“Vengeful spirits will hack the sky to pieces with their machetes, the forest behind the sky will fall upon us. So swift will be the end that we will not have time to scream. The spirits, untethered from the earth, will smash the sun, moon, and stars. And there shall be nothing but darkness..”
The natural cycles continue on their course, the continuous movement of life and death…in that form we make our return, like the sprouting shoots of spring made strong by the cruelty of winter. “All has its moment. There are moments to speak and moments to keep silent. Moments of stillness and moments to act. Patience was and will be the greatest attribute of the savages.”
We recommended ourselves to the sky, the moon, the stars, and abandoned a package-bomb at the entrance of the Physics and Astronomy Space in the University City, addressed to Dr. Gloria Dubner, director of the establishment, who was awarded recently for her progressive efforts in support of the techno-industrial system. It seems that the person in charge of the place perceived that something was amiss and decided to call the police. We remark here that this won’t stop us. On the contrary, it compels us to do more. The next time we won’t fail. The package was aimed to wound physically and emotionally all of the techno-geeks who were nearby; not only Gloria herself but any student or simple worker. We don’t make distinctions in this war that we wage against our own species. We chose this establishment in particular because of the disgust it causes us seeing the human insisting on controlling everything. We see the sciences (specifically space sciences) as the clear expression of that sick wish to reduce all phenomena to simple numbers and calculations, domesticating all that is wild, to place at the forefront the ideologies and infrastructures that cement today’s hyper-technological world. In this view it is common to think about inhabiting other planets and traveling through space, daydreaming about ways to make life “easier” and more “comfortable”. All the while they ignore what’s below our feet, in our environment, and principally inside ourselve.
We know that we are not going to stop techno-industrial progress with attacks such as these, but at least the great minds of our time will have to walk around more cautiously. We lurk about their houses and work places. With the return of ITS activity in this region, death will prowl about the universities and bars, parks and malls, and in any place where the human masses move about. We have the determination to carry out this war until the last consequences. Being an international terrorist group responsible for six murders, many wounds, and property destruction, they will know that the threats are very real… Speaking with actions more than with empty words, the chaotic dance of the wild constellations continues on its course.
The study and practical application of techniques in the field of genetics for police purposes has been developing for some time now. Given the importance that the police investigation bodies give to this field, since it makes their work much easier, it is inevitable that the progress of the technology focused on this field will develop quickly and be cheaper, this makes it increasingly a technique more used even for “minor” crimes.
Obviously not everywhere police investigations are done in the same way, and it is clear that depends on the characteristics of the crime to investigate (number of victims, media impact / political … etc.) Will devote more funds and effort, anyway it is advisable to never trust oneself and always act with the utmost caution.
The extremist individualists will never enjoy acceptance, always being a minority, we can not afford unnecessary risks or become martyrs.
We consider it extremely useful, and virtually obligatory, for any individualist at war to learn from the methods the enemy uses to trap us (or kill us) that information in our favor.
For this reason, part of the information presented here has been taken from police sources such as the interpol DNA research report (the PDF is uploaded to the internet in English) and we also recommend the “Exclusion: no coincidence” fanzine only in Spanish) edited recently by anarchists and with very interesting information on the investigation of DNA traces. Without any moral or ethical problem, we take the information valid for our purposes and recommend its reading for more detailed information of the subject, since this text only contains very basic information.
We will not focus on technical-scientific details, we will go directly to what is useful for the extremist.
DNA is used for the identification of people, DNA is found in virtually anything that comes out of our body, blood, sweat, saliva, tears, feces, hairs, remains or skin cells … although we need a specific amount to do a successful identification, the percentage of DNA required is becoming smaller due to the great advances in the field of genetic research. It can be said with certainty that everything we touch, the clothes we wear etc., is impregnated with traces with our DNA, the thing is to minimize them to the maximum to avoid or make difficult the investigations.
But how can we avoid or counteract DNA traces? there are a few tips.
