From: locklin@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Lupo the Butcher)
Subject: Re: Lupo's last victim
Organization: Campus Crusade for Cthulhu
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 23:07:40 GMT
X-Posted-From: titan.ucc.umass.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

(reply)
>
>>> >> You haven't banished anyone, Scott.  You simply refused to listen and I stopped
>>> >> wasting my time on you.
>>> >You are effectively banished. If you insist on posting, I'll insist on posting
>>> >my last public response to you untill you can come up with an effective answer.
>>> >Noone with a brain will be convinced untill you answer the questions logically.
>>> >Me refusing to listen? I listen, you are simply to mentally impotent to respond
>>> >to criticism & as far as not wasting my time with me, what do you call this letter?
>>> 
>>> I gave you a logical answer for your posting.  You proceeded to bring up
>>> something that was so "left-wing", it didn't need to be answered.  I'm not
>>
>>As a card carrying member of the libertarian party I say; Fuck you! Your Idea
>>of right-wing is Pat Buchanan & other such hate mongers. Read someone with a
>>brain like Bill Buckley Jr. 
>
>I could care less.

Because you have no brain. The appeal of Bill Buckley's work is purely 
intellectual where Buchannan appeals to the reptilian parts of the brain.

>>There is absolutely nothing political in my post. Just cold hard facts. If you
>>cannot answer them, don't. Just don't whine about my political affiliations.
>
>Good, I won't.

Won't answer eh? You were certainly whining in the previous letter about me
being "so left wing"

>>> going to argue a point like that, not because I can't back myself up, but
>>> because you will never hear.
>>
>>Because I will never "believe" is the proper term. 
>
>Sorry to hear that.
>
>>If you have some empirical
>>evidence, lets have it. All you do is toe the traditional line, without even 
>>knowing its sources. Intellectual cowardice.
>
>I know the sources, you just continue to falsly say that I'm wrong.

If you know the sources, why do you not post a rebuttal? Intellectual 
cowardice.

>>> >> Too bad "this evidence" is only what YOU want to hear.
>>> >
>>> >No feeble minded one. 
>>> 
>>> Thank you.  That is a compliment compared to your gnostic views.
>>
>>*chuckle* I have no "gnostic views" these are what are, me bucko
>
>"Are what are me" --- fantastic grasp of the English language you have.
>
>>> >I speak only in facts, you speak in what you want to hear.
>>> 
>>> No, Scott.  You speak with logic until it mo longer serves your purpose.  Then
>>> you rely on the emotional responses of your Lupo facade.
>>
>>Bullshit! Find the "emotional response" in my posts. Better yet, find the logic
>>in yours! I'll even give you the opportunity to respond via E-Mail. You won't 
>>accept because you have no facts to base your beliefs on.
>
>Whatever you want to believe is fine.  Sorry that you are wrong.

LETS GET ONE THING STRAIGHT MARSHALL! I HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED THIS; I DO NOT
BELIEVE IN ANYTHING!!!!!!!!

>>> >This is a classic case of projection. Re-read your last post & my response, you
>>> >will find more psychological wisdom there than an entire years worth of seeing
>>> >a shrink
>>> 
>>> Thank you again for trusting in theories.
>>
>>Better to trust in a theory than a pathetic book! At least theory gets things 
>>accomplished & if it doesn't work _I_ can always discard it for one that does.
>>If you can provide empirical proof of your theories that is superior to mine,
>>do so. Stop whining that I am not your sheep.
>
>It would be a good thing to call you brother, but you constantly turn away.

What this has to do with the above is beyond me. It would be a good thing for
you to respond to my post with some references and logic.

>>> >> > I have freinds who have gotten the same peace of mind you report
>>> >> >from the use of various meditational techniques, drugs and religious cults.
>>> >> 
>>> >> How sad.
>>> >
>>> >No, not sad. Effective. Fuckwads like you who say their path is the only one
>>> >are the ones who are sad. 
>>> 
>>> So damaging the brain with harmful drugs is the way to solve problems,
>>> according to you?
>>>  
>>Name a drug that damages the brain other than alcohol (which ol J.C. was fond 
>>of if I remember correctly). I'd REALLY like to hear this one from such a 
>>closed minded bigot as yourself. See how much you have bought into the pat
>>Buchannan view of reality.
>
>You live for the moment; that moment will die.

Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die. I notice that you have chosen
not to display your ignorance on pharmacology as well as biblical lore.

>>> >Get any sex lately Marshall? Sad you will probobly
>>> >never get to truely enjoy this aspect of life, due to your varied hangups.
>>> 
>>> This proves that you sipmly speak only out of emotion and not out of logic.
>>
>>No actually it was a logical response parodying your emotional resonse. Idiot.
>
>I sorry that you feel you need to boost your own ego by calling people names.

