Subject: Re: Legume's Lesson (was Re: Legume's death was a hoax)Date: 27 Oct 1995 02:50:48 GMT
From: nickie@mars.superlink.net ( Rev. Nickie)
photo of the infamous Rev. Nickie Deathchick by Rev. Matt
Subject: Re: Legume's Lesson (was Re: Legume's death was a hoax)
Date: 27 Oct 1995 02:50:48 GMT
From: nickie@mars.superlink.net ( Rev. Nickie)
Tarla Wrote:
> nickie@mars.superlink.net ( Rev. Nickie) wrote:
>
> *Oh, boy. Maybe now Legume's little lesson has taught you a thing or two.
> *ALWAYS, and I do mean ALLLLWAAAYS, get ready to take it or BE FUCKED,
> *especially if you think you're a SubGenius.
>
> You're forgetting rule number 4 "If you don't have a sense of humor,
> don't try to be funny." I don't think that Legume has a sense of
> humor...this wasn't funny.
Well, shit. Just because you didn't think it was funny doesn't mean that it
WASN'T. I myself thought he was dead for a period of time, and dammit, I
was bummed. BUT- when I found out it was a joke, I thought it was DAMN
FUNNY. You see, being a SubGenius, and not having been fooled by the
Conspiracy for a long time, I thought it was KINDA NEAT to be fooled. I
thought it was utterly brilliant that he was able to pull it off at all.
All good SubGeniuses play tricks on each other like this from time to time
to keep each other on their toes.
> Tell me this...did just ONE of his friends who didn't know about this
> bullshit in advance, did just ONE of them punch the self-centered
> bastard in the throat? It's a goddamned good thing *I* didn't know him
> or give a shit about him.
No, you didn't know him, but obviously you give a shit about something, or
else you wouldn't be so pissed. Maybe you don't like to be fooled, no
matter how beneficial it is.
I don't mind having been fooled. For this is Legume's Lesson. It aptly
demonstrated that you shouldn't beleive everything you read, especially on
the Internet (even this sentence!), and ESPECIALLY especially about people
being dead on the Internet. Stang himself has been dead here...I mean, come
on! This was not a malicious attempt to get Slack by draining others'- it
was a BRILLIANT act of LIVING SCRIPTURE, and I'm damn glad it happened. He
was merciful in delivering this medicine that was, after all, for your own
good. He could easily have smacked you upside the head. But no one was
hurt, so who cares? The only wounds here were self-inflicted. Let's move
on; the ones who learned from this come away with a valuable Lesson- the
rest...well...
Fuck YOU if YOU can't take a joke, for once you lose this ability, YOU
become THEM.
I for one appreciate a good MINDFUCK when I recieve one.
--
*you have been blessed by a communication from*
-----Rev. Nickie
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 11:45:23 GMT
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
Organization: Little Sisters of the Perpetually Juicy
nickie@mars.superlink.net ( Rev. Nickie) wrote:
>No, you didn't know him, but obviously you give a shit about something, or
>else you wouldn't be so pissed. Maybe you don't like to be fooled, no
>matter how beneficial it is.
What I give a shit about is that Legume deliberately hurt his friends.
If you've ever lost someone you cared about deeply; if you've ever
felt that empty pain in your chest that won't go away, if you've ever
gone through the long hours when your brain keeps flashing you images
of the person you cared about suffering and dying, then you might
begin to understand. Perhaps I am too empathetic. Perhaps it is my own
psychology which finds the action of deliberately causing others to
suffer repulsive, but I have this feeling that others are effected in
a similar way. Those of us who have known deep pain, don't want to see
others go through the same thing. THAT is what makes me angry. I don't
mind being a fool. I didn't believe Legume was dead in the first
place. It was only after getting letters that tore my heart out, that
I began to believe it.
>I don't mind having been fooled. For this is Legume's Lesson. It aptly
>demonstrated that you shouldn't beleive everything you read, especially on
>the Internet (even this sentence!), and ESPECIALLY especially about people
>being dead on the Internet. Stang himself has been dead here...I mean, come
>on! This was not a malicious attempt to get Slack by draining others'- it
>was a BRILLIANT act of LIVING SCRIPTURE, and I'm damn glad it happened. He
>was merciful in delivering this medicine that was, after all, for your own
>good. He could easily have smacked you upside the head. But no one was
>hurt, so who cares? The only wounds here were self-inflicted. Let's move
>on; the ones who learned from this come away with a valuable Lesson- the
>rest...well...
NO ONE was hurt? You yourself admit that you felt badly. Imagine how
Pastor Craig must have felt when he heard, or Ginsu.
>Fuck YOU if YOU can't take a joke, for once you lose this ability, YOU
>become THEM.
No, fuck you if you think that hurting people is funny. I will only
become one of them when I lose my ability to see that something bad is
happening and I didn't say something about it. It is the CON that
plays mindfuck games with us. When I become as big a liar as they are,
then I become one of them.
--
Reverend Mutha Tarla, Little Sisters of the Perpetually Juicy,
A Proud Jism Schism of the Church of the SubGenius, Worshipping
"Connie" Dobbs and Juicy Retardo since 1986
http://www.ionet.net/~bmyers/homepage.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 27 Oct 1995 14:18:52 GMT
From: ljduchez@en.com (Lou Duchez)
Rev. Nickie (nickie@mars.superlink.net) wrote:
: Well, shit. Just because you didn't think it was funny doesn't mean that it
: WASN'T. I myself thought he was dead for a period of time, and dammit, I
: was bummed. BUT- when I found out it was a joke, I thought it was DAMN
: FUNNY. You see, being a SubGenius, and not having been fooled by the
: Conspiracy for a long time, I thought it was KINDA NEAT to be fooled. I
: thought it was utterly brilliant that he was able to pull it off at all.
: All good SubGeniuses play tricks on each other like this from time to time
: to keep each other on their toes.
Personally, I don't mind being fooled. I felt bad for a day or two but
that's it; no harm done.
But Ginsu, Nickie. Explain to me how his heartache is justified. You're
sure as hell closer to him than I am, yet it seems to bother you less.
Perhaps you know something I don't. Can you tell me how he benefited from
all this? I don't necessarily demand an explanation; I'm just wondering
if you *can* produce an answer that even you believe?
You seem to be defending this all under the premise of "it's a joke".
Making a friend suffer for six weeks isn't a joke I can understand. You
probably think I'm Pink for being that way; but to me, it's a sign of Slack
that I can afford compassion towards friends and even tangential
acquaintances.