The first thing is not to touch ANYTHING that will be used in a crime, not only with our hands, but with no part of the body. Try to acquire the materials or tools that we need in the most possible safe way (for example that they are packaged), in the same way, do not store these materials, tools, weapons or whatever house, in our closet, under the bed or in any other place that frequent you, your accomplices or people related to you (especially relatives, since they contain many similarities with your DNA) since these places are FULL of traces of your DNA like hair or cells that are released from the skin … etc ., and which can easily adhere to the materials. The DNA of animals or pets can also be identified.
The ideal is to store sensitive material in a place other than your home (this for multiple reasons not only DNA) with several plastic bags (new, not previously used) as a cover to avoid contamination of DNA, dust, soil or other traces that can be identified.
The same thing happens with the construction of artifacts, cleaning weapons etc., must be done on aseptic surfaces, we can use for example plastics or large bags to cover the entire surface on which we are going to work, so it will be necessary to cover our body COMPLETELY, including eyes as they can detach eyelashes, eyebrow hair, tears …, the ideal is to wear a work overalls. Obviously all the material must be brand new, both what we use to isolate the environment as the clothes we wear, the tools we use … and yes, the tools also leave specific traces. We can also work in the middle of the forest, if we do not need electricity and we have no other place to do it, we still have to take precautions both with the environment and with us.
In the event of touching something accidentally, the fingerprints can be removed by rubbing vigorously with a cloth soaked in degreasing liquid (alcohol or acetone go well), some materials like the metal require that the cleaning be with metal scouring so that the surface is ” deformed “or modify as the tracks will not go away with a simple cleaning with rag.
Do not leave anything in the crime scene or in its surroundings, clothes, tools, weapons, caps or anything. The blood stains do not go away, even if they do not “see” the trail is still in the clothes, just as if there was a fight or a hand-to-hand fight with someone, their traces remain in us and our clothes. Shooting or manipulating black powder (for example in the construction of an explosive device) also leaves traces impossible to eliminate and we assume that the same thing happens with other chemical substances, therefore it is better to use one-time clothes in each action (depending on what Let’s do it, of course). Get rid of everything safely, better destroy it and burn it if possible, and away from where the action has happened.
Finally, it is said that cleaning with liquid antiseptics (such as those in hospitals) contaminates or destroys DNA traces, we do not know to what extent this is safe, although it is not too bad to give one last cleaning with this substance …
All this may seem very daunting to perform, but in extremist action it is better to take time, patience and good preparation to hit more and better.
For years now, most of the big cities have been plagued by video-surveillance cameras, now not just those of traffic or those that install by “public safety”, as well as public buildings, ministries, train stations … that thanks to the rise of cheap technology, any imbecile can install his own closed circuit video surveillance. In this way we find cameras in private homes, shops, garages and even there are those who place cameras in their vehicles.Some are false, we know that, others are high definition and others record with a painful quality but we must treat all as if they were real, every camera represents danger.
Apart from this, there is still another type, cameras for mobile phones, any idiot today, even children have a smartphone, which not only enables you to call the police, but also to record or take photos.
How does this contrast? Here are some suggestions:
Look for paths without cameras, look every corner well, every trade … the cameras can be placed anywhere, sometimes they are hidden …
Prepare several alternative routes always, look for hidden place where to change of appearance and clothes, to make sure that there is nobody observing from some window …
If it is impossible to make a route without cameras, if they are only one or few and are within reach, they can be deactivated or destroyed without attracting attention (for example by cutting the cables or blinding them with a paint spray) but not the same moment of the action because this may attract unwanted attention, it can be done several days before the action and check if they have been repaired before performing the mischief.
If there is no other choice but to be recorded, wear clothing that is broad enough to deface the body’s characteristics, body shape, height, gender … get the clothes for better second-hand action, street markets, or stolen. In general, you should not pay anything that you are going to use in any illegal action with credit card or to keep receipts, to buy clothes and materials with sufficient time in advance and far from your place of residence and from where the action is going to happen.
