It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bones member list w/ details

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Once they graduate, they must retire to emeritus membership. To be an active member, it is required that one be enrolled in at least 12 credit hours at Yale University. The same is true of Scroll and Key, Book and Snake, Staff and Serpent, and all the others (with the exception that the last two are at Rutgers University).


It does not seem like they retire at all. As the networking and nepotism continues as well the pledge of secrecy irrespective of how powerful the members become. Just recently, Bush admitted fives bonesman into his cabinet. So, it appears that is a clear indication the ties forges in Yale are life long. In the past, many bonesman have been part of the cabinet and worked together on state policy.

Further, I would like to see evidence for your claims that they retire.


Actually, it is "just a college fraternity." That's what college fraternities are.


Do you know of any other college fraternity, that is some 200 years old, where so many of the members become presidents, senators, uber-rich bankers, CIA directors, media tycoons etc

It is a cult based in an old college, and it will remain so, until you can prove otherwise.

[edit on 20-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]




posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child

It does not seem like they retire at all. As the networking and nepotism continues as well the pledge of secrecy irrespective of how powerful the members become. Just recently, Bush admitted fives bonesman into his cabinet. So, it appears that is a clear indication the ties forges in Yale are life long. In the past, many bonesman have been part of the cabinet and worked together on state policy.


If you will look back and read my response to the other gentleman, you will see that I certainly conceded that fraternal ties almost always remain after graduation. They have for me personally, and I'd wager that many other posters on this forum would give us similar testimony.

However, just because I remain close friends with former collegiate "secret society" brothers does not mean I'm an active participant in the society. Active membership belongs to students only, and this has always been the case.

Furthermore, there are other reasons that Bush appoints former Bonesmen aside from the fact that they were Bonesmen. For example, John Kerry is also an Emeritus Bonesman, but I'd sincerely doubt that Bush would appoint him to anything.


Further, I would like to see evidence for your claims that they retire.


My "claim" that they must retire from active membership after graduation is found in the bylaws of every fraternity and sorority that ever existed. With the example of Skull and Bones and Scroll and Key, which are the two major senior societies at Yale, the University itself requires it, as practically all universities do. These are, after all, student societies.




Do you know of any other college fraternity, that is some 200 years old, where so many of the members become presidents, senators, uber-rich bankers, CIA directors, media tycoons etc


Yes, and the answer is: practically all of them. A look throgh the websites of the various fraternities (all of which list famous members) is proof of this.


It is a cult based in an old college, and it will remain so, until you can prove otherwise.


I really have no interest in "proving" anything to you. But I think you've got it backwards: one is innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa. To be guilty until proven innocent is a feature of tyranny, which by comparison was deeply employed by the Nazi regime, a government founded by conspiracy theorists.

Would I be in error in seeing a pattern between such a statement and persecution based upon fear instead of facts?



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 08:10 PM
link   

If you will look back and read my response to the other gentleman, you will see that I certainly conceded that fraternal ties almost always remain after graduation. They have for me personally, and I'd wager that many other posters on this forum would give us similar testimony.

However, just because I remain close friends with former collegiate "secret society" brothers does not mean I'm an active participant in the society. Active membership belongs to students only, and this has always been the case.


I am certainly not suggesting Bush still attends the tomb for secret meetings. What I am suggesting, and what you concede too, that S&B go on to assume positions of power. This is what is generally agreed upon. They do not have to actively involved in the tomb to be S&B members.


My "claim" that they must retire from active membership after graduation is found in the bylaws of every fraternity and sorority that ever existed. With the example of Skull and Bones and Scroll and Key, which are the two major senior societies at Yale, the University itself requires it, as practically all universities do. These are, after all, student societies.


Well, yes, that is what I suspected. Your claim that they are retired is based on the underlying and unfounded assumption that it is another "fraternity" and is based on nothing more than a prejudice from your own experiences with such socities. Apples and oranges.



Yes, and the answer is: practically all of them. A look throgh the websites of the various fraternities (all of which list famous members) is proof of this.


We are talking about powerful members; not just famous. Is there any other "fraternity" where there have been three presidents, four senators, two presidential runners, chairman of the CFR, times owner etc?

As we can see from the S&B list, there are dozens, if not hundreds, that have all assumed a position of power in the various fields since the inception of the society in the 18th century.

Show; don't tell.


It is a cult based in an old college, and it will remain so, until you can prove otherwise.



I really have no interest in "proving" anything to you. But I think you've got it backwards: one is innocent until proven guilty, not vice versa.


You claim S&B is just another fraternity. So the burden of proof lies on you to show that. As it could also be a cult based in a college. Which is what it seems to be.

[edit on 20-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 08:59 PM
link   
What kind of security does the tomb have ?
It's on the Yale campus ?



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child

I am certainly not suggesting Bush still attends the tomb for secret meetings. What I am suggesting, and what you concede too, that S&B go on to assume positions of power. This is what is generally agreed upon. They do not have to actively involved in the tomb to be S&B members.


If this is what you meant, then I certainly agree; this is what I meant by Emeritus Membership. Once they graduate, they no longer actively participate in the Order, but they remain graduated Bonesmen.



Well, yes, that is what I suspected. Your claim that they are retired is based on the underlying and unfounded assumption that it is another "fraternity" and is based on nothing more than a prejudice from your own experiences with such socities. Apples and oranges.


I'm exactly sure what it is that we're disagreeing on here. You yourself stated above that once they graduate, they no longer attend meetings, which are reserved for the active membership. It is only this active membership that is retired; they remain Emeritus Members.

And, although this is sort of beside the point, I find it interesting that so much emphasis is placed on Skull and Bones alone. According to federal tax records, the Scroll and Key is far wealthier than Skull and Bones, having received millions more in endowments than their rivals in Skull and Bones; furthermore, Scroll and Key tends to be much more elitist. Skull and Bones has admitted members with less than fantastic academic credentials (George W. Bush among others); A&E ran a show about the fraternity where they interviewed a Bonesman who was tapped in the '60's simply because he was a Marxist, and the Bones thought he would make an interesting addition to their debating team. Also, Skull and Bones now admits an equal number of female students.

Scroll and Key, on the other hand, continues to be male-only, and they only tap the wealthy who show academic excellence. See the online encyclopedia entry en.wikipedia.org...



We are talking about powerful members; not just famous. Is there any other "fraternity" where there have been three presidents, four senators, two presidential runners, chairman of the CFR, times owner etc?


Most of them have, especially Phi Beta Kappa. Scroll and Key, Staff and Serpent, Sword and Snake, and The Owl Society have also seen students go through their ranks who have become powerful. Outside of college fraternities, Freemasonry and the International and Benevolent Order of Elk have also had many members who obtained positions of power. For example, 16 US Presidents have been Masons, and 8 have been Elks.



You claim S&B is just another fraternity. So the burden of proof lies on you to show that.