("Haven't been fooled by the Conspiracy for a long time"? All I need to
do is find one instance of a fact misreported in the paper that you
believed, and you will have been fooled. Then you will have been fooled
by them exactly the same way as Legume fooled you. So it's not like he
did anything original, is it?)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 11:49:09 GMT
From: kai@upx.net (Kai Cherry)
Tarla, as much as we agree of quite a few things (f'rinstance the
*Other* Sworn Enemy - The "Crutch" of DollarSignetology), I have to
step right up and say it: You Are Wrong As FUCK. It was a Good Idea
for you to schism, because you missed a VERY important point:
DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING. BELIEVE EVERYTHING.
Some history:
Back in the good ol' days, the Glorious Eighties (Praise Stinking
rotting fish!) when I first heard of the COTSG, I thought it/they were
"cool". I was still a kid, what did I know. I forgot about them for a
couple of few years, then 'suddenly' (to this day I know not why)
became very re-interested. I bought Hi Weirdness and Tales, but could
*not* find The Book. So, interest wained again.
I finnally got The Book of The SubGenius and (attempted) to read and
understand it. Could not comprehend one FUCKING word of it. At least
not conciously (sp.?).
BUT THEN SOMETHING "WONDERFUL" HAPPENED! As if someone had smacked me,
I started to figure out all KINDS of things. The fact that we *know*
the world is fucked up is *not* enough, it's the -degree- of how
screwed it is that makes or breaks ya'.
Which brings us to Beanie. If anyone, ANYONE, on the planet should
have know better, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE SUBS!! We should have been
HAPPY he was dead! Free of this CRAP we still live in. Sad, that we
would be able to get our rocks off, but PISSED AS FUCK, DRIVEN TO KILL
ANYTHING THAT EVEN LOOKED like it might have run his fat ass down.
Why? Because, it IS a war, our unpredictable insanity against their
sick, contrived erosion of the senses, of of just goddamned plan good
SENSE.
If anything, what you should be doing is not poo-pooing his lack of
sensitivity (what is sensitivity anyway? a bizarre vehicle of blame),
but lauding him for POINTING OUT your weakness. You shouldn't be
blaming him for 'tricking' you, BUT KICKING YOUR OWN ASS for falling
for it. Blame Yourself, for sympathising for the plight of this
so-called asshole. Fuck, if his brains were splattered ALL OVER I-95,
he SHOULDA' wore a goddamned helmet!
Stop being a VICTIM. Start being a SubGenius.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 1995 20:28:45 GMT
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
I think I said what I truly felt in a letter to Duchez this morning.
I'll repeat parts of it here at his suggestion:
> I feel like I'm going through a personal Slack drain time. I haven't felt
> like writing about my world much lately, and I can't even come up with a
> funny look at the world. Maybe this Legume thing has gotten to me more
> than I'd like. I really do have much too soft a heart. I cried in the
> shower last night because I was so angry that these people couldn't or
> wouldn't see how they could possibly be doing something bad. They think
> that if they claim it's a joke, then that puts the responsibility for the
> pain they inflicted on those who felt it. It's like saying, "I was just
> having some fun dropping boulders off the overpass...it's YOUR fault that
> you were driving in that lane at that time." Now, as the outside
> observer, I can't help but see that it was actually the boulder dropper
> that was at fault for the damage, but the boulder dropper is too angry or
> stupid or proud to admit that what they were doing was just plain wrong.
>
> If they were REALLY SubGenii, they'd see that we only have this ONE life,
> this single precious moment in time to accomplish all our hopes and
> dreams. We have so little time here or possibly ever, that we are obliged
> by our ephemerality to create as much pleasure and happiness (Slack) as is
> possible. Causing others pain for the sake of your own pleasure is
> twisted. That's what the CON does. It takes your Slack. It uses you and
> your ability to produce something of quality and twists it to its own
> ends, leaving you empty. If you value life and consciousness, then you
> must make it your goal to enhance life, and celebrate it in every form
> possible. THIS is the excess of the SubGenius, not just eating the
> hamburger, but eating the HELL out of it. Not just having a good time, but
> becoming rapturous with every nuance of a situation. The anger of the
> SubGenuis SHOULD (in my never humble opinion) come from that place which
> resents the stealing of Slack, the taking but not giving in return, the
> exhaultation of the mediocre over that of the talented. THAT is where our
> anger comes from...from the DENIAL of life in all its glory.
> If Legume is angry because he bankrupts himself on the road preaching,
> then why is he blaming those who come to hear him preach? He should be
> blaming HIMSELF for doing something which robs him of Slack. If his
> message doesn't seem to be getting through then there are two
> possiblities, either he's preaching the right message to the wrong crowd,
> or he's preaching to the right crowd but his message is not clear or
> effective enough. Once again, it is not the crowd which is to blame here.
> We do what we do because in some way it is preferable to the alternative.
> Unless someone is threatening you with a weapon or imprisonment or harm to
> those you love; your choices are your own responsibility. I choose to
> change the way people think through my writing. If I can't get through to
> them, then I'd better become either a better writer, start preaching to
> those who are capable of understanding my points and changing their minds,
> or check to make sure that my message is a good one. What message is
> Legume sending? I think that it is: do not trust or care for anyone, you
> have the right to hurt people as you will, and no one has the right to
> criticize you for it.
>
> Some fight the CON at devivals, preaching to the saved. I fight the CON on
> the net, and in my little local rag, preaching to the masses and praying
> that my words might cause someone to think about what and why they do the
> things they do. I don't blame others because I am not a success, yet.
> Here's one more difference between me and Legume et al: I don't lie. I
> don't tell falsehoods about me or my life. I am as open as I can possibly
> be and there is a very good reason for it, a method to my madness if you
> will. My openness is my strength. You cannot threaten an honest man with
> exposure. My faults, and my willingness to admit them and my honest
> attempts to change them are not liabilities unless I deny them and hide
> them. Of what use is your life if you don't LIVE what you believe? The
> life of a hypocrite is worthless, it changes nothing. The life of an
> honest man, be he sane or insane, is admirable, is useful as a tool for
> others to learn from. How can I rail against the CON's lies, if I do
> nothing but lie myself? How can I demand that others stand up to the CON
> if I am afraid to do so? Running from your fears makes you angry in a very
> self destructive way. Lying to yourself is running from your fears. If
> your anger comes from a place where you are honest and angry at injustice,
> at negatives, then you are using the anger as a tool to enlighten. If it
> just comes from the fearful place, the justifying-of-failure place, then
> is is simply sad and pathetic.
I believe that's my last word on the subject.
--
Reverend Mutha Tarla, Little Sisters of the Perpetually Juicy,
A Proud Jism Schism of the Church of the SubGenius, Worshipping
"Connie" Dobbs and Juicy Retardo since 1986
http://www.ionet.net/~bmyers/homepage.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1995 01:15:38 GMT
From: clavis@ix.netcom.com (the Grand Clavister )
In <46rae8$hrd@news.cais.com> kai@upx.net (Kai Cherry) writes:
>
>bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar) wrote:
>
>a lot.