Walking late at night one or more people dressed in black and with balaclava catches the attention of anyone who crosses through. For some actions in urban areas it is preferable to wear “normal” clothing, which is not flashy, or even dress in “fashionably”. And instead of ski masks, a cap, glasses and scarf or, better yet, wigs, false beards and artistic latex. Obviously the disguise must seem realistic and credible, otherwise better not to use it.
Double life, psychology and mental state.
To live a double life can sometimes be difficult to cope with, especially in the beginning, not only because one has to be extremely meticulous to maintain the “facade”, but also because it can often cause a mental conflict with oneself. To live a double life requires a willpower of steel, patience, sacrifice and a lot of cold blood.
When an individualist decides to move from words / thoughts to facts, today, given the characteristics of this type of war and the factors that surround it, practically it becomes impossible to have durability and “success” without carrying some type of double life that conceals our intentions and acts in the eyes of the rest of the world. It is necessary to have clear things in the mind before engaging in a life immersed in the chaos of war without permanent barracks, since the consequences that they carry if certain rules are not fulfilled can be irreversible. This is not a joke, death and imprisonment are very real and the risk accompanies us daily.
Before starting a criminal / terrorist activity it is necessary to change many things to have a minimum security guarantees, or rather, to live a double life you may have to change your whole being: Starting with your appearance and “look”, your personality and even your way of socializing, your circle of friends and acquaintances, where you move and what places you frequent … you have to soak in knowledge about different ways to go unnoticed in both real life and the internet, a thousand and one things that we change the life completely and for which it is necessary to be mentally prepared, and to take into account that this change could not happen from one day to another, because this also calls the attention. You have to be aware that many things have to be given up and you have to be prepared to take certain sacrifices with integrity. For example if we have “problematic” friendships or frequent places that attract the attention of the authorities … are luxuries that we can not afford and we must renounce them, even if these friendships are for years or if we share the same blood … and give up ourselves, to our past life … is something that is not easy. One of the characteristics of double life includes lying and acting falsely to hide in the society we hate, not infrequently we must bite our tongue and pretend to smile, in front of strangers but also of acquaintances and relatives. Enduring all day absurd conversations and pretending interest in the same nonsense idiocy as the rest of the sheep around you … you have to have a great capacity for self-control not to betray yourself and fit like a hyper-civilized being more, like one more of the herd. To build a parallel personality on which to conceal our true Self, and in a way to “transform” itself into everything we hate, is by no means an easy task.
The human being is a social animal, the fact that extremist individualists (of whatever type) are and always will be a minority living in the shadows, makes it difficult for many to find accomplices or affinities that share our points of view and sometimes this can lead us to feel alone and therefore try to look for affinities in our close circles or the internet. This is a fatal error.
Starting conversations of “sensitive” issues with acquaintances or family members may make them start to suspect, moreover, the fact that they can share some point of view with you does not imply real complicity.
Keep in mind that for the immense majority of people around us, we are the enemy, if they knew what we were plotting or, worse, they would know or just imagine our criminal / terrorist activities, they would be scared and would betray us to the authorities, and it does not matter if they are friends or relatives, there are issues and conversations that are much better not to mention and obviously NOBODY outside our group of accomplices (if there is such a group) should be aware of our activities under no circumstances.
For the rest of the world we must be ordinary people, people who do not dirty their hands and who respect law and order. The last one who they would think when pointing the finger as the author of an illegal act.
This is some particular issue within this project that continues to grow thanks to the hard work and dedication of committed and determined individualists. We collect some of the reflections that illuminate the more “spiritual” side of the Tendency, along with others that talk about Wild Nature, our bond with her among other things.