Again, I think you have it backwards. We know that it's a college fraternity, and is recognized by Yale University is such. That much, at least, is in black and white. But if you claim that it is anything else, it would mean the burden of proof would fall upon you.


As it could also be a cult based in a college. Which is what it seems to be.


It could also be an auxiliary for the Girl Scouts, but I'm pretty sure it's not. A cult and a frat are two different things, regardless of what Jimmy Swaggart may tell you.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Schaden
What kind of security does the tomb have ?
It's on the Yale campus ?


It's on campus, but most (if not all) of the members belong to Greek Letter Societies, so it has no dorms. The Society I belonged to in college had a house called The Crypt, which was protected by electronic security, so I assume The Tomb is similar.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 12:23 AM
link   
SKULL AND BONES MEMBER LIST(partial)

I have collated a list of S&B member and painstreakingly researched the positions they have held across the spectrum of fields of political, economic and other fields of influence. Here are my foundings:

US Presidents(3)

william Howard Taft (1878), 27th President of the United States
George Walker Bush (1968), 43rd President of the United States
George Herbert Walker Bush (1948), 41st President of the United States (19891993)

Senators(6)

Robert Alphonso Taft, son of president Wiliam Howard Taft, presidential candidate
Prescot Bush(1917)
John Heinz II (1931), father of Senator John Heinz
Jonathan Bingham (1936)
John Chafee (1947)
David Boren (1963)
John Kerry (1966), presidential candidtate

Other Government positions(33)

Alphonso Taft(FOUNDER OF SKULL AND BONES), father of President William Howard Taft,
Supreme Court Justice, Attorney General, Secretary of state

William Collins Whitney(1862), Secretary of US navy
Edward Baldwin Whitney(1878), Supreme Court Justice
Edward Johnson Phelps(1888), 2nd comptroller of the US treasuery, US minister to England, senior security counsel
Henry Lewis Stimson(1888), US secretary of state
Gifford Pinchot (1889), President Theodore Roosevelt's chief forester
Harvey Hollister Bundy (1907)-- Special Ass. to Sec. of War Stimson(also S&B) and key Pentagon man on Manhatten project
Charles Seymour(1908), CFR member
William Averell Harriman(1913), Governor of New York, Assistant Secetary of State
Under secretary of political affairs, ambassador to Soviet union and CFR member
Robert Ambercrombie Lovett(1918), 4th US Secretary of defence to President Truman, CFR member, Harriman brown partner
Henry Robinson Luce(1920), CFR member
DeForest Van Slyck(1920), CFR member
Morehead Patterson(1920), Bilderberg member
Robert Guthrie Page(1922), CFR member
Frank Ford Russell(1926), CFR member
Alfred Ogden(1932), CFR member
William P. Bundy, national advisor to US and central figure on Vietnam policy
Potter Stewart(1936), Supreme Court Justice
Barry Zorthian(1941), CFR member
William Henry Draper III (1950), the Defense Department, UN and Import-Export Bank
Winston Lord (1959), Chairman of CFR, Ambassador to China
and assistant Secretary of State in the Clinton administration and Bilderberg member.
Charles Edwin Lord(1981), Acting Comptroller of the Currency, Bilderberg member

Admitted into the US cabinet by George Bush Jr in 2004:

Evan Griffith Galbraith, adviser to the U.S. mission to NATO
William Henry Donaldson, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission
George Herbert Walker III, U.S. ambassador to Hungary
Jack Edwin McGregor, member of the advisory board of the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corp.
Victor Henderson Ashe, member of the board of directors of the Federal National Mortgage Association
Roy Leslie Austin, U.S. ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago
Robert Davis McCallum Jr, associate attorney general
Rex Cowdry, associate director of the White House's National Economic Council
Edward McNally Sr., associate counsel to the president and general counsel to the Office of Homeland Security
David Batshaw Wiseman, an attorney in the Justice Department's Civil Division
James Emanuel Boasberg, an associate judge on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.


CIA(14)

Hugh Wilson (1909)
Yale's "unofficial" Secretary of War, Robert D. French (1910)
Archibald MacLeish (1915)
Charles R. Walker (1916)
Hugh Cunningham (1934)
Richard A. Moore (1936)
Reuben Holden (1940)
James Buckley (1944)
Sloane Coffin, Jr. (1949), "Tapped" by George H. W. Bush
V. Van Dine (1949)
William F. Buckley, Jr. (1950), "Tapped" by Sloane Coffin, Jr.
Dino Pionzio (1950), CIA Deputy Chief of Station during Allende overthrow
William Putnam Bundy (1937), CIA, CFR members, Bilderberg member, Assitant secretary of Eastern foreign affairs
McGeorge Bundy(1940), C.F.R., President Ford Foundation, Bilderberg member, Special Assistant to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson on national security

Bankers(36)

Pierre Jay (1892), first chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Harry Payne Whitney (1898), husband of Gertrude Vanderbilt, investment banker
Percy Rockefeller (1900) Morgan partner(MP)
Joseph R. Swan (1902), MP
Thomas Cochran (1904), MP
W. Murray Crane (1904), MP
William McCormick Blair(1907) William Blair & Co founder
Harold Stanley (1908), founder of Morgan Stanley, investment banker
Knight Wooley (1917) , MP
Frank P. Shepard (1917), MP
Henry P. Davison (1920), senior partner, Morgan Guaranty Trust
Thomas Rodd (1935), MP
George H. Chittenden (1939)
Clement D. Gile (1939), MP
William Redmond Cross (1941), MP
Daniel P. Davison (1949), MP
Dean Witter, Jr.(1944), investment banker
Evan G. Galbraith (1950), Ambassador to France and Managing Director of Morgan Stanley
Jonathan Bush, CEO and President of Riggs investment bank
J.L. Guinter, Director of Union Banking Corp.
Cornelius Lievense, President, Union Banking Corp. and Director of Holland American Investment Corp.
H.J. Kouwenhoven (Nazi) Nazi banker, managing partner of August Thyssen Bank and Bank Voor Handel Scheepvaart N.V.
Johann Groninger (Nazi)Director of Bank Voor Handel en Scheepvaart and Vereinigte Stahlwerke (Thyssen's Steel operations)

Brown Bros., Harriman (Formerly W.A.Harriman)

W.A. Harriman (1913)
E. Roland Harriman (1917)
Ellery S. James (1917)
Ray Morris (1901)
Prescott Sheldon Bush (1917)
Knight Wooley (1917)
Mortimer Seabury (1909)
Robert A. Lovett (1918)
Eugene Wm. Stetson, Jr. (1934) (1937-1942)
Walter H. Brown (1945)
Stephen Y. Hord (1921)
John Beckwith Madden (1941)
Grange K. Costikyan (1929)

Corportates(7)

Alfred Cowles (1913), Cowles Communication
John Thomas Daniels (1914), founder of Archer Daniels Midland
Artemus Gates (1918), President of New York Trust Company, Union Pacific, TIME, Boeing Company
Henry Luce (1920), Time-Life and Fortune magazine founder
Amory Howe Bradford (1934), husband of Carol Warburg Rothschild and general manager for the New York Times
Richard Gow (1955), president of Zapata Oil
Russell W. Davenport, editor Fortune Magazine, created Fortune 500 list

Education(102)

Daniel Coit Gilman, (1852) was 1st President of Johns Hopkins University. President of the University of California. President of the Carnegie Institution. Founded Russell Trust (Incorporated Skull and Bones at Yale in 1856). Studied at the University of Berlin between 1854 and 1855
under Karl Von Ritter and Friedrich Trendelenderg, both prominent "Right" Hegelians.

