Metal Reviews

You're welcome to comment on:


Click here to read the article.

I bet he'll love that, being councilled by churchgoers. Ooo yeah.

Ha ha. That would be so entertaining to watch. I hope they try it with Varg next.

that makes sense

plus they are plenty other ways to assault the church without commiting any crime... I gave away condoms when the young Christians came to gather in Paris for their big feast a few years ago... that was way more meaningful than burning a church which is just plain stupid ! :?

PS : whoever contacted me on MSN to know my views knows it now, so please stop !

You got him too?

What a sad little boy.

Hmm...I guess I'll concede to being a little late for the other topic. Interesting read, though. Although mindless interludes of insults and incompetence dragged down its value.

Admittedly Novak lacked understanding of the art of character assassination, however the intent behind his actions is respectable. His grasp of the role of Christianity in mass enslavement is well-developed, though he failed to foresee the impact of his actions.

Nevertheless, I see the attention paid to his credibility as irrelevant - if one can play the Christian society with a false or misleading apology, and earns a tactical advantage ie 13 less years of jail because of it, then mere credibility should mean very little.
It must be obvious to those who saw the intention behind the arson that the apology is false, and Novak has earnt 13 extra years inwhich to act - far more important than individual credibility, is time inwhich to act; and I'm sure time in an adult prison would provide little of value.

Most likely he would've learnt a lesson - the fallacy of burning down a church - whilst it is a good symbol ofwhich anyone who sees his reasoning would respect, it's flawed by the solid church counter-play of sympathy. If Novaks's next move will be more informed - assuming he isn't touched by Christian propaganda during his sentence - we may yet see determined, effective anti-Christian acts on his part.

What's still hilarious to me is that you all think this matters.

You do know the church doesn't hold political power to speak of, yes? Politicians use Christianity as a tool (especially in America), not the other way around. Thus, physical strikes against Christianity (we'll leave off the discussion of how it's possible to make physical strikes against a nonphysical concept for another day) do nothing but make the locals mad. The only people you're going to impress are those who already agree with you. You are, if you'll excuse the expression, preaching to the choir.

If you feel that strongly that Christianity is the evil downfall of all mankind, try and convert others to whatever brand of non-Christianity you believe in. Of course, doing something constructive isn't nearly as exciting as burning churches, but if you're actually serious about changing the world, that's what you need to do. Get your head out of your pants and actually do something, rather than destroying old buildings.

I don't believe these actions were committed under the pretense that the Church is the top link in the chain; identifying who holds ultimate power goes far beyond the government, too.
Action against the chursh is taken to perhaps shake free a percentage of the world; or to remove one enslaving tool from the hands of the powers that be. There has to be some sort of starting point, and eliminating one weapon is one means to an indication of who wields them.
Religion is a tool alongside The Media, Citizenship, and several others - cutting off any one of these is a great victory for us.
Novak's move was ofcourse flawed, however his intent is unquestionable.


The unenlightened, and more to the point closed-minded individuals of society are indeed unlikely to be swayed by a symbol like the one Novak has used, indeed. There may be a small percentage of new enlightened thought resultant of it, which is countered by the portion of those claiming to follow Black Metal's message yet too weak/insecure to support these views in reality. Novak's gain would be one of self-expession, which, even if millions don't "get it", is still fulfilling; and a lesson learnt. The drawbacks include sympathy shown for the church, and 3 years imprisonment.
That's my conclusion, anyway.


Convincing the masses requires hundreds of years of social tide redirection, or drastic action - a remarkable event capable of awakening the world to the flaw in their thinking; Novak chose the wrong move - that doesn't mean his end-game isn't to introduce "whatever brand of non-Christianity you believe in".

Heh heh heh. So, what, the Illuminati and Grey Aliens are using the Media and Church to enslave all mankind, and Black Motherfucking Metal is our Savior?

Do you listen to yourself?

Do you listen to yourself? You can present Illuminati-based retorts if you want, but that's just further trivialising lines of thinking which present an otherwise very obviously possible answer.

George W Bush has an IQ of 91. Any time that a reporter has caught him offguard he's been literally speechless. Obviously, the credibility of the people being placed in these seats is dropping, in favour of incompetent line-reading morons - everything required of a political puppet.
I trace power back to corporate superpowers, though I'm not going to confidently point my finger at anyone in particular. Obviously placing someone in a position of political power requires a sizeable financial investment in the media, among another list of easily bought assets. People are just too stupid to realise how plausible this idea really is.

EDIT: Good call on "Black Motherfucking Metal", though.

You still haven't answered the basic question of who is doing this. It's just the shadowy "somebody" that plagues children's nightmares. "Somebody's out to get you."

You also haven't answered the question of what to do about it.

There's no point fighting. Just keep your head down, and teach your children to be good humans.

I'm just having fun with this guy. Sometimes you need someone to come along and challenge your beliefs; if they can't stand up to scrutiny, you should probably rethink them. After all, blind faith is what the "Christian sheep" have, no?

All the facts point to someone, some group of corporate power; I've heard many times of possible candidates, however not seeing it as necessary to currently speculate, I piece together what fits from that which I can gather. Just because you don't know exactly who your enemy is, doesn't mean they don't exist - infact, it just makes them more dangerous.
Sometimes the most basic questions have the most difficult answers to obtain; luckily, they aren't needed to piece together so much as the fact that there is a problem.


Define the problem, then plan the solution. Don't get ahead of yourself, now.


Blind faith? Ouch, I didn't ask for a fight, now.
Tell me, what scrutiny have you presented? That the enemy hasn't been given a specific name? That you want a solution immediately? I welcome critics - "sometimes" isn't nearly often enough for someone to challenge your beliefs. The best advice I could possibly give, is to search for the answer, to piece it together from the evidence given, and the possibilities that fit; not to simply make one up and prove it true.

And may I ask, what are your views?

On what? Church arson? It's bad. It's useless and uselessly destructive. On the state of the world? It's also pretty bad right now, but I've seen nothing at all to point to a vast corporate conspiracy to take over the world.

By the way, what's your evidence for said conspiracy?

I agree with your view on church arson. I mean, God, what a waste of your time, burning a church. There has to be a million better things you could be doing (even if they are also destructive) with your time.

And the "Jewish goats". And the "Muslim pekinese". And the "Buddhist Chimps". Etc