We included the texts named “Halputta” by Bowlegs, “The fierce manifestation of Wild Nature” taken from Nomen Nescio, “It is time to kiss the land again” taken from the blog “Desde el instinto” and the “Short reflections of a winter walk” by Shaughnessy. As well as four texts by Abe Cabrera together with another article translated from the last issue of Revista Regresión named “The seris, the eco-extremists and the nahualism”.
Most everyone has heard of solipsism, even if he or she doesn’t know what the word means. Anyone who has watched the Matrix movies has been introduced to the concept. The basic idea is that we all live in our heads and only in our heads, and we don’t have any way of knowing if the world we sense is “truly real”.
Our senses report data to our brains, but we don’t really know if what our brains perceive is a reality that is objectively true. This is not just because our senses and our brains are imperfect, which they are. It is because we have no way of knowing what is real in an absolute sense because we have no absolute reference point by which to judge. There is always the possibility that our reality is some sort of dream or hallucination that is being imposed on us by someone or something that lives in a reality that is “actually real” (or at least more so than ours).
A consideration of the implications of solipsism tells us that we can never “know” anything with absolute certainty. There is always some possibility that we are wrong, even if that possibility is very, very remote. The question that faces us then, as we go about our lives trying to make important decisions, is choosing the degree of certainty that we are comfortable with when deciding that we “know” something.
The religious continually use solipsistic reasoning to try to corner atheists into thinking we are actually agnostic. Their goal is to pressure most atheists into admitting doubt and thus make religious beliefs seem respectable. They also wish to paint atheists into the “strong atheism” corner–to get them to take the seemingly unreasonable and affirmative position that they are 100% certain that there is no god. Consequently, they present the “doubt” brought on by a consideration of solipsism and complete, affirmative certainty as the only two options. Either admit you are agnostic or you are a “strong atheist” claiming certainty that god doesn’t exist.
They do this by confusing the question of the universe’s origins with the question of god’s existence. These are obviously two different questions to any objective, logical thinker. To the religious, however, they are the same question because in their minds they have already accepted the idea that god is the only possible explanation. They accept it so thoroughly that they are not even aware that they are confusing the two questions and that doing so shows they are engaging in circular reasoning.
The reason the religious try to make non-believers choose between “agnostic” or a “strong atheist” is to make it easier for believers to argue that they do not bear the burden of proof. They are desperate to get out from under this burden because they know they cannot bear it in any way. If a non-believer makes the mistake of choosing one of these two options in this false dichotomy, then he or she has implicitly taken on the burden of proof.
Any argument based on solipsism or an attempt to get you to say you are agnostic–such as by calling atheism a religion–has this goal in mind. But, the argument fails for many of the same reasons that the argument from existence fails. The lack of evidence for an extraordinary proposition that cannot be disproved meets whatever burden of proof we have. All atheists should make this point whenever the burden of proof comes up as an issue in a debate:
“The complete lack of evidence for such an extraordinary proposition meets whatever burden of proof we atheists have.“
Clarifications can be added either before or after that statement:
“The existence of god cannot be disproved–ever.”
“The god hypothesis is essentially a belief in magic. Such an extraordinary proposition needs to be proved by those who believe in it.”
One of the good things about solipsism/agnosticism based arguments is that you can turn their reasoning on them because it applies with equal validity to every proposition imaginable.
For example: If god does exist in some fashion, then even he cannot know for absolute certainty that he exists and is not merely a hallucination or magically constructed phantasm made by another, greater magical being. The rather obvious reason for this is that there is no objectively verifiable standard for “absolute certainty”.
If one of them tries this argument with you, you can say:
“But, using your reasoning, even god himself, if he existed, would be agnostic as to his own existence. Because there is an extremely remote possibility that he is merely the imaginary construct of some other being in some plane of existence that is more “real” than his own.”
The religious would define agnosticism with reference to the most ridiculous reaches of solipsism, which stretches the concept to and beyond its breaking point. Under that definition, I would have to say that I am agnostic as to the question of whether I am really sitting in my office chair typing on my computer keyboard because there is a chance, however slim, that I might be just imagining it.