William H. Welch (1870) was President of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical research from 1910 to 1934.


Daniel Coit GilmanAndrew Dickson White (1853) was 1st President of Cornell University. First President of the American Historical Association. Studied at the University of Berlin between 1856-58. Timothy Dwight (1849) was 12th President of Yale University. Studied at the Universitiers ofBerlin and Bonn between 1856 and 1858.

In Yale college alone:

Beebe, William, Professor of English Literature (1882-1917)
Beers, Henry A, Professor of English Literature (1874-1926)
Bellinger, Alfred R, Professor of Greek (1926-
Dahl, George, Professor of Yale Divinity School (1914-1929)
Darling, Arthur B, Professor of History (1925-1933)
Day, Clive, Professor of Economic History (1902-1938)
Dexter, Franklin B, Secretary, Yale University
Dwight, Timothy, President of Yale University
Farnam, Henry, Professor of Economics (1880-1933)
French, Robert D, Professor of English (1919-1950)
Gilman, Daniel C.
Graves, Henry S, Dean, Yale School of Forestry (1900-1939)
Gruener G, Professor of German (1892-1928)
Hadley, Arthur T, President of Yale (1899-1921)
Hilles, Frederick, Professor of English (Professor of English 1921-
Holden, Reuben A, Assistant to President (1947-
Hoppin, James M, Professor of History of Art (1861-1899)
Ingersoll, James W, Professor of Latin (1897-1921)
Jones, Frederick S, Dean Yale College (1909-1926)
Lewis, Charlton M, Professor of English (1898-1923)
Lohman, Carl A, Secretary Yale University (1927-
Lyman, Chester, Professor of Mechanics (1859-1890)
McLaughlin, Edward T, Professor of English (1890-1893)
Northrop, Cyrus, Professor of English (1863-1884)
Packard, Lewis R, Professor of Greek (1863-1884)
Peck, Tracy, Professor of Latin (1889-1908)
Perrin, Bernadotte, Professor of Greek (1893-1909)
Pierce, Frederick E, Professor of English (1910-1935)
Root, Reginald D, Yale Football Coach (1933-1948)
Schwab, John C, Professor of Political Economy (1893-1906)
Seymour, Charles, Prof. of History (1915-37), Pres. (1936-50)
Seymour, Charles Jr, Professor of Art (1945-
Silliman, Benjamin Jr, Professor of Chemistry (1846-1885)
Stokes, Anson P, Secretary of Yale (1899-1921)
Sumner, William G, Professor of Economics (1872-1909)
Taft, William H, Professor of Law (1913)
Tarbell, Frank B, Professor of Greek (1882-1887)
Thacher, Thomas A, Professor of Latin (1842-1886)
Thompson, John R, Professor of Law (1939-
Walker, Charles R, Assistant Secretary (1943-1945)
Woolsey, Theodore S, Professor of International Law (1878-1929)
Wright, Henry B, Professor of History (1907-1911)
Wright, Henry P, Professor of Latin (1871-1918), Dean Yale university (1884-1909)

Outside Yale:

Burtt, Edwin A, Professor of Philosophy, University of Chicago (1924-31) and Cornell University (1931-60)
Alexander, Eben,Professor of Greek and Minister to Greece (1893-97)
Blake, Eli Whitney, Professor of Physics, Cornell (1868-70) and Brown University (1870-95)
Chauvenet, William, U.S. Navel Academy (1845-59) and Chancellor Washington University (1862-69)
Cooke, Francis J, New England Conservatory of Music
Cooper, Jacob, Professor of Greek, Center College (1855-66) Rutgers University (1866-1904)
Cutler, Carroll, President Western Reserve University (1871-1886)
Daniels, Joseph L, Professor of Greek, Olivert College, and President (1865-1904)
Emerson, Joseph, Professor of Greek, Beloit College (1848-88)
Estill, Joe G, Connecticut State Legislature (1932-1936)
Evans, Evan W, Professor of Mathematics, Cornell University (1868-72)
Ewell, John L, Professor of Church History, Howard University (1891-1910)
Fisher, Irving, Professor of Political Economy, Yale (1893-1935)
Fisk, F.W, President, Chicago Theological Seminary (1887-1900)
Green, James Payne, Professor of Greek, Jefferson College (1857-59)
Griggs, John C, Vassar College (1897-1927)
Hall, Edward T, St. Marks School, Southborough, Mass.
Harman, Archer, St. Paul's School, Concord, N.H.
Harman, Archer Jr, St. Paul's School, Concord, N.H.
Hincks, John H, Professor of History, Atlanta University (1849-1894)
Hine, Charles D, Secretary, Connecticut State Board of Education (1883-1920)
Hoxton, Archibald R, Episcopal High School
Hoyt, Joseph G, Chancellor Washington University (1858-1862)
Ives, Chauncey B, Adirondack - Florida School
Johnson, Charles F, Professor of Mathematics, U.S. Navel Academy (1865-70), Trinity College (1884-1906)
Johnston, Henry Phelps, Professor of History, N.Y. City College (1883-1916)]
Johnston, William, Professor of English Literature, Washington & Lee (1867-77) and Louisiana State University (1883-89)
Jones, Theodore S, Institute of Contemporary Art
Kingsbury, Howard T, Westminster School
Knapp, John M, Princeton University
Learned, Dwight Whitney, Professor of Church History, Doshiba College, Japan (1876-1928)
McClintock, Norman, Professor of Zoology, University of Pittsburg (1925-1930)
Macleish, Archibald, Library of Congress (1939-1944), UNESCO, State Dept. OWI, Howard University
Moore, Eliakim H, Professor of Mathematics, University of Chicago (1892-1931)
Nichols, Alfred B, Professor of German, Simmons College
Norton, WIlliam B, Professor of History Boston University
Owen, Edward T, Professor of French, University of Wisconsin (1879-1931)
Parsons, Henry], Columbia University
Perry, David B, President, Douana College (1881-1912)
Pomeroy, John, Professor of Law, University of Illinois (1910-24)
Potwin, Lemuel S, Professor, Western Reserve University
Reed, Harry L, President, Auburn Theological Seminary
Richardson, Rufus B, Director of American School of Classical Studies Athens (1893-1903)
Russell, William H, Collegiate School, Hartford
Seely, William W, Dean, Medical Faculty, University of Cincinnati (1881-1900)
Southworth, George CS, Bexley Theological Seminary (1888-1900)
Stagg, Amos A, Dir. Physical Education, University of Chicago
Stillman, George S, St. Pauls School
Tighe, Lawrence G, Treasurer of Yale
Twichell, Charles P, St. Louis Country Day School
Tyler, Charles M, Professor of History, Cornell University (1891-1903)
Tyler, Moses Coit, Professor at Cornell (1867-1900)
Watkins, Charles L, Director, Phillips Art School
Yardley, Henry A, Berkeley Divinity School (1867-1882)