>
>Tarla, as much as we agree of quite a few things (f'rinstance the
>*Other* Sworn Enemy - The "Crutch" of DollarSignetology), I have to
>step right up and say it: You Are Wrong As FUCK.
Fuck this shit. FUCK isn't wrong, and neither am I. Or she. Or...
> It was a Good Idea
>for you to schism, because you missed a VERY important point:
>
>DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING. BELIEVE EVERYTHING.
Quit quasispouting and get to the point.
>Some history:
[history excised]
>Which brings us to Beanie. If anyone, ANYONE, on the planet should
>have know better, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE SUBS!! We should have been
>HAPPY he was dead! Free of this CRAP we still live in. Sad, that we
>would be able to get our rocks off, but PISSED AS FUCK, DRIVEN TO KILL
>ANYTHING THAT EVEN LOOKED like it might have run his fat ass down.
>Why? Because, it IS a war, our unpredictable insanity against their
>sick, contrived erosion of the senses, of of just goddamned plan good
>SENSE.
I don't see your point. I cried no tears. I didn't know him. But I was quite
prepared to assume that the Conspiracy had decided to eliminate one of the
Church's more promising new preachers. Where did I "go wrong"?
>If anything, what you should be doing is not poo-pooing his lack of
>sensitivity (what is sensitivity anyway? a bizarre vehicle of blame)
I don't fucking think so. This isn't about sensitivity. It's about trust. It's
about the fact that we're supposed to be ON THE SAME FUCKING TEAM. If, for all I
know, on July 5, 1998, at 6:55 am, my fellow SubGenius brethren are going to pull
my wallet out, pull out my membership card, rip it up, and laugh and say "You are
a SubGenius, and so are we... but we're jes playing a JOKE on you!!!!", then what
the fuck is the point? Let's face it... it's very easy to start attacking people
for finding Legume's trick in poor taste. After all -
"Let he who is without sensitivity cast the first stone..."
- Elements, Sulphur 34:3
>but lauding him for POINTING OUT your weakness.
Enough of this horseshit. Investing things, people and other nouns with important
is a means of gaining Slack for many SubGenii. Legume got Slack from fooling us
into thinking he was dead. The two don't have to be compatible. Most SubGenii
can't agree on what color the fucking sky is. But that doesn't make the one who
thinks it's purple any less a Yeti than the one who thinks it's yellow.
I won't call Legume a Pink for playing a really lame joke if you don't call me a
Pink for thinking his joke was lame.
> You shouldn't be
>blaming him for 'tricking' you, BUT KICKING YOUR OWN ASS for falling
>for it. Blame Yourself, for sympathising for the plight of this
>so-called asshole. Fuck, if his brains were splattered ALL OVER >I-95, he
SHOULDA' wore a goddamned helmet!
I wasn't sympathising with the guy himself. Don't you fucking get it? Being a
true SubGenius and having Slack and being really "with it" doesn't mean "not
giving a shit"... it means "giving a shit freely"! [It's right on pg 68 of
TBotSG, for Blobbs' sake!] I was down about the event because the Church had (or
so I thought) lost a valuable and staunch ally in the fight against the Con! I
decided to give a shit, asshole, and you haven't the barest SHRED of a right in
any form or dimension to tell me I'm wrong. You got that? I really don't get this
"Fuck everything" hypernihilist attitude that a couple of alt.slackers seem to
have adopted on this. FUCK 'EM IF THEY CAN'T TAKE A JOKE works only if you're
referring to the involved parties as "THEM". If there hadn't been anyone on the
'net who'd actually met Legume, and who LOST Slack because of all this, then I
would'na given as much of a shit. But, like I said, I was concerned that the
important SlackMasters were either dropping out or dropping off. Kid Ginsu lost
sleep over it, and not because he was a pussy, or because he was Pink, or because
he doesn't have a sense of humor.
I don't claim to be the arbiter of "taste". I don't claim to be the judge of how
far is "too far". I've made the mistake of "crossing the line"... hell, I've done
it in front of paying audiences, and I paid for it later. But I do know that it
is different for everyone. Including... ESPECIALLY... every SubGenius. SO don't
try to lay your fucking template over me. What Legume did MIGHT have been funny.
BUt it wasn't. It might have been a good joke, but I guess he didn't tell it too
good. Too fucking bad for all of us. Too fucking bad for you.
[Besides, according to the 'story', he WAS wearing a fucking helmet!]
>Stop being a VICTIM. Start being a SubGenius.
Fine. Fuck you. How's that? Is that "not giving a shit" enough for you? Fuck your
mother. Fuck her in the ass with a meat cleaver. Cut your dog into sausages and
put the sausages into your baby sister's eye-sockets and then spray her with cum.
JUST A JOKE! HAW HAW!!! Would you like me to tell some "nigger jokes" and "jew
jokes" now? Or are you laughing so hard you're afraid you'll bust something?
Dumbass. I'm no victim. I AM, however, from time to time, a TARGET. There's a
difference. Legume targeted the alt.slack community with this joke. Fine. It
worked. But I'm not going to pat him on the back for betraying our trust. He's
going to have to explain how I could discern this "joke" from any possible future
"joke". If he comes to NYC, and I let him sleep on my couch, and while I'm asleep
he steals all my shit, is that a "joke", too? Haw haw haw?
the Grand Clavister of NYC (and points Beyond)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
THE GRAND CLAVISTER OF NYC (AND POINTS BEYOND) NEEDS YOUR KEYS!
SEND AN SASE FOR INFORMATION ON JOINING THE WORLDWIDE CLAVISTIC
NETWORK. KEYS OR $1 WILL AUTOMATICALLY GAIN YOU MEMBERSHIP INTO
THIS VITAL ORGANIZATION! SEND IT ALL TO: O.L.I.N.Y.K., P.O. BOX
2559, GRAND CENTRAL STATION, NEW YORK NY 10163-2559. THANK YOU!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1995 16:26:30 GMT
From: nickie@mars.superlink.net ( Rev. Nickie)
In article <46s07q$3nf@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, clavis@ix.netcom.com (the
Grand Clavister ) wrote:
> I don't see your point. I cried no tears. I didn't know him. But I was quite
> prepared to assume that the Conspiracy had decided to eliminate one of the
> Church's more promising new preachers. Where did I "go wrong"?
Oh, isn't it OBVIOUS???
You went wrong in believing that the Conspiracy was EVEN CAPABLE of
eliminating Legume.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Oct 1995 15:42:06 GMT
From: saint@prairienet.org (Andrew Matthews)
In a previous article, nickie@mars.superlink.net (Rev. Nickie) says:
>
>You went wrong in believing that the Conspiracy was EVEN CAPABLE of
>eliminating Legume.