Such an all-encompassing definition renders the term “agnosticism” meaningless–except to the extent that you can use it as armor to fend off the horrible social pressures exerted on us non-believers by the theists. If you can’t bring yourself to accept the ultimate intellectual violation and simply join the deluded, then, rather than face their wrath, you can use the “agnostic” label as a subterfuge that allows you to allow them to save face.
At the end of Orwell’s “1984” the protagonist had his ability to think independently so thoroughly destroyed that he couldn’t even bring himself to admit that he knew 2 plus 2 equals 4. Well, this sort of agnosticism is similar to that scenario. We all know that 2 plus 2 equals 4, but there is an infinitesimal chance that we are wrong. After all, how do we know that we really exist? How do we know that the universe we live in is real and that we have observed its rules correctly? Where is the ultimate mathematical yardstick by which we can judge the correctness of our calculations? How can we ever know that we have achieved a true observation? If knowing requires some absolute, objective standard be found and met, then we can never “know” anything.
Solipsism is a “trick” of philosophy. It is a tool used to teach the importance of epistemology, ontology, open-mindedness regarding new evidence, and skepticism. It’s implications, when taken seriously as the religious would have us do, however, are not worthy of consideration. It can be very quickly reduced to the absurd.
What I am getting at is that the true lesson of solipsism is that there is no such “absolute” standard and that we don’t need to find it and meet it in order to say that we know something. Those who say we can never know anything, have taken the absurd negative example of solipsism seriously and thus mistaken the Socratic question for the lesson they were meant to learn from the futility of trying to answer it.
Some things are simply beyond proof. The nonexistence of all gods is one of those things because the god concept is far too malleable (as is any concept with “magic” at its core) to be disproved empirically. Thus, the “proof” can only consist of 1. a lack of evidence for the positive, opposite hypothesis; 2. the mountains of evidence showing that gods are man-made constructs (the clear history of fakes, the sheer impossibility of the claimed entity); and 3. the fact that logic leads inexorably from these observations to the conclusion that gods don’t exist.
When there is no evidence at all for a thing, then it almost certainly doesn’t exist (with the exception of probable variations of similar things that have been proven to exist–i.e., previously unknown types of flora or fauna that are within normal parameters of form and function). There is no evidence for any god nor for any magical entity of any sort. The claimed attributes are extremely improbable–so much so that one should require not just evidence but more evidence than normal for such claims. Everyone knows that the improbable magical creatures in the Harry Potter books don’t exist, even though disproving their existence would be almost as hard as disproving the existence of gods. It is only when the question of gods comes up that people suddenly lose their ability or their will to think logically.
As I have pointed out before, the lack of evidence for gods meets whatever burden of proof required to conclude they don’t exist. Reserving judgment, calling yourself agnostic implies that you think you have the burden of proving conclusively that gods don’t exist, even though it is literally not possible to do that. I think that is exactly why the religious try so hard to get atheists to say they are agnostic–so they can get us to implicitly accept that we have the burden of proof.
If you click on this link, it will take you to a very good defenses of agnosticism. The author does a very good job of defending and explaining his position, but I can’t help but see that he has fallen into the trap of the theists.
The author doesn’t distinguish between the question of the origins of the universe and the issue of whether the god hypothesis has merit. Whenever this happens, whether you are speaking to a believer or an agnostic, you can say:
“We don’t know how the universe came to be, but being agnostic on the question of the universe’s origins doesn’t mean you have to be agnostic on the question of whether “an invisible magic man in the sky did it” is a reasonable theory.”
The author also implicitly accepts that he has the burden of proof with regard to the god hypothesis and must meet it before declaring himself an atheist. And, most telling, he ends by saying that he calls himself agnostic because that is what makes him most comfortable–even though he is about a certain as anyone that there is no god. Obviously, this lack of comfort level helps explain why he embraces that label and fails to see the problems with his reasoning.