Total: 201 positions of political, economic, and educational influence (less than 15% members accounted for)


The Main families (Note some members have not been accounted for above)


Taft Alphonso 1833
Taft Charles Phelps 1918
Taft Henry Waters 1880
Taft Horace Dutton 1883
Taft Hulbert 1900
Taft Peter Rawson 1867
Taft Robert Alphonso 1910
Taft Thomas Prindle 1971
Taft William Howard 1878

Bush Derek C. 1967
Bush George Herbert Walker 1948
Bush George Walker 1968
Bush James S. 1922
Bush Jonathan 1953
Bush Prescott Sheldon 1917

Whitney Edward Baldwin 1878
Whitney Edward Payson 1854
Whitney Emerson Cogswell 1851
Whitney Harry Payne 1894
Whitney James Lyman 1856
Whitney Joseph Ernest 1882
Whitney Payne 1898
Whitney William Collins 1863
Whitney William Dwight

Lord Charles Edwin 1949
Lord Franklin Atkins 1898
Lord George de Forest 1854
Lord Oswald Bates 1926
Lord William Galey 1922
Lord Winston 1959


Harriman Edward Roland ("Bunny") Noel 1917
Harriman William Averell 1913

Bundy Frederick McGeorge 1921
Bundy Harvey Hollister 1909
Bundy Hollister 1909
Bundy McGeorge 1940
Bundy William Putman 1939

Russell Frank Ford 1926
Russell Philip Gray 1876
Russell Richard George 1981
Russell Richard Warren 1951
Russell William Huntington (Founding S&B) 1833

Perkins John 1840
Perkins Nathaniel Shaw 1842
Perkins Thomas Albert 1858
Perkins William 1840

Phelps Edward Johnson 1886
Phelps Sheffield 1886
Phelps William Walter 1860
Phelps Zira Bennett 1895

Cheney Clifford Dudley 1898
Cheney Frank Dexter 1900
Cheney Howell 1892
Cheney Philip 1901
Cheney Ronald Lawton 1958
Cheney Russell 1904
Cheney Thomas Langdon 1901
Cheney Ward 1896
Cheney, Jr. Knight Dexter 1892


See more on S&B families here: portland.indymedia.org...


Conclusions:

The research has shown that S&B indeed have a monopoly over economic and political power across an entire spectrum of fields, the more prominent being government, banking and education. Also shown is how initation in S&B is based on a nepotistic elite bloodline system, where certain families dominate the most powerful positions and network amongst each other. Some of the members not accounted for, yet listed officially, are republicans, democrats, cabinet members of previous administrations, and other government position holders.

The biggest shock is that S&B has also infiltrated the entire faculty of Yale and other colleges and the media. It would not be an overstatement to state that S&B is the most powerful and insidious organization in the world. To claim this to be a college fraternity would be simple mindedness of the highest order. The facts clearly show that the S&B is an elite satanic cult, that pre-selects it's members on bloodlines and who remain members for life.

Research into S&B members will show a lot of sinister and foul play, from funding and directing all the wars, Vietnam, Korean, world wars. Links with Nazis, Stalin, Saddam, Khomenai, Osama Bin Laden, and a lot of support for fascism. The S&B members have been the driving force behind the NWO.

As much as this all belies belief, no one can overlook the fact, that a single organization, that practices satanic rituals has controlled and orchestrated everything in the world for hundreds of years. A further proof of this comes from George Washington's acknowledge to a conspiracy by the "Illumananti"


John Robison, a professor of natural philosophy at Edinburgh University in Scotland and a member of a Freemason Lodge,

said that he was asked to join the Illuminati. After study, he concluded the purposes of the Illuminati were not for him.

In 1798, he published a book called "Proofs Of A Conspiracy":

"An association has been formed for the express purpose of rooting out all the religious establishments and overturning all

the existing governments.... the leaders would rule the World with uncontrollable power, while all the rest would be employed

as tools of the ambition of their unknown superiors."

"Proofs of A Conspiracy" was sent to George Washington. Responding to the sender of the book with a letter, the president

said he was aware the Illuminati were in America. He felt that the Illuminati had "diabolical tenets" and that their object

was "a separation of the People from their government."

In "Proofs Of A Conspiracy", Robison printed the ceremony of initiation of the "Regent degree" in Illuminism. In it "a

skeleton is pointed out to him [the initiate], at the feet of which are laid a crown and a sword. He is asked 'whether that is the skeleton of a king, nobleman or a beggar.' As he cannot decide, the president of the meeting says to him, 'The

character of being a man is the only one that is importance'".

This is, essentially, the same as the writing in the Skull & Bones "tomb":

"Wer war der Thor, wer Weiser, Bettler oder Kaiser?
Ob Arm, ob Reich, im Tode gleich."

Which reads:

"Who was the fool, who the wise man, beggar or king?
Whether poor or rich, all's the same in death."


References:

www.mabus.biz...
www.freedomdomain.com...
www.mega.nu:8080...
www.politicalgraveyard.com...
portland.indymedia.org...

[edit on 22-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:09 AM
link   

And, although this is sort of beside the point, I find it interesting that so much emphasis is placed on Skull and Bones alone. According to federal tax records, the Scroll and Key is far wealthier than Skull and Bones, having received millions more in endowments than their rivals in Skull and Bones; furthermore, Scroll and Key tends to be much more elitist. Skull and Bones has admitted members with less than fantastic academic credentials (George W. Bush among others); A&E ran a show about the fraternity where they interviewed a Bonesman who was tapped in the '60's simply because he was a Marxist, and the Bones thought he would make an interesting addition to their debating team. Also, Skull and Bones now admits an equal number of female students.

Scroll and Key, on the other hand, continues to be male-only, and they only tap the wealthy who show academic excellence. See the online encyclopedia entry en.wikipedia.org...


I am glad you brought that up. It goes to show, that Scroll and Key, a rival society based in Yale with better funds and more elitist standards, still pales to a insignifiance compared to S&B.