That's bullshit, Nickie... If you believe that you are invincible
from the Con, then they have really pulled the wool over your eyes.
The Con is REAL. There is a WAR going on out there, and it is US
vs. THEM. Wise up.
$T.&REUX, KSC
OGYR NETWORK ONLINE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1995 17:10:47 GMT
From: jch9334@is2.nyu.edu (Kid Ginsu)
TarlaStar (bmyers@ionet.net) wrote:
: What message is
: > Legume sending? I think that it is: do not trust or care for anyone, you
: > have the right to hurt people as you will, and no one has the right to
: > criticize you for it.
Tarla, at first I thought that these kinds of responses were kind of
funny, but now I tend to agree with Rev. Nickie. Legume's prank WAS a
joke, and the punchline of it was that all of us who go around preaching
a JOKE can't even take one ourselves because we are so thin-skinned that
we will even get degraded by one of our own. Legume is not a nice
man...not even a kind man, as YOU measure kindness. Legume is an
original and his reaction to the slackin is an original reaction that
cannot be measured by comparisons to conspiracy-endorsed notions of
kindness and friendship. It's like something that Sphinx said a few
months ago--"If my face was on fire you would tell me, wouldn't you? I
mean, I might not know if my face were on fire, and we could then put it
out so it didn't burn the place down." Or something to that effect.
Legume talked alot about what he perceived as a "touchy-feely"
church of the SubGenius. "Bob"Dammit Tarla, I am as guilty to
contributing to that as you are, so we're not talking righteousnesses
here. Or counting them, either. What we are looking at is the BRUTAL
truth-IS SubGenius getting touchy-feely? Nickie might say YES. In fact,
Nickie was probabally as glad to see me get humiliated as Legume was at
doing it and for the same good reason. But if it IS getting
touchy-feely, a "cute" "Bob", then DAMMIT OUR FACE IS ON FIRE!!!!!!!!!!
And Legume told us so.
If you would be angry at someone who lets you know that your face
is on fire simply because you thought that it would hurt more to know
then you have a misguided sense of priorities. Legume performed a public
service announcement at his wake and I have had enough of these
whimpering responses to what amounted to a GOOD MINDFUCK. We must keep
alert and not rest on our laurels. It's so easy to lapse back into Normalcy.
Keep It Up,
Kid Ginsu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Schism off, Legume!
Date: 29 Oct 1995 16:04:41 GMT
From: jch9334@is2.nyu.edu (Kid Ginsu)
Look...I'll say this ONCE.
DO NOT PITY ME FOR LEGUME. I don't WANT your pathetic pity. I
can hold my own with Doktor Legume, I should say you might want to be
able to say the same if you ever get a chance to meet him, mug for mug.
Some of you have been using my name to buttress your arguments
for/against the debacle in Ohio, or to make yourselves sound more
righteous: "Oh, I cried for Legume, and now that he's back I feel
foolish, but probabally not as foolish as those who were his
friends...like GINSU!" And then you proceed to hold my hand while you
bash Legume's recently-exhumed memory with the flat end of a shovel.
Thanks, but no thanks. I stopped needing my Mommy to fight my
battles for me long ago. I can stand up to Legume on my own terms. He
doesn't frighten me. AND--I have news for you: he's not really that
bad. It's kind of fun fighting off his wit. Good exercise. A challenge
to my person. A workout. A dare to be my best. And I have certainly
experienced worse from Legume than a stupid near-death experience
(ho-hum) and wound up laughing. I'm glad he's back.
Keep It Up,
Kid Ginsu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jimvan@gate.net (Jim Vandewalker)
The following was posted before The Great Revelation:
> From: jimvan@gate.net (Jim Vandewalker)
> Subject: Re: Open Letter to Stang RE:Legume (Rev Bevilacqua)
> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 1995 22:15:33 -0500
>
> The Way of the SubGenius is the way of hate, diamond-hard HATE, and the
> way of the sick black joke.
>
> Thomas Henry Huxley was what XIXth century Victorians called a
> "freethinker," meaning he was an atheist. One of the things he took issue
> with in his life was Victorian sentimentality about "meeting your loved
> ones in heaven." Then his son died and the culture vultures of the time
> wondered aloud if he would abandon his previous stand on the non-existence
> of heaven and seek the consolation of religion. Well, he didn't. He may
> have been a latent SubGenius.
>
> We now know, of course, that Huxley was wrong, HIDEOUSLY wrong, about the
> gods, and the afterlife. But what does the SubGenius offer in defiance to
> those evil malevolent beings, whose playthings merehumans are?
>
> HATE, admantine hate, that's what, and a black joke. A joke that grows
> thick and gnarled like a root grows in the dark. And the black and
> twisted root that writhes in the dark seeks...SLACK! Stang knows this;
> like Huxley he refuses to accept the consolation of sentimentality when it
> would be easy to do so, and if the reports are true of the cold green fire
> that burned in the depths of Legume's eyes, he knew it too.
>
> The revelation will come to Bevilaqua when he sees the tortured spirit of
> Legume pissing into the upturned mouths of the Masters of Fate, and hears
> the SubGenii laugh. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.
>
> YES! The laugh of the SubGenius that smashes the crystalline spheres and
> throws up stinking black mud in the noses of the gods. MUD! Black and
> foul as the joke of the SubGenius.
>
> What was that, Legume? Do WHAT to 'em if they can't take a joke?
Well, I guess now we know what upturned mouths Legume was pissing into,
eh? Great joke. Note how I left all the sniveling sentimentality in as a
lesson to us all.
--
Jim the Prophet
"Forasmuch as he will body forth what I have revealed unto him and it will be the truth to my people" --The Book of Jim the Prophet, VIII, 12.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Legume's Lesson (was Re: Legume's death was a hoax)
Date: 30 Oct 1995 01:05:54 GMT
From: kaz@upx.net (KAZ Vorpal)
the Grand Clavister (clavis@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>)In <46rae8$hrd@news.cais.com> kai@upx.net (Kai Cherry) writes:
>)>Tarla, as much as we agree of quite a few things (f'rinstance the
>)>*Other* Sworn Enemy - The "Crutch" of DollarSignetology), I have to
>)>step right up and say it: You Are Wrong As FUCK.
>)Fuck this shit. FUCK isn't wrong, and neither am I. Or she. Or...
Great...the usual neo-alternative art-fag poseur response;
pretend to be really glib and act silly, so nobody will notice that you
looked silly before you were doing it on purpose.
>)> It was a Good Idea
>)>for you to schism, because you missed a VERY important point:
>)>
>)>DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING. BELIEVE EVERYTHING.