I am repeating myself here, so I will simply rephrase my primary points on this subject:
1. The point of solipsism isn’t that we can’t know anything but that knowing something requires less than an absolute certainty that we can’t define in any event.
2. Atheism is not a claim to absolute knowledge. One can reach a conclusion without closing one’s mind. (Though in some cases, such as creationism, one might well conclude that re-examining the subject repeatedly is worse than a waste of time).
3. A lack of empirical evidence for a thing is evidence (though not conclusive proof) that the thing doesn’t exist.
4. If the thing is also highly improbable and not subject to disproof, that lack of evidence is all one will ever have and is sufficient to reach a conclusion.
I can more than understand why one would call oneself an agnostic when dealing with religious people. I have done it myself on numerous occasions. But non-believers should resort to this sort of tactic only when necessary for their self-protection. Otherwise, the implication is that atheists have the burden of proof, which is simply not true.
Notwithstanding the above remarks, it appears that Stirner presented his account of the ages of man in earnest, for he next proceeds to describe human history analogously. The ancients, like children, were realists. Modern Christians are idealists, like youth, while men of the future will be egoists, like adults.
For the ancients, the world of nature and blood kinship was the highest value, and they accepted it as unquestioningly as a Christian accepts the mystery of the divine word. This observation was already made by Feuerbach, but Stirner adds that the ancients also tried to subvert or get behind supposed natural truths.
In particular, he praises the Sophists, who used the mind as a weapon against the world. The Sophists lived by their wits to attain the most pleasant life, rather than accepting natural or customary norms. They used the mind as an instrument for getting behind traditional ethics, yet without elevating the mind to the status of a new master or conscience. They cultivated the understanding, but not the heart, which was still free to pursue its most voracious appetites unhindered. Thus, for all their superior understanding, the Sophists remained enslaved to the world through their sensual desires.
Socrates perceived that the heart as well as the mind must be purified. It is not enough to have understanding, but that understanding must also be directed to a worthy cause. Stirner considers this purification of heart to be a further liberation of the mind, freeing it from worldly desires. What is this purification? According to Stirner, just as the Sophist mind had elevated its own interests over the interests of others (i.e., what is “natural” or customary), so does the Socratic heart disdain all worldly things, so that even family and country are given up for the sake of the heart’s own blessedness.
“Daily experience confirms the truth that the understanding may have renounced a thing many years before the heart has ceased to beat for it.” [p.21.] While the Sophists had made themselves masters over “the dominant, ancient powers” in their understanding, it remained to drive these powers out of the heart. Socrates began this war, which would last until the end of the classical age.
The final purgation of the heart was achieved by the Skeptics, who “threw all contents out of the heart and let it no longer beat for anything.” [p.22.] This purgation, stripping man of all bonds to the world even in his desires, effectively detaches man from the corporeal world. He now sees himself as spirit, i.e., as pure thought, a development that would facilitate the reception of Christianity. Continue reading →
Following the latest criticisms and responses that the anarchic nuns have spit out to people to defend their anarchist “comrades” who live in Chile along with us, we want to express some irrefutable points to situate the debate a bit.
We would like to speak of an “insurrectionary anarchist affinity group of tension,” or whatever they call themselves, that made amoral indiscriminate attack their own. FINALLY THEY ENTERED INTO OUR MADNESS! Or rather, they did so some time ago, and now they want to resurface.
It was 2014 and their target was what seemed to be the office of Chilean prison officials (conveniently without anyone present). That’s what they thought, since it was not clear what they thought they were burning. What is known is that they left a backpack with an explosive device in the street. They didn’t set up the famous anarchist guard of morality that makes sure innocents aren’t hurt.
And they shit the bed on this one by their standards since they became the first indiscriminate anarchists. A young drug addict named Sergio Landskron picked up the backpack and died due to the explosion. Finding this out probably made the anarchists fall off their bike, vomit up their vegan burgers, and start praying to St. Bonnano or Sister Bakunin asking for forgiveness for their sins.