From the list you have shown, only the follwing have any significant economical or political power:

Dean Acheson (1915), U.S. Secretary of State 1949-1952, architect of the Cold War foreign policy

George Shiras, Jr. (1853) U.S. Supreme Court Justice 1892-1903

Robert F. Wagner, Jr. (1933), three-term Mayor of New York City, U.S. Ambassador to Spain, Personal Envoy of the President to the Vatican

Cyrus Vance (1939), U.S. Secretary of State under Jimmy Carter (1977-1980) Secretary of the Army 1962-1964

Cord Meyer (1943), CIA, president of United World Federalists

John Lindsay (1944), Mayor of New York City, US Congressman, US Presidential Candidate in 1972

That is a total of 6, and neither is there any indication of nepotism and pre-selection by bloodlines. It is well within reason for a college like Yale. However for S&B, 6 is as many senators it's produced.

On 16 presidents being Masons. That is interesting, but if Masons is what it claims to be, then it nothing more than a religion. Yeah, I know, you will object to that notion, but it essentially has all the qualities to be a relgion. So, I would not consider it to be an elite secret society, which is what S&B is. Apples and oranges.

I still need to research more on Masons, because as far I am concerned, it is still not vindicated for me.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child

The facts clearly show that the S&B is an elite satanic cult, that pre-selects it's members on bloodlines and who remain members for life.


The only facts you've shown is that there have been many members of Skull and Bones who have went on to be either successful or powerful in their careers, a fact that I've never denied. But this doesn't even come close to demonstrating that the fraternity is a "cult", much less satanic.

To being with, I'm not sure you understand what is meant by "cult." A cult is not necessarily bad: it just refers to a doctrinal group which has deviated from the norm. For example, Buddhism began as a Hindu cult, and Christianity began as a Jewish cult, but neither Buddhism nor Christianity were "bad" or "satanic" just because they were cults.

But the Skull and Bones Society is not doctrinal, nor has it evolved or deviated from some perceived norm; therefore it cannot meet the definition of a cult. And since the raternity admits atheists (as in the example of the radical hippie Marxist student I mentioned above), it cannot have a religious doctrine.


Research into S&B members will show a lot of sinister and foul play, from funding and directing all the wars, Vietnam, Korean, world wars. Links with Nazis, Stalin, Saddam, Khomenai, Osama Bin Laden, and a lot of support for fascism. The S&B members have been the driving force behind the NWO.


Still waiting on proof.


John Robison, a professor of natural philosophy at Edinburgh University in Scotland and a member of a Freemason Lodge,
said that he was asked to join the Illuminati. After study, he concluded the purposes of the Illuminati were not for him.


Robison did not claim he was "asked the join the Illuminati." What he did do was write and publish books that defended Jesuit propaganda.

www.masonicinfo.com...


"Proofs of A Conspiracy" was sent to George Washington. Responding to the sender of the book with a letter, the president

said he was aware the Illuminati were in America. He felt that the Illuminati had "diabolical tenets" and that their object

was "a separation of the People from their government."


Washington's quote is here accurate, but the context is fictitious. He was referring to the Jacobins in France, not the Illuminati in Bavaria. Furthermore, Thomas Jefferson publicly defended the Illuminati of bavaria, and Weishaupt in particular, because they were being slandered by Jesuits in order to strike fear in the populace, in order to more easily gain control over them. Jefferson wrote:


"As Weishaupt lived under the tyranny of a despot and priests, he knew that caution was necessary even in spreading information, and the principles of pure morality. This has given an air of mystery to his views, was the foundation of his banishment.... If Weishaupt had written here, where no secrecy is necessary in our endeavors to render men wise and virtuous, he would not have thought of any secret machinery for that purpose."


In "Proofs Of A Conspiracy", Robison printed the ceremony of initiation of the "Regent degree" in Illuminism. In it "a

skeleton is pointed out to him [the initiate], at the feet of which are laid a crown and a sword. He is asked 'whether that is the skeleton of a king, nobleman or a beggar.' As he cannot decide, the president of the meeting says to him, 'The

character of being a man is the only one that is importance'".

This is, essentially, the same as the writing in the Skull & Bones "tomb":


As it is in practically all fraternal societies. And by the way, this ritual was published by Weishaupt years before Robison.

This part of the ritual teaches the simple fact that all men are by nature equal, regardless if they are "king, nobleman, or beggar." To be honest, I don't understand your point in posting it, as it seems to disprove your claim that they are elitists.



[edit on 22-12-2004 by Masonic Light]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 05:04 PM
link   

The only facts you've shown is that there have been many members of Skull and Bones who have went on to be either successful or powerful in their careers, a fact that I've never denied. But this doesn't even come close to demonstrating that the fraternity is a "cult", much less satanic.


As you said above, the Scroll and Key is a better funded and more elistist fraternity than S&B. However, irrespective of this, Scroll and Key pales to insignifiance in comparison. It, therefore most hold true, that Skull and Bones members are assuming these positions of power through nepotism.

The members are initiated not based on their academic performance(which you have already stated) but their actual bloodlines. I have produced proof of this in the list I produced above and also listed some of the major families involved. It is not contestable.


To being with, I'm not sure you understand what is meant by "cult." A cult is not necessarily bad: it just refers to a doctrinal group which has deviated from the norm. For example, Buddhism began as a Hindu cult, and Christianity began as a Jewish cult, but neither Buddhism nor Christianity were "bad" or "satanic" just because they were cults.


No, it's not.

A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.

Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
The object of such devotion.
An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.


Skull and Bones does meet the definition: it is an exlusive group of people of elite bloodlines that engages in satanic rituals and has an obsession with death. Thereafter, after graduating from college, the rituals continue - bohemian grove; as does the cult.


Research into S&B members will show a lot of sinister and foul play, from funding and directing all the wars, Vietnam, Korean, world wars. Links with Nazis, Stalin, Saddam, Khomenai, Osama Bin Laden, and a lot of support for fascism. The S&B members have been the driving force behind the NWO.


Maybe, when I feel I need to or want too. For now, consider the following:

Bush + Harriman = Thyseen + Nazis + Hitler
MP+ CFR = UN


This part of the ritual teaches the simple fact that all men are by nature equal, regardless if they are "king, nobleman, or beggar." To be honest, I don't understand your point in posting it, as it seems to disprove your claim that they are elitists.


No it doesn't. It just shows they have a ritual on this. It does not necessarily mean they are for equanimity. For that would be contradiction of the incontrovertable fact that it is an elite society.

[edit on 22-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Regarding this:

"No, Masonic light is correct. Skull and Bones is just a college fraternity that picks out members who have the potential to achieve great things."

You are both wrong. George Bush was only picked for S&B because of who his father and grandfather are. His IQ is just under half that of Clinton and he was a drunk # in school.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
As you said above, the Scroll and Key is a better funded and more elistist fraternity than S&B. However, irrespective of this, Scroll and Key pales to insignifiance in comparison.


It seems to me that you are confusing two entirely separate issues, i.e., the two actual Yale student societies, and the history of what some of their members went on to accomplish, both for good and for ill. For example, Scroll and Key certainly does not "pale to insignificance in comaprison" with Skull and Bones; they are both basically the same: senior societies at an Ivy League University.