>)Quit quasispouting and get to the point.
see above, add clever twitticisms to the list of responses.
>)I don't see your point. I cried no tears. I didn't know him. But I was quite
>)prepared to assume that the Conspiracy had decided to eliminate one of the
>)Church's more promising new preachers. Where did I "go wrong"?
You ASSumed? You took the whole thing SERIOUSLY?
Wrong...gone way wrong.
MAYBE it was real, maybe it was a gag.
See, a little bitty hint; you ain't acting like you're very slack
yourself. There's a difference between acting silly to cover up what a
dork you are, and actually not taking things more seriously than
absolutely pragmatic...
Guess which you did...
>)>If anything, what you should be doing is not poo-pooing his lack of
>)>sensitivity (what is sensitivity anyway? a bizarre vehicle of blame)
>)I don't fucking think so. This isn't about sensitivity. It's about trust. It's
>)about the fact that we're supposed to be ON THE SAME FUCKING TEAM. If, for all I
>)know, on July 5, 1998, at 6:55 am, my fellow SubGenius brethren are going to pull
>)my wallet out, pull out my membership card, rip it up, and laugh and say "You are
>)a SubGenius, and so are we... but we're jes playing a JOKE on you!!!!", then what
>)the fuck is the point? Let's face it... it's very easy to start attacking people
>)for finding Legume's trick in poor taste. After all -
TRUST?
YEah, I remember that part of the Subgenius doctrine: "We are
always trustworthy and serious about everything we do...take us at our
word and as literally as possible, as we will treat you like peers just
because you mimick what we say!"
You don't become part of the real inside joke by parroting it.
You just become an even more pathetic joke than the first guys they were
mocking.
How can you complain, when you're own inability to take a joke
-makes- you one of the "them"?
>) "Let he who is without sensitivity cast the first stone..."
>) - Elements, Sulphur 34:3
>)>but lauding him for POINTING OUT your weakness.
>)Enough of this horseshit. Investing things, people and other nouns with important
>)is a means of gaining Slack for many SubGenii. Legume got Slack from fooling us
>)into thinking he was dead. The two don't have to be compatible. Most SubGenii
>)can't agree on what color the fucking sky is. But that doesn't make the one who
>)thinks it's purple any less a Yeti than the one who thinks it's yellow.
If you both understood and subscribed to the concepts around
slack, you'd not be pissing and moaning about how your urinary track
burned when you did it...
>)I won't call Legume a Pink for playing a really lame joke if you don't call me a
>)Pink for thinking his joke was lame.
Bobbies don't really qualify to call anyone Pink.
>)> You shouldn't be
>)>blaming him for 'tricking' you, BUT KICKING YOUR OWN ASS for falling
>)>for it. Blame Yourself, for sympathising for the plight of this
>)>so-called asshole. Fuck, if his brains were splattered ALL OVER >I-95, he
>)SHOULDA' wore a goddamned helmet!
>)I wasn't sympathising with the guy himself. Don't you fucking get it? Being a
>)true SubGenius and having Slack and being really "with it" doesn't mean "not
>)giving a shit"... it means "giving a shit freely"! [It's right on pg 68 of
>)TBotSG, for Blobbs' sake!] I was down about the event because the Church had (or
If you can't take shit, you can't dish it up for anyone but yourself.
>)so I thought) lost a valuable and staunch ally in the fight against the Con! I
>)decided to give a shit, asshole, and you haven't the barest SHRED of a right in
>)any form or dimension to tell me I'm wrong. You got that? I really don't get this
>)"Fuck everything" hypernihilist attitude that a couple of alt.slackers seem to
>)have adopted on this. FUCK 'EM IF THEY CAN'T TAKE A JOKE works only if you're
>)referring to the involved parties as "THEM". If there hadn't been anyone on the
See previous paragraph. You -are- "them", by your own behavior.
Hell, I'm probably qualified as "them" just because I bother to address
you directly instead of leading you even farther along the road of
idiocy, but then again I never claimed to be the paragon of slack you are
imagining yourself to have built.
But at least I get it...
>)[Besides, according to the 'story', he WAS wearing a fucking helmet!]
>)>Stop being a VICTIM. Start being a SubGenius.
>)Fine. Fuck you. How's that? Is that "not giving a shit" enough for you? Fuck your
>)mother. Fuck her in the ass with a meat cleaver. Cut your dog into sausages and
>)put the sausages into your baby sister's eye-sockets and then spray her with cum.
>)JUST A JOKE! HAW HAW!!! Would you like me to tell some "nigger jokes" and "jew
>)jokes" now? Or are you laughing so hard you're afraid you'll bust something?
You were correct, though only by accident, when you said it's not
nihilism. Even using the prole's definition of nihilism whose context you
adopted, it's not that...because one does not bash everything mindlessly
like you just did...
They bash people like you, preferably without you ever
understanding it's happening at the time(as I said, I'm being kind to you
and breaking that part of the rule) so that you look like an even bigger
fool by the time you buy a clue.
And anyone pink enough to fall for it, deserves what they got.
Consider it natural selection; you're not "in" just because you
are yelling "mee too!"...the ones who are "in" picked up on it before
they were caught pissing on the fence, or at least had the slack to say
"yeah, you got me..." and to be more careful next time, instead of
whining like a grape farmer.
>)Dumbass. I'm no victim. I AM, however, from time to time, a TARGET. There's a
>)difference. Legume targeted the alt.slack community with this joke. Fine. It
>)worked. But I'm not going to pat him on the back for betraying our trust. He's
>)going to have to explain how I could discern this "joke" from any possible future
>)"joke". If he comes to NYC, and I let him sleep on my couch, and while I'm asleep
>)he steals all my shit, is that a "joke", too? Haw haw haw?
If you had trust, you should have kept it in the same place you
keep your clue. Nobody ever said it belonged anywhere else. Respect must
be earned, and so does trust, and in giving one without it being earned
you lost any potential of deserving the other.
--
Words of the Sentient:
Bureaucracy is a giant mechanism operated by pygmies. --Honore' De Balzac
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 Oct 1995 04:48:15 -0500
From: thecharlie@aol.com (TheCharlie)
I've read this stuff since I first got to alt.slack and I still don't
understand it. Legume had just 'died' when I got here and even I felt bad.
I don't know Legume, never met him.. actually had never heard of him
except that he had died. I don't wish anyone dead (unless they're a
creditor, ex-wife, in-laws or the IRS) So I felt a little bad that
something like this had happened :
a) to a person
b) to a person who was cared about by people here
c) to a person cared about by people I know and
d) to a person cared about by people known by people I know.
