Humakt/Yanafal Tarnils

From: Brian Tickler <tickler_at_netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 16:57:24 -0700 (PDT)


Sandy writes:
> Sez who? A Humakti, while strongly affirming that YT are
>not Humakti's, would still contend that they were, somehow,
>traitors.

I think you've been reading something into my commentary that I was not intending to convey. I am not saying that Yanafal Tarnils cultists are not Humakti AND are not traitorous. I'm saying that they are not Humakti, and, thus, should not be called "traitorous Humakti". Calling them simply "traitorous" (or "traitorous scum", "traitorous Lunar twits", etc.) is not only acceptable, it is the proper form of address when referring to such individuals. I believe if you peruse my posts again from this perspective, you will see that I am not in any way advocating the idea that Yanafal Tarnils are anything but the epitome of the word "traitor".

A Lunar spy? ...I am well and truly insulted.

Powered by hypermail