The members are initiated not based on their academic performance(which you have already stated) but their actual bloodlines. I have produced proof of this in the list I produced above and also listed some of the major families involved. It is not contestable.


Not only is it contestable, it is blatantly false. All student societies choose whomever they want, regardless of "bloodlines" (in fact, it is only the conspiracy theorists who are obsessed with "bloodlines", not the secret societies).

Now, I would concede that, for example, George W. Bush was tapped for one reason: because of his dad, who had also been a member. But to turn this simple instance into some kind of theory that all members are chosen because of parentage is to commit the fallacy of converse accident, a generalization, and which in formal logic is a fallacy of presumption, and always must ipso facto lead to an erroneous conclusion.
To elaborate, anyone who has seen the A&E program about secret societies I mentioned above, where several former Bonesmen were interviewed, will recall that:

1. One Bonesman revealed that he had been a Trotskyist and anti-Vietnam War campus organizer. After his initiation, he was told that he was tapped because his viewpoints could be utilized on the Skull and Bones Debating Team at Yale. This Bonesmen was the first in his family to attend Yale, and had no relatives in the Society.

2. The other Bonesmen related that they too were the first in their family to be invited into the fraternity, and that their academic performance was the reason.

3. They conceded that, in some cases, members are chosen who are the sons and daughters of alumni, but these cases are in the minority, and exist in all fraternities and sororities.


Skull and Bones does meet the definition: it is an exlusive group of people of elite bloodlines that engages in satanic rituals and has an obsession with death. Thereafter, after graduating from college, the rituals continue - bohemian grove; as does the cult.


Here you have woven together two separate fallacies to support a false conclusion. The first of these fallacies is ad ignorantiam, and is defined as a premise wherein one claims a proposition is true simply because that it has not been proven false, or vice versa. It literally means "arguing from ignorance", because, in this case, you yourself are not a member of Skull and Bones, and therefore you are unable to validate your claims about it.

The second fallacy is ad verecundian ("appeal to inappropriate authority"), and follows from the first: since you have no real knowledge of Skull and Bones, you must appeal for your knowledge to some sort of authority. Since the authorities you have appealed are not Bonesmen either, but are conspiracy theorists, such authority is inappropriate because they have no real knowledge of it either.

Because Skull and Bones, in the tradition of all fraternal societies, does not make known its rituals to the public, you are in no position to label them "satanic" because, quite frankly, you have no idea what they are. Having researched fraternal organizations for many years, and being a member of several, I have found many so-called "exposures" which were so absurdly wrong as to be laughable.

Furthermore, those who were interviewed on A&E spoke of the ritual: for example, there is a coffin present, but no nudity or sexuality involved (and this was even before the order began admitting female students). A coffin, and even the presence of a skull and crossbones, is a long way of proving some sort of "obsession" with the death. These same symbols are used in practically all fraternal societies, both collegiate ones, and post-collegiate ones, like Masonry and Oddfellows. If members of Skull and Bones are "obsessed" with death because of this, that means that all other fraternities who use this symbolism are obsessed with death too for the same reason, a premiss which seems to be absurd.


Maybe, when I feel I need to or want too.


Excellent reseach credentials. You're going to make a great Internet conspiracy theorist!


It does not necessarily mean they are for equanimity. For that would be contradiction of the incontrovertable fact that it is an elite society.


Indeed it would contradict this, which is my point. It seems to me that you have forgotten the simple fact that fraternities are based upon an ideal of brotherhood and equality; therefore, it is certainly not surprising that such a thing would be taught in its ceremonial.


[edit on 22-12-2004 by Masonic Light]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by hierarch
You are both wrong. George Bush was only picked for S&B because of who his father and grandfather are. His IQ is just under half that of Clinton and he was a drunk # in school.


Arrested for driving drunk in Texas in 1976 - at a time when you had to be really god damn lambasted to get arrested, in a place where they weren't likely to care.

Cheerleader? What?!

Traded Sammy Sosa...

Yeah, not too bright.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   

It seems to me that you are confusing two entirely separate issues, i.e., the two actual Yale student societies, and the history of what some of their members went on to accomplish, both for good and for ill. For example, Scroll and Key certainly does not "pale to insignificance in comaprison" with Skull and Bones; they are both basically the same: senior societies at an Ivy League University.


*Sigh* I will have to clarify for the third time. You raised the "Skull and Key" point in an effort to demonstrate how other college fraternaties have also produced people of power. I refuted that and produced a partial list of 201 S&B members all in positions of authority to demonstrate how S&B owns a monopoly over power.

You also equivocate on what you indicated yourself: You said S&K is funded in millions of dollars more than S&B, and unlike S&B, only admits the most academically brilliant, and is only 10 years younger.

Yet, irrespective this, you could only produce 6 proper examples of it's ex-members assuming a position of power. Forgive me, that I have to restate the obvious:

S&K, a rival organization to S&B in yale. Is a rich society funded in millions, that taps 15 of the most academically brilliant each year. Yet, less than 15% of S&B members(in the partial list above) have 33 times the positions of power and influence.

You have no choice but to concede that S&B does indeed have a monopoly over power, unlike any college fraternity anywhere in the world. It is not debateable, sorry.


Not only is it contestable, it is blatantly false. All student societies choose whomever they want, regardless of "bloodlines" (in fact, it is only the conspiracy theorists who are obsessed with "bloodlines", not the secret societies).

Now, I would concede that, for example, George W. Bush was tapped for one reason: because of his dad, who had also been a member. But to turn this simple instance into some kind of theory that all members are chosen because of parentage is to commit the fallacy of converse accident, a generalization, and which in formal logic is a fallacy of presumption, and always must ipso facto lead to an erroneous conclusion.
To elaborate, anyone who has seen the A&E program about secret societies I mentioned above, where several former Bonesmen were interviewed, will recall that:

1. One Bonesman revealed that he had been a Trotskyist and anti-Vietnam War campus organizer. After his initiation, he was told that he was tapped because his viewpoints could be utilized on the Skull and Bones Debating Team at Yale. This Bonesmen was the first in his family to attend Yale, and had no relatives in the Society.

2. The other Bonesmen related that they too were the first in their family to be invited into the fraternity, and that their academic performance was the reason.

3. They conceded that, in some cases, members are chosen who are the sons and daughters of alumni, but these cases are in the minority, and exist in all fraternities and sororities


What is blatant is that you have either not read the list of S&B members and the prominent families I have produced, or you are ignoring it and being dishonest with yourself.