But (and I know that this will sound stupid coming from someone who only
lurks here, and even MORE stupid since it's after the fact and easy to say
now that the facts are out.. but it's true) reading the responses and
accusations after the announcement that he was dead (Mostly the Bevilaqua
rantings) I thought that Legumes 'death' was a hoax way back then. It was
just a hunch, but that was my gut feeling. It seemed like not only was it
a hoax, but there was some deliberate hatemongering going on afterwards...
people gloating over the death etc. Maybe that's normal here, I don't
know. But I didn't pay much attention since I didn't know the man at all.
I also have to agree with Tarla and Lou. (if they haven't changed their
minds... if they have, then I disagree with them too.) I didn't find it
funny at all. But then, it's really none of my business either. Don't get
me wrong.... I enjoy a good joke. I'm known for my rather elaborate
practical jokes. Death has just never been on my 'top ten' list as being
funny. I hope it never is.
I don't see the lesson here, unless the lesson is in cruelty and
deliberate manipulation of emotions of people who care about you. I prefer
not to learn this lesson either.
If I pulled this stunt it might be funny since none of you know me, so
nobody would actually be hurt except in the vague sense of a fellow being
losing his/her life. But for someone to do this to people who care for you
is just viscious. There is no lesson to be learned that i can see. We all
learn cruelty about the time we reach first grade.
I don't need the 'FUCK YOU IF YOU CAN"T TAKE A JOKE' tagged on to it
either.
Cruel is cruel.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 13:04:40 GMT
From: bmyers@ionet.net (TarlaStar)
Organization: Little Sisters of the Perpetually Juicy
nickie@mars.superlink.net ( Rev. Nickie) wrote:
I wrote:
>> -> If they were REALLY SubGenii, they'd see that we only have this ONE life,
>> ->> this single precious moment in time to accomplish all our hopes and
>> ->> dreams.
>Gee, what was that I once heard about the ones who're really the Bobbies
>are the ones who say "they're not REALLY SubGeniuses" or "this is how
>SubGeniuses should behave."
As a parody of Legume's statement:
"These are the true
SubGeniuses, twisted bastards who will revel in the horrors of the
coming days, not simpering little bovine TV-eyed sexless wretches
waiting to be crushed like marmosets under the conspiracy's iron
boot."
Complain to your buddy, that is , if you can get your nose out of his
ass long enough.
--
Reverend Mutha Tarla, Little Sisters of the Perpetually Juicy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 09:54:59 -0500
From: KAZ Vorpal <kaz@upx.net>
On Sun, 29 Oct 1995, the Grand Clavister wrote:
> In <4718di$a37@zippy.cais.net> kaz@upx.net (KAZ Vorpal) writes:
>
> > Great...the usual neo-alternative art-fag poseur response;
> >pretend to be really glib and act silly, so nobody will notice that you
> >looked silly before you were doing it on purpose.
>
> First of all, WHO THE FUCK ARE _YOU_? Kai? Kaz? All one person, or merely several
> people with the collective brain (graciously) of one human?
No...though the changing of one letter was confusing to
me once when my biochemical state had been severely artificially altered,
we are two chromatically opposite entities.
> Second of all, please don't waste my time by trying to insult my writing style if
> you claim to have anything intelligent to say about the content.
>
> Third of all, I've been acting silly ON PURPOSE since 1970.
That's the point. You're one of those typical little fakes who
uses fake silliness in a pathetic and transparent attempt to hide your
real foolishness. See, that is -not- what the mockery involved in slack
is about, only what the foolish bobbies do in immitation of it.
> >>)I don't see your point. I cried no tears. I didn't know him. But I was quite
> >>)prepared to assume that the Conspiracy had decided to eliminate one of the
> >>)Church's more promising new preachers. Where did I "go wrong"?
> >
> > You ASSumed? You took the whole thing SERIOUSLY?
> >
> > Wrong...gone way wrong.
> >
> > MAYBE it was real, maybe it was a gag.
> >
> > See, a little bitty hint; you ain't acting like you're very slack
> >yourself. There's a difference between acting silly to cover up what a
> >dork you are, and actually not taking things more seriously than
> >absolutely pragmatic...
> >
> > Guess which you did...
>
> I'm going to attempt to decipher that garden maze of a last sentence, and assume
> (gee, excuse me for using THAT word again) that you are attacking my taking the
> news of his death "seriously".
>
> You seem to be confusing the concept of taking something seriously i.e. taking it
> for its word, and taking something seriously i.e. treating something with
> reverence or without a sense of humor.
>
> Guess which I did...
>
You are ignoring the last sentence because you can't defend
against it. You took the whole thing seriously, id est; with reverence
and without a sense of humor. Your own churlish whining on this group
demonstrates that. ASSuming that anyone involved in the Church was
telling the truth to such a degree that you are upset when they are not
is just as inane, of course. Either way you are not in on the joke, you
are someone standing among the insiders, pretending to get it...
> Come on down to the NYC Mini-Devival, Kai/x, and I'll show you what a "dork" I
> am. I'm really flabbergasted by your simultaneous attack of my character and
> propping-up of your own. Bragging of SubGenii is usually relegated to Brags.
> Otherwise it just comes off sounding like an act of sophmoric posing. "Boy,
> you're a dork and a Pink, not like me. _I_ get it. _I'm_ cool. You haven't a
> clue. You aren't cool like me!"
Woo-hoo. The ever popular redneck "if you're so smart, let's see
how smart you is after I kicks your ass" response.
Oh, how very slick.
And where exactly do I, in my post, effect or affect my own
character in any way? Unlike you, I don't use attacks on other people's
fiction to prop up my own; I have more than enough personal pomposity to
do just fine without any external reassurance. I even go so far in the
post as to point out that I don't assert to be slack myself, that the
problem is that -you- claim to be so and yet even I can see plain as day
that you are exactly what of which they're making fun.
> >>)>If anything, what you should be doing is not poo-pooing his lack of
> >>)>sensitivity (what is sensitivity anyway? a bizarre vehicle of blame)
> >
> >>)I don't fucking think so. This isn't about sensitivity. It's about trust. It's
> >>)about the fact that we're supposed to be ON THE SAME FUCKING TEAM. If, for all
> I
> >>)know, on July 5, 1998, at 6:55 am, my fellow SubGenius brethren are going to
> pull
> >>)my wallet out, pull out my membership card, rip it up, and laugh and say "You
> are
> >>)a SubGenius, and so are we... but we're jes playing a JOKE on you!!!!", then
> what
> >>)the fuck is the point? Let's face it... it's very easy to start attacking
> people
> >>)for finding Legume's trick in poor taste. After all -
> >
> > TRUST?