Under the moral parameters of these crybabies, ITS was already in Chile in 2014. This couldn’t possibly have been anarchists. “It’s a set-up!” they should have cried.
But we know this isn’t the case, since the Mafia isn’t anti-prison, and at most eco-anarchist groups were already conspiring who share our hatred. But they don’t focus on prisons, as is well known. Landskron’s murderers never took responsibility for the attack, so much was their shame at violating their standards of the moral of attack.
This indiscriminate attack – let’s call it what it is – was a great SIN of the action group in question. Gallons of ink and saliva of anarchist morality burned that marginal youngster, who we recognize as one of the worst results of this rotten civilization, and, we could even call him a “victim”.
The anarchists kept quiet! They didn’t utter a peep about his death, there was no communique asking for forgiveness or explaining why they didn’t hit they intended target, as was the case with the prisoners of war Juan, Nataly, and Guillermo, to justify why they indiscriminately attacked a bus station.
Even less likely was the existence of a communiqué saying, “yes, we did it, it was an accident.” They hid their snouts out of fear of the cops. They were afraid to end up like savages without anarchist morality. Look at them killing the last victim of the system!
So now that it is all the style to threaten an anarchist war against the Eco-extremist Mafia, snitching included, we gave some clues about these nuns to the friends and family (some of them criminals) of Sergio Landskron, so that they’ll know who to shoot and stab to get even. They’re looking in freed squats around site of the indiscriminate attack and they’ll know who took their son-uncle-brother from them. They’re squats full of shitheads who have gotten out of the explosives game because of this anarcho-Christian sin, but we know that they have this hidden sin on their chest and it won’t be forgotten anytime soon.
Do the moralists consider this snitching too? It’s all the same to us, it’s not for nothing that we are egoists, criminals, and amoral. But let it be known, what we have just stated is just one demonstration that we know quite well those behind certain things, we know where the campaign in Chile against eco-extremism comes from. We thus state that if they continue with this pathetic campaign they shouldn’t be surprised when we respond.
In their anarcho-civilized morality, killing that Landskron kid was a sin so great that the Chilean anarchist movement kept quiet out of shame. They shouldn’t criticize the Tendency with their moral standards, since we aren’t up for being judged by their crooked scales. More than that, people will see that the emperor has no clothes.
With success or failure, sometimes it is difficult to know for sure. But who cares? The experimentation on indiscriminate attack continues because I crave it. Consult your ideologies to figure out why, or even better… ask your conscience.
Nothingness conforms to my senses as my senses conform to Nothing. Sleepless projection manifests in the Descent. I am having sexual intercourse with Chaos. I penetrate it and it penetrates me. How powerful it is to experiment on the destruction of the human notion and the interment of idealism! How petty they all are in the face of nihilistic pure experience and the Negation of the value of value! I rejoice in the Moment and I don’t hold myself back. I hate humans pungently!
My will bursts out of overflowing of Hate and it wants to become the axe with which I will penetrate the imbecility of human societies. Egomania arises and becomes the fuel channeling my black blood towards carrying out the strike of the Nihilist Misanthrope, Defiler of the notion of social training and Violator of the holy spirit of progress.
In the brothel of human existence I laugh nihilistically and I offer my hatred freely. I deny the sickness of freedom in any ethical context. My freedom might be to commit atrocities. Who is going to tell me what is freedom? Who knows what this dictator of the mind is?
Against every sanctimonial self-renunciation, Nihil arise! May the Abyss become the amputation of human existence. Terror align with my power to retaliate on this septic world. Blood flow through my veins, with every attack give me a new birth, the birth of the neverending End.
Complicity with Nihilist Terrorist sects, Criminalistic Nihilists, Antisocial Misanthropes, GITS and with ITS!
To spread the plague of the misanthropic tendencies of Nihilism and Eco-extremism!