A list of members tapped by bloodlines:

Taft Alphonso 1833
Taft Charles Phelps 1918
Taft Henry Waters 1880
Taft Horace Dutton 1883
Taft Hulbert 1900
Taft Peter Rawson 1867
Taft Robert Alphonso 1910
Taft Thomas Prindle 1971
Taft William Howard 1878

Bush Derek C. 1967
Bush George Herbert Walker 1948
Bush George Walker 1968
Bush James S. 1922
Bush Jonathan 1953
Bush Prescott Sheldon 1917

Whitney Edward Baldwin 1878
Whitney Edward Payson 1854
Whitney Emerson Cogswell 1851
Whitney Harry Payne 1894
Whitney James Lyman 1856
Whitney Joseph Ernest 1882
Whitney Payne 1898
Whitney William Collins 1863
Whitney William Dwight

Lord Charles Edwin 1949
Lord Franklin Atkins 1898
Lord George de Forest 1854
Lord Oswald Bates 1926
Lord William Galey 1922
Lord Winston 1959


Harriman Edward Roland ("Bunny") Noel 1917
Harriman William Averell 1913

Bundy Frederick McGeorge 1921
Bundy Harvey Hollister 1909
Bundy Hollister 1909
Bundy McGeorge 1940
Bundy William Putman 1939

Russell Frank Ford 1926
Russell Philip Gray 1876
Russell Richard George 1981
Russell Richard Warren 1951
Russell William Huntington (Founding S&B) 1833

Perkins John 1840
Perkins Nathaniel Shaw 1842
Perkins Thomas Albert 1858
Perkins William 1840

Phelps Edward Johnson 1886
Phelps Sheffield 1886
Phelps William Walter 1860
Phelps Zira Bennett 1895

Cheney Clifford Dudley 1898
Cheney Frank Dexter 1900
Cheney Howell 1892
Cheney Philip 1901
Cheney Ronald Lawton 1958
Cheney Russell 1904
Cheney Thomas Langdon 1901
Cheney Ward 1896
Cheney, Jr. Knight Dexter 1892

This is from the partial list. A researcher who has collated a more extensive list of members has found: 15 families with more than 10 members each(150); 49 families with 5-9 members each(245-441); 212 families with 2 members each(424). That's 900+ members that have been tapped by bloodlines.

Again, you have no choice but to concede.


Because Skull and Bones, in the tradition of all fraternal societies, does not make known its rituals to the public, you are in no position to label them "satanic" because, quite frankly, you have no idea what they are. Having researched fraternal organizations for many years, and being a member of several, I have found many so-called "exposures" which were so absurdly wrong as to be laughable.


I am going to ignore the illogical logics and get straight to the point. The Skull and Bones is a secret(operative word) society conducted in an windowless gloomy tomb. In order to obtain information about the rituals within the society they have to be exposed, thus disconnecting them from the secrecy. Which they have by many investigators and the rituals revealed can only be described as satanic:

1. Lying naked and masturbating in coffins (for nights?)
2. Death worship
3. Drinking blood from skulls
4. Dramatizations of murder
5. Digging up graves
6. Dressing up as the devil and pope

I am sorry, but while you may dismiss these as spooky antics, I find it very disturbing and telling. The fact, that there are so many cases of ritualistic child abuse amongst the rich and CIA. The fact that the biggest families(Bush, Harriman, Browns) of S&B are involved with the Nazis and terrorist networks is not as surprising anymore, when one considers that they have been indoctrinated into Satanism from early as college.

Tell me which is positive and which is negative. You can only answer this intuitively:

A person who chooses life?
A person who chooses death?
A person who is happy?
A person who is sad?
A person who practices love?
A person who practices hate?
A person who is content and harmonious?
A person who is discontent and chaotic?
A person who is divine?
A person who is evil?


Excellent reseach credentials. You're going to make a great Internet conspiracy theorist!


I feel I will be wasting my time at this moment. In fact I have already researched it. I just can't be bothered to document it for you. As you will probably just ignore it or not read it like you have done with the member list I produced.

I left you two equations:

Bush + Harrimans = Nazis + Hitler + Thyseen
MP(Morgan Partners) + CFR = UN

If you cannot make sense of them, then I don't think there's any point.


Indeed it would contradict this, which is my point. It seems to me that you have forgotten the simple fact that fraternities are based upon an ideal of brotherhood and equality; therefore, it is certainly not surprising that such a thing would be taught in its ceremonial.


Apples and Oranges. The ideals of brotherhood and equality exist within the fraternal organization, which does not necessarily reflect a global idealism of equanimity. It seems you have forgotten that they
are elitist socities and elitism and equanimity are mutually exclusive.

[edit on 23-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Indigo, you are helping me immensely. Good work. Way above!



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child

*Sigh* I will have to clarify for the third time. You raised the "Skull and Key" point in an effort to demonstrate how other college fraternaties have also produced people of power. I refuted that and produced a partial list of 201 S&B members all in positions of authority to demonstrate how S&B owns a monopoly over power.


And I will have to clarify for the fourth time that you have demonstrated nothing of the sort. If your list is correct, it could lead us to consider the possibility of networking between members, another point I've never denied. But to claim that members of Skull and Bones have a "monopoly" over power is very far-fetched, much less claiming that the fraternity itself does.

You would probably have an easier time defending your argument if you claimed the former, i.e., that many Skull and Bones alumni have procured positions of power through networking; this is obviously the case in some circumstances. But a claim that the fraternity itself, whose active leadership spend their days cramming for finals and throwing beer bashes, holds a monopoly on power is a wild claim, to say the least.


You have no choice but to concede that S&B does indeed have a monopoly over power, unlike any college fraternity anywhere in the world. It is not debateable, sorry.


Again, your conclusion is erroneous. It can only be said that individual alumni seem to be overrepresented in positions of power. Your premisses do not lead to the conclusion that the fraternity itself has any power, much less a monopoly over it.


What is blatant is that you have either not read the list of S&B members and the prominent families I have produced, or you are ignoring it and being dishonest with yourself.


I'm neither ignoring your comments nor being dishonest. In the spirit of ATS, I am "denying ignorance", which begins with remaining skeptical, and applying Occam's Razor. Also, there are several points that you have not, at least seemingly, taken into consideration.

In speaking of US presidents, you have correctly stated that the two Bushes are S&B alumni. Senator Kerry is also a Bones alumni; therefore, whichever of those guys would have won in November, we would still have a Bones alumni in the White House. But you have used this fact to partially draw an erroneous conclusion, i.e., the S&B has a monopoly over power.

In reality, S&B did not decide who was going to President, or even presidential candidates. The American people decided this in the primaries and general elections. Furthermore, the policies espoused by Bush and Kerry are vastly different; they have everything to do with party ideology, and, so it would seem, nothing to do with Skull and Bones. Bonesmen and Boneswomen do not share the same political ideologies, and will support a candidate whom they agree with, regardless of what fraternity they may or may not belong to. This is true of all fraternal societies.

For example, in 1996, I voted for two non-Masons (Bill Clinton and Al Gore) over two Masons (Bob Dole and Jack Kemp). Senators Dole and Kemp are good and honest men personally; but I disagree with their political ideology and could not support their campaign, even though they are my fraternity brothers.