> >
> > YEah, I remember that part of the Subgenius doctrine: "We are
> >always trustworthy and serious about everything we do...take us at our
>
> Stop right there. Don't try to push your "argument" by connecting seriousness and
> trust. I didn't connect them. There's a difference between being "serious" and
> being trustworthy. You want to think everything is a joke? Fine. Just don't
> expect me to laugh as I punch your teeth down your throat. If you betray my
> trust.
As I say later, trust should be earned. In this world of
socialist inanity people are forgetting that, but it does not change
reality. Until you get a CONTRACT, at least verbal, between you and a
given entity promising any specific thing, they owe you nothing and any
failure of theirs to keep that "trust" is your own risk and fault.
You cannot MAKE me indebted you for trustworthiness, and neither
can you do this to Ivan Stang.
Oh, and again a perfectly mindless reference to how you're going
to prove yourself right by proving what a Big Bad Boy you is. eek.
> >word and as literally as possible, as we will treat you like peers just
> >because you mimick what we say!"
> >
> > You don't become part of the real inside joke by parroting it.
> >You just become an even more pathetic joke than the first guys they were
> >mocking.
>
> I don't think so, "Vorpal". I'd like to respond intelligently, but you haven't
> given me anything to respond to. You're just name-calling now. "You're parroting
> it! You can't take a joke! You're pink!"
You just don't get it. You actually agreed with and reinforced
what I said in that part, by saying you couldn't understand it. Which is
what you say when you state that there is nothing to which you can
respond. I made a clear assertion, which if you are "responding
intelligently" you must refute, in which I say that you are demonstrating
your inability to understand the real grist of the whole mill, and thus
are the very butt of the joke which you pretend to help deliver.
> > How can you complain, when your own inability to take a joke
> >-makes- you one of the "them"?
>
> Don't you even realize that, by insisting cameraderie with Legume for being
> unflappably good-humored about EVERYTHING, you're breaking an even more basic
> rule of the church... claiming COMMONNESS?! Hah? We're all different, right? Or
> is that part of the doctrine that was a "joke - a ruse to weed out the Pinks!"?
> Fuck you, my man. I can take whatever the fuck I want seriously, and I'll be more
> of an individual than you. And that, as they say, makes one of me worth more than
> a thousand of you. And, believe me, there ARE at least a thousand of you.
Is this your second language? Or do you just not have a first
language at all?
Where do I insist comeraderie with -anyone-?
I insist that you are "them", and the context makes it clear what
"them" means. The context is "inability to take a joke". Anyone with any
sense(I should have known better) can see this refers to "fuck em if they
can't".
The whole movement is a joke against two different groups. First
the proles in general, but that's just a blind for the real joke...which
is against morons like you who FALL FOR these "we're so hep and catty"
movements in the first place. The joke is AGAINST THE BOBBIES.
It's against the fools so desperate to have a clue that they
follow anyone who claims there's one hidden in a nearby source of
fluidity.
> >>) "Let he who is without sensitivity cast the first stone..."
> >>) - Elements, Sulphur 34:3
> >
> >
> >>)>but lauding him for POINTING OUT your weakness.
> >
> >>)Enough of this horseshit. Investing things, people and other nouns with
> important
> >>)is a means of gaining Slack for many SubGenii. Legume got Slack from fooling
> us
> >>)into thinking he was dead. The two don't have to be compatible. Most SubGenii
> >>)can't agree on what color the fucking sky is. But that doesn't make the one
> who
> >>)thinks it's purple any less a Yeti than the one who thinks it's yellow.
> >
> > If you both understood and subscribed to the concepts around
> >slack, you'd not be pissing and moaning about how your urinary track
> >burned when you did it...
>
> Please speak English. It makes it SO much easier to communicate.
A true grasp of the language allows one to manipulate it to one's
own ends. Not just to show what one means.
See, I was pointing out that you are contradicting the tenents to
which you rent, by having hysterics over being stung when you
misinterpret the entire concept.
> >>)I won't call Legume a Pink for playing a really lame joke if you don't call me
> a
> >>)Pink for thinking his joke was lame.
> >
> > Bobbies don't really qualify to call anyone Pink.
>
> Fuck you _again_, my man.
Brilliant rebuttal. Proved me wrong with your insightful
categoric refutation of my assertion.
> >>)I wasn't sympathising with the guy himself. Don't you fucking get it? Being a
> >>)true SubGenius and having Slack and being really "with it" doesn't mean "not
> >>)giving a shit"... it means "giving a shit freely"! [It's right on pg 68 of
> >>)TBotSG, for Blobbs' sake!] I was down about the event because the Church had
> (or
> >
> > If you can't take shit, you can't dish it up for anyone but yourself.
>
> Again, you're not making any fucking sense. I get to give a shit about whatever
> the fuck I want. If I decide that my true Yeti calling in life is to fuck you up
> the ass in all 50 states, than you, of all people, are the LEAST qualified to
> tell me how Pink I am for wanting to do it! End of fucking story! Bend over!!
You really can't see the difference between your own -defensive-
silliness, which you use to cover up your confusion and fear of your real
inanity, and the sarcasm with which people who have a clue are treating
you?
Words of the Sentient
The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of
nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by
no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no
conclusion. --Thomas Paine
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 19:01:56 GMT
From: kai@upx.net (Kai Cherry)
KAZ, you need to leave folks ALONE. As for driving up to NYC and
getting your/my teeth punched out...
Look, Clav, KAZ and Kai, we are 'bidnissmen'. To even respond to your
sniviling is NOT PROFITABLE to either of us before 6pm EST, but you're
so damned funny. I can SEE the vains bulging, feel the blood boiling.
Face, dood, you were, as KAZ went ON and ON about (he cannot post in
less than 100 lines on any topic...you should try being in meetings
with this guy. ) not in on the joke; you were the 'them' in "Fuck
THEM".
Wait! I know what it is! You called that 900 number DIDN'T ya'??
Heheh. Have a nice day, Sparky!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Nov 1995 15:13:02 GMT
From: kaz@upx.net (KAZ Vorpal)
Pee Kitty (pkitty@netcom.com) wrote:
>)KAZ Vorpal (kaz@upx.net) wrote:
>): That's the point. You're one of those typical little fakes who
>): uses fake silliness in a pathetic and transparent attempt to hide your
>): real foolishness. See, that is -not- what the mockery involved in slack
>): is about, only what the foolish bobbies do in immitation of it.
>)<snip>
>): You really can't see the difference between your own -defensive-
>): silliness, which you use to cover up your confusion and fear of your real
>): inanity, and the sarcasm with which people who have a clue are treating
>): you?
