They will always be distinguished by ‘ ‘, as to continually build the context in which they are understood.

I offer no apologies for the institution of specialized language within this/or any other text produced by me. Put simply, it is the nature of language; that words adopt contextualized meaning. Language is a peculiar phenomenon, by its own nature both evolving and esoteric. It is in our very use that we find a vergence . It can be demonstrated that the right set of words, used at the right point in time; can ‘invoke ‘ (open) a channel of understanding in both the conscious, and subconscious often triggering action. There are those that would argue against the merits of N.L.P., hypnotism, and psychology (and whatever else fits into this category of science) as pseudosciences. Yet the proven effectiveness of advertising alone, makes small work of the matter. Reflecting upon, the recent national election ; I am convinced strung together the right way, (no matter the bullshit associated with) words hold power. That ladies and gents, is the key to ‘invocation’ nut-shelled.

‘Spirit’ is a dirty word these days. Which conjures up thoughts of the ‘supernatural’, mystical, and ghostly phenomena. For most these days, those are a hard pill to swallow. Since there is virtually no empirical evidence to substantiate Substance Dualism, this is understandable. This IS NOT the state of what I have imagined ‘spirit’ would be, it has been my understanding that ‘spirit’ was in interchangeable with ‘intensity’. Yet I cannot stress the peculiarity of the sense, I am describing. I contend to be in the ‘spirit’; simply means to manifest traits with intensity.

When you have school ‘spirit’, you emulate characteristics thought to represent that school. When a debate is ‘spirited’; it is because the arguing position’s intensity, gives it ‘spirit’. When your ‘spirits’ are high, we are talking about manifesting an emotional state that is intensely euphoric. If understood properly, it is describing a psycho-transformative state of a physical material. When I more properly examine it, it seems to hold qualities comparable to a ‘possession’. ‘Spirit’ seems to be acted through or itself acts through.

I then can understand where the muddling of ‘spirit’ moves into a ‘super natural’ stigma. A disciplined mind can make the distinction; we are not describing a non-material thing. Rather we are isolating a state/force enacting on a material thing for the purposes of examination, discussion, and enaction. No bogey-men required. Given you accept the premises laid out in the above few paragraphs; ‘Invoking’ the ‘spirit’ of Satan is calling for an intense manifestation of traits thought to represent Satan.

From this we are beckoned the question of why; why ‘invoke’ the ‘spirit’ of Satan? Why ‘invoke’ any ‘spirit’ at all? ‘Divination’ is the answer that firmly resounds to these ‘considerations’. Traditionally ‘divination’ is understood as the use of ‘super natural’ means to find out about the future or the unknown. This definition is deceptive to our conventional senses. What is deemed as ‘super natural’, is often accompanied with a spooky ghostly context; occurring outside the natural order. I contend, nothing can occur outside of the natural order. Even if we construct our model from a traditional scenario, within which we propose a haunting; it still verges within the natural order. I realize this is a plea on The Alchemy, but The Necromancy is not exclusive. The Alchemy tells us all things emerge within the natural order, exist as a transformative vergence; which is interconnected . So why do we in this one occurrence, assume a pejorative correlation to super? Am I mistaken to the paramount qualities of something super? Accepting the traditional understanding of ‘divination’ ; does this not mean the use of predominant, prime, supreme, and key means to finding out the future or unknown? To paraphrase Gurdjieff, one of my main influences; words truly only mean one thing. Words like other tools (means) of man’s design, when studied, understood, and practiced can become ‘super natural’.

Tonight’s word means ‘black divination’ ; Necromancy. ‘Black’ because unlike The Alchemy which seeks purification (simplification) through transmutation, it seeks absorption (complexification) through consumption. Necromancer’s seek to add to their field of influence, assimilation provides a rational means to this end. Not to simply “find out” the future or unknown, but to hold influence over them. To that effect, The Necromancer is a ‘black art’.

“I would like to see the concept of divination more correctly defined. Divination is often assumed to be a quest for information about the future. Rather, it is a quest simply for information, with which the person equipped can design the future.” – Jason Sorrell

An Alchemist’s aim is take something commonplace, and make it rare. Which in the end, alludes to all things having the potential to be rare. Necromancy has a different idea entirely.

In my discussion of ‘invocation’, I pointed to the idea, “words have power”. I hinted to the idea that, by understanding its meaning, relations, and intensities; you steadily tune the ability to wield it. Thereby essentially further complexifying the field of influence. As the intensification reaches iconic proportions, an embodiment of ‘spirit’ is recognizable. It is the ‘possession’ of/by this ‘spirit’ in which, The Necromancer; craft manifests.The Necroma

Pages: 1 2 »

Issue Reporting

Report any issues to He may, or may not, get back to you in a timely manner.