Lastly, I need to point out here that I'm defending Skull and Bones because I'm a fan of theirs; to be honest, I care nothing about them, one way or another. There have been members of that organization that have caused great evil, but there have been other members that have caused great good. The same is true of practically all organizations; it has everything to do with the individual.

So my problem with this kind of conspiracy theory is this: it recognizes that there is great evil, inequality, and injustice present in the world, but instead of trying to correct it logically, it invents a fantasy concerning imaginary conspirators, and uses them as a scapegoat. While this is done, the true perpetrators escape practically blameless, and the grain of truth that the conspiracy theorists actually have are so mingled with nonsense that most people will not take any of it seriously, and ignore the whole thing. In other words, in a sense, those who perpetuate conspiracy theory seem to me to be actually, but unknowingly, helping the "bad guys" by deflecting attention from them, focusing instead on fraternities and such.

And, I think, an impartial study of current events will easily show whom I speak of when I say "bad guys". Unethical corporations who rob their stakeholders (Enron, WorldCom, etc.), corporations who are in the pockets of political leaders and who profit from war (Haliburton), corporations who outsource jobs because they'd rather pay 10 year old children two dollars per day to perform slave labor than American workers who need to feed their families and stimulate our own economy, etc.

The above are not conspiracies, they are matters of public record, in black and white. And as long as the focus is on imaginary conspiracies, the real problems go unchecked.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 04:26 PM
link   

And I will have to clarify for the fourth time that you have demonstrated nothing of the sort. If your list is correct, it could lead us to consider the possibility of networking between members, another point I've never denied.


First, use the correct terms. It does not lead us to the "possibility" it leads us to the fact that there is networking between members.

Second, there is a difference between networking and nepotism in this context:

Networking: Is giving the opportunity for selection
Nepotism: Is granting favoritism for certain applicants based on family

So the true statement is: It leads us to the fact that there is networking AND nepotism between the S&B members.

This conclusion itself proves the system is unfair, unjust and most definitely undemocratic.


But to claim that members of Skull and Bones have a "monopoly" over power is very far-fetched, much less claiming that the fraternity itself does.


Yes, it would be very far-fetched to claim S&B have a monopoly over power. As it is a fact that S&B has a monopoly over power. The main families involved in S&B are amongst the richest, powerful and most influential in the world. However, as powerful as S&B is, I think it is only one pillar of the Illumanti.

The most powerful affiliate organizations of the S&B are the Bilderbergs and CFR. This is an expert from an essay I did last month on NWO.

It was during the 1900's that it becoming increasingly apparent that America was being reintegrated into the European empire after it's so-called independence. An organization proposed by Woodrow wilson, though created by Edward Mandell House, called the league of nations to be formed for a global government with America as a member. However, the senator refused to ratify the treaty, as obviously it was no different than asking America to become a colony of the empire again. However, the efforts did not end here. The original proponents of this were Paul Warburg, J. P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, John W. Davis, an elite circle of friends who were involved in the forming of the federal reserves. The next year, House arranged an assembly of dignitaries and went to Europe for post-war peace talks, leading to the formation of the INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, which has two branches; one in London under the name of Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA); and the other in New York, which was called the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), formed officially July 29, 1921. The purpose was to invite the most wealthiest members in the society that could influence US foreign policy and form a world government. In 1941, two weeks after Pearl harbour attacks by Japan, Cordell Hull, secretary of the state, recommended a presidential post-war advisory committee for the planning of the UN. This committee consisted of 14, out of which 10 were CFR members. In 1945, UNESCO(United Nations, Educational Scientific and Culture Organization) was formed to prepare for the people for world government or NWO. A point to be taken note of: both UN and UNESCO was formed at a time of war and instability.

In other words the powerful UN and UNESCO was created by CFR, who in turn is founded, made up and chaired by S&B members. This organization has the power to influence US foreign policy and has often exercised it.

In government positions(refer to the list of S&B members.) There have been dozens and dozens of S&B members in every cabinet of government. In the current cabinet there are 12 known S&B members(including the president himself)

Finally, nearly the entire faculty of Yale is full of S&B members. There is something very inherently wrong with that.



I'm neither ignoring your comments nor being dishonest. In the spirit of ATS, I am "denying ignorance", which begins with remaining skeptical, and applying Occam's Razor. Also, there are several points that you have not, at least seemingly, taken into consideration.


I had to delete the bulk of your writings as it has nothing to do with the argument. I just proved to you that more than 900 S&B members have been selected on bloodlines.

As for the comments on Masons; apples and oranges.

In summary, all original postulates are true:

1. S&B is one of the most powerful organization in the world(I say "one of" because I believe it is only one, but substantial, pillar of the Illumanati(men god elites))
2. S&B has been actively involved in US domestic and foreign policy
3. S&B selects members on bloodlines
4. S&B members aquire positions of power through networking and nepotism

In conclusion: S&B is beyond a college fraternity.

[edit on 23-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Indigo,

The problem in your logic is your repeated tendency to confuse your personal beliefs with facts. You continue speaking about "facts" concerning "bloodlines" and "power monopoly", when in fact no facts exist at all to validate such claims.

And judging from your immediate dismissal and ignoring of my argument, I can only assume that you can't refute it, or are simply interested in spreading your propaganda or beliefs or whatever you want to call it. This is all well and fine, but if you do so in a public venue, do not be surprised or become offended if someone challenges you on it. You have the right to hold any beliefs you want, regardless of how correct or ridiculous they may seem to me or anyone else. But if you confuse your personal feelings and/or prejudices with facts, eventually someone will call the bluff; especially on a forum such as this, where most members remain skeptical about everything, seeking only the truth of the matter, whatever it may be.

Therefore, with that being said, I consider the matter closed. I'm climbing down off my soapbox, and am going to have a beer.

And that, my friend, is a fact.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Masonic Light, I guess that is just your way of conceding. Thank you for your time.



Originally posted by DeltaChaos
Indigo, you are helping me immensely. Good work. Way above!


Thank you for your vote of confidence Delta


[edit on 23-12-2004 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Are S&B members bound by the same capital gains taxes that the rest of society is? I heard an heir of someone worth $45 million dollars will have to pay $20 milllion dollars in capital gains taxes just to inherit his fathers estate. Most end up selling everything just to pay the taxes. It keeps a lot of people from getting super powerful in a few generations obviously. I think in this case the heir is taking out a twenty million dollar insurance policy that would have never been needed before the capital gains tax law, just incase his father dies. Things like that whittle away at what little profit one is making to start with. Plus one has to pay expensive accounting and financial avdvisor fees. Plus you have regualar insurance(expensive) to pay for any other uneventful occurance. If you ever have a claim against the insurance they go up exactly enough to cover thier expense of the claim next year. Typically one could be worth millions of dollars on paper and not have cash to go to the grocery store.


One things for certain he won't ever be able to slow down long enough to meditate or smell the roses. He'll be too busy trying to keep his head above the water.

[edit on 24-12-2004 by TgSoe]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join