>)Ahh...so Clavis is being silly to hide his foolishness...and you're being
>)sarcastic because you're superior to him. Because he's a fake and a
>)bobbie and you're a TRUE, REAL subgenius. And the reason he's a fake and
>)pink and everything is because he didn't get the big joke about Legume
>)not really dying. And you're a TRUE, REAL subgenius because you got the
>)joke right away and didn't take it seriously and don't take this
>)seriously and don't take Tarla seriously and don't take me seriously and
>)don't take Clavis seriously (though you sure seem to assume that he's
>)being serious and not yanking your chain--but nahhhh, YOU couldn't be
>)fooled by that cuz you're a yeti and he's a bobbie and you rule, rite
>)man?) and don't take anything seriously and so you're wayyy better than
>)he is because you have a clue. Right?
No, my neo-illiterate friend...as I already noted several times,
I don't claim to be even slightly subgenius. I simply am pointing out how
distant -he- is from the real gist of the whole thing.
Personally, I don't need to cower behind bobbyism like him, or
even to wield the real thing. I simply find it somewhat entertaining.
And since having a clue comes naturally to me, I don't use my
having a clue to judge others...I simply use their cluelessness.
The "I'm totally slack, D00D! And Your Knot!!!" type of behavior
is hardly slack itself. But this doesn't preclude pointing out when
someone is behaving like a teen-angst trendie dweeb, and missing the
point entirely.
--
Words of the Sentient:
They call themselves democrats, but they yearn for dictatorship. They call
themselves revolutionaries, but they want to make the government omnipotent.
They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform
the world into a gigantic post office. Every man but one a subordinate clerk
in a bureau, what an alluring utopia! What a noble cause to fight for!
--Ludwig Von Mises, /Bureaucracy/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To All You Pathetic anti-Legume Whiners
From: gggor@io.com (gggor)
Date: 4 Nov 1995 23:53:55 GMT
Oh fer Dobbsake get a fewkin' life sub-gleemies.
Legume conned you all, myself included, BIG FUCKING DEAL.
I personally think it was a grand shot, although I agree
with Sphinx that he should have played dead a little longer. At least he
is out there stirring up shit with both hands while the majority of you
sit there and merely react. Now there's all this sputtering and whinig
because you all snapped at that hook the same as me. When I found out
Legume was really not dead I felt very happy. I didn't get all upset,
miffed and pissed off when I found out I had been conned by the beanish
one, I fuckin' well CHEERED. We all got conned (although there will
always be those who say that they had their 'suspicions') and, we should
be happy that were were ABLE to be conned. Remember this church
is for cynics and scoffers who are also believers. And a lot of us
believed L. was dead. He didn't hurt anyone, he didn't put any of you
out of pocket so quit your snivelling and bitching about what is right
and wrong. Remember what some old, stoned raghead said in the
12th century "Nothing is true! Everything is permitted!" Or
to to quote Crowley (who stole it from Rabelais) "Do what thou will
shall be the letter of the law!" Now fer "Bob"'s sake quite yer pissing
and moaning and get used to the idea. So many of you are such self-
involved little wankers it makes my skin crawl, no wondder Nenslo killed himself!!
Live it or live with it!
GG(Get a fuckin' life) Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Legume's Lesson (was Re: Legume's death was a hoax)
Date: 9 Nov 1995 08:30:01 GMT
From: i.stang@metronet.com (Rev. Ivan Stang)
Organization: The SubGenius Foundation, Inc.
Ahhhh....!! This is exactly what we HOPED would happen! YES! The FORMULA
is being REFINED! Perhaps soon it will be PERFECT! And then... then... THE
HARVEST!!!
Stang
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 21:38:19 -0800
From: imber@scf.usc.edu (Aprilfish)
Are you sure you aren't being trolled? I thought Tarla's speach about
crying in the shower over Legume's death was one Fine piece of work, and
it looks like someone new just showed up to take bait.
Or perhaps, she was serious?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 1995 05:35:02 GMT
From: jamie@dcd00745.slip.digex.net (Jamie Schrumpf)
In article <i.stang-0110950332090001@net142.metronet.com>, i.stang@metronet.com
says...
>Ahhhh....!! This is exactly what we HOPED would happen! YES! The FORMULA
>is being REFINED! Perhaps soon it will be PERFECT! And then... then... THE
>HARVEST!!!
Rev, if these people get SO UPSET when a Doktor pulls the wool over their eyes,
how can they EVER have the DOBBSIFYING INTESTINAL RIGIDITY to pull it over
their OWN eyes? Hey, if the Yeti-leaders wanna pretend to be dead, it's their
git-go, ain't it?
Go back and read The Book; I believe the operating principle is "FUCK 'EM IF
THEY CAN'T TAKE A JOKE!" What, they thought it didn't mean THEM!? It's only
the US Congress that doesn't abide by its own laws, folks.
Jeez.
(Stang, every time you go away, Edward G. Robinson makes that golden calf
again and forces the Weak SubGpretenders to worship it. And they DO!!!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Legume's Lesson (was Re: Legume's death was a hoax)
Date: 10 Nov 1995 20:15:09 GMT
From: saint@prairienet.org (Andrew Matthews)
>It's only
>the US Congress that doesn't abide by its own laws, folks.
What? There are rules in this Church? I thought we made up stuff as
we went along...
>Jeez.
Us.
>(Stang, every time you go away, Edward G. Robinson makes that golden calf
>again and forces the Weak SubGpretenders to worship it. And they DO!!!)
Of course... do you know the STREET VALUE of that calf?
"You can only serve one, says Christ. Then he gives us the choice:
God or money. I'll choose the one that doesn't want me to cut part
of my peter off when I'm born..."
- $T. &REUX, KSC
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Nov 1995 14:10:25 GMT
From: gggor@io.com (gggor)
Organization: greenhelle
In article <i.stang-0110950332090001@net142.metronet.com>, i.stang@metronet.com (Rev. Ivan Stang) says:
>Ahhhh....!! This is exactly what we HOPED would happen! YES! The FORMULA
>is being REFINED! Perhaps soon it will be PERFECT! And then... then... THE
>HARVEST!!!
>
And what makes you think you're gonna get any of those
pretty blue cylinders mister Showbiz? While you were out debauching
the name of Dobbs for you own crass, personal aggrandizement and lewd
public spectacle WE were tilling and mulcing and may I say FERTILIZING
this pasture and planting the seeds. Sure it's harvest time Stangky, but
your soul-rations have been cut, by order of the Nine Elder Bankers.
Your fault, you were the one who took a trailerload of prairie squid on the road
and wouldn't even share the damned things. And what about that simply disgusting
even that took place on the second night of your "performance"?
We have spies everywhere, and digitally enhanced
topographic scans of your scrotum contents, don't get greedy bub!
GGG& Associates (Global)
"Only for the moment are we saying nothing."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Original file name: Legume's Lesson
This file was converted with TextToHTML - (c) Logic n.v.