My ego is fine thanx. Sorry that you are such an idiot that I have to point it
out several times in a letter to you.

>>> >Babble all you want about sex in marriage; christian women are uniformly
>>> >frigid. One good orgasm would probobly kill you.
>>> 
>>> Semhaza was correct when she said you were only out to feed your dick.
>>
>>I haven't gotten laid in 2 months. If all I wanted was sex, I would be a 
>>liberal arts major.
>
>Why speak of such thing so much then?

Because I enjoy tormenting you, Marshall. I know it is a subject of great 
sensitivity to most fundies, which is generally why you have so many hang ups
about sexuality. Sexual frustration and christianity have a long history 
of association. Besides; I may be a flaming homosexual for all you know. This
is yet another example of your presumptuous bigotry.

>>> >> I'll be forever watching.
>>> >> 
>>> >And I'll be forever waiting for your rebuttal on your last alt.satanism post, 
>>> >weakling.
>>> 
>>> Unless you bring up some more solid answers to my postings, you will be forever
>>> waiting.
>>
>>Shithead, how much more solid than hisrtorical evidence and biblical quotes 
>>can you get? If you can't answer admit so. Look in some books. Read your bible.
>>Think you fool!!!
>
>I do all these things.  Your examples are extreme with holes in your reasoning.

All I ask is that you find these extreme holes in my reasoning & point them out
in a rebuttal. Should be simple enough; you have stated that they are there &
presumably you know what they are.

>>Now, your pat answer to this will be that it is emotional ranting. To a certain
>>extent this is true. Idiocy pisses me off more than anything else, which is why
>
>Why do you partake in it?
>
>>I hate religious right bigots like yourself, as would J.C., who wouldn't 
>>conform to the Zealot's (religious right of the age) expectations. Now, if you
>
>You do not know Christ or His ways.

Neither do you. You do not know The Bible, and it is the only record  of this 
fellow's life you seem to accept. As far as knowing him personally, untill
proof to the contrary he is long dead.

>>can answer my questions with some kind of rational discourse, go for it. I 
>>answered yours which are certainly below my contempt. The excuse than they are
>>offensive to you doesn't cut the baloney. You are as offensive a human as I 
>>have yet encountered on usenet, yet I spent several hours in the library
>>looking up information for YOU. 
>
>Thank you for what you do look up, but if you spend that much time just trying
>to prove me wrong, then you have some major priority problems.  For one, you

No I did it for alt.satanism readers entertainment and edification. You are not
that important, but what you stand for; bigotry and hate, must be answered.

>could have spent all that time seeking God to see if I was actually correct. 

I looked for some evidence. I found none. You would not provide any.

>Also, you could have looked for the truth that is in the Bible, rather than
>aimlessly trying to prove it wrong.  If your aim is just to prove me wrong for
>your own spattered self-esteem, then you're missing out.  Missing out on the

So, now I have to look for the truth in it? All I did was take some examples
directly from it; if these are bad examples you should elucidate in a rebuttal.

>friendship we could have, missing out on all the treasures God has for you,
>missing out on the campassion that people should have for one another...

You missed out on all the pleasures life has to offer. Satanism offers no
freindship to the psychic vampire. Like the compassion in the old testament?

>You missed out so much that you finally went blind.

You missed out on your best opportunity to actually convert someone from 
alt.satanism. If you could point out any logical fallicy on my part, or, better
yet, proove me completely wrong using logic rather than your boneheaded acts
of faith you would have you would have at least won the respect of this 
newsgroup, and opened the possibility for debate. You have failed in this.
Do you have any idea how many people sent me mail on this? There were people
I've never heard from before who were paying attention to YOU Marshall; you
have failed them by not responding. Their souls are lost forever.

>>What it all boils down to is that you are incapable of answering a post that
>>deals with what is basically history. The reason for this is that you are 
>>afraid to actually confront what I have put forth for fear of finding out that
>>it happens to be the facts. So be it.
>
>I am not afraid to confront you or what you have put forth.  I must also
>measure in how much good it would do.  In your case, currently, it would do no
>good, for you are unteachable and full of comtempt.

What about all the others? It was not a private debate. I have contempt for 
your ignorance. You are afraid to confront the truth in yourself; you are
living a lie.

>
>
>>-Lupo (Scott to my freinds)
>
>It would be nice to call you Scott.
>
>
>Take care and look to the Lamb of God.
>Evan

I'd bugger it if I could find it.

-Pazuzu (at the abyss)



Newsgroups: alt.satanism