Those interested in the subject of O9A ‘outer representatives’ might find the O9A text Authority, Learning, and Culture, In The Sinister Tradition Of The Order of Nine Angles (pdf) – published in 2013 ev – of interest. Here is a quote from it:
“In regard to the ‘outer representative’, as of the beginning of phase three (c. 2011-2012) of the century long O9A sinister strategy to disrupt the existing order, recruit a small number of suitable people (for the inner ONA), and aid the emergence of a new aeon based on the law of kindred honour, this particular causal form no longer serves a purpose. Which purpose was for a particular individual to maintain a temporary ‘external, causal, O9A presence’ via the dissemination of O9A MSS and the propagation of ONA theory and praxis. In effect, to aid the embedding of the ONA mythos in the collective psyche of the peoples of the West. Since this has most certainly been achieved – as witness, for instance, (i) the appearance of the Order of Nine Angles as the evil protagonists in several best-selling novels by mainstream writers such as Stephen Leather and Conrad Jones, and (ii) the mention of the O9A in mainstream books dealing with satanism and the occult – then that particular causal form is no longer required. Indeed, to continue it would be detrimental to the ‘open source’ and the collective way that the ONA mythos and ONA theory and praxis now needs to be (to paraphrase what AL wrote in his letter to Aquino dated 20th October 1990 ev) disseminated, developed, adapted, changed, extended, and transformed.”
Also, as mentioned elsewhere:
1. Everything ONA “can and should be surpassed, refined, changed, when others discover, experience, and attain knowledge and experience for themselves.” Satanic Letters of Stephen Brown, Letter to Miss Stockton, dated 19th June, 1991 ev
2. “The O9A way, as it now exists, is not sacrosanct or dogmatic and (a) should be added to, evolved, and refined, as a result of the esoteric pathei-mathos of those who have lived it, and (b) can and should be adapted and developed and changed, in whole or in part, by others who are or who have been inspired by or influenced by it.” Roots and Organization of the Order of Nine Angles. 2013
3. The Order of Nine Angles is, and always has been, anarchic, where a useful, working, definition of anarchy is “that way of living which regards the authority of The State as unnecessary and possibly harmful, and which instead prefers the free and individual choice of mutual and non-hierarchical co-operation”. This anarchism is evident, for example, in the non-hierarchical, communal, nature and structure, of the O9A; in the disdain for the the principles of ‘copyright’ and ‘intellectual property’; in the aforementioned insistence on change and development; in the principle of the ‘authority of individual judgement’; and in the Code of Kindred Honour which places the law of kindred honour over and above the laws of The State.
It is also perhaps worth mentioning that:
“It is incumbent upon the neophyte to judge for themselves the value and veracity of such information about the O9A as they may find via the medium of the internet […] One of the basic principles of the O9A, enshrined in the Code of Kindred Honour, is that of judging people for ourselves, individually, based on and only on a personal knowing. Thus, we who are O9A neither trust nor respect anyone unless we know them personally, in the real-world, and they have shown us, by their behaviour and by their deeds over a period of time, that they merit our trust and our respect. This means that we most certainly do not trust nor respect some anonymous or anonymized person who writes about themselves and/or about the O9A via the medium of the internet. Thus we suspect them, and everything they write, be it via e-mail, or on some weblog or on some forum or on some website.” Advice For Neophytes Regarding The Order of Nine Angles (pdf)
For those who do indeed possess certain occult skills/abilities will be able to intuit – or otherwise ascertain – the ‘truth’ (the esoteric reality) irrespective of whatever words are written or spoken; irrespective of whomsoever writes or speaks such words; irrespective of whether the person or the persons so writing or so speaking is anonymous, anonymized, or does so write using their real name(s), and irrespective of whether the person or the persons has or have some academic credentials or some sort of reputation verified by mainstream sources in the real world. Thus, if someone or some many are ‘taken in’ by deceptive words (written or spoken by whomsoever) then it is their mundanity that is revealed, at least to sagacious others.