Freemason's link to Hillsborough investigated by IPCC

Freemasonry has always been an organization that looks after its own whenever possible even to the point of perjury and mis/disinformation.

They have ties to Occult fraternities and to Zionism through the Jewish B'nai Brith and I wouldn't be surprised if they also had ties to the Jesuits now that everything has sufficiently been infiltrated by you know who and their fallen friend.

It seems like Freemasonry is probably the least dangerous of the so called secret societies but if one gets in trouble yet is connected one will get out of trouble. Many cops are Masons, they have members in very high, medium and low places all dancing to the same tune. Israels.

But it's not like they have dangerous assassins for higher or soldiers like the mobs, they are political stooges, so they definitely have police connections in every area.

originally posted by: LucianusXVII
Freemasonry has always been an organization that looks after its own whenever possible even to the point of perjury and mis/disinformation.

So you say, but there's nothing in Freemasonry that says to commit perjury. In fact, we're charged to obey the laws of the land

They have ties to Occult fraternities and to Zionism through the Jewish B'nai Brith and I wouldn't be surprised if they also had ties to the Jesuits now that everything has sufficiently been infiltrated by you know who and their fallen friend.

Accusations are not ties.

Many cops are Masons, they have members in very high, medium and low places all dancing to the same tune. Israels.

What statistics do you have to back this statement up?

Freemasons do come from all walks of life, but we're not dancing to the tune of Israel.

a reply to: KSigMason

You have your opinions and I have mine.

Personally I find Freemasonry silly. Grown men playing dress up based on a few Biblical characters who are not real and revering a man who never existed (Hiram Abiff) because he wouldn't reveal a secret.

I could sum up the the quality that you revere so much with a few words:

Don't be a snitch.

Criminals admire the ability to keep secrets and Masons openly call themselves "A society with secrets" and revere secrecy.

Criminals value secrecy because revealing the secrets does harm to the organization they belong to and while I have no love for snitches as it is dishonorable I must ask:

If you are so law abiding, what use have you for secrets?

And if you espouse secrecy, you espouse omission of truth, a variant of lying.

So how could anyone trust anything any of you Masons say?

Nobody does. Nobody will ever believe in the benevolence of Freemasonry who isn't connected to it. Your little goon Brent Morris is not helping either, he is a smug puke.

If your secrets are great truths beneficial to humanity then your version of secrecy is repugnant and selfish. If.

I find it far more likely that your organization is so despised because it deserves to be, what you call secrets I call skeletons in the closet. Piety and righteousness needs no secrets or oaths.

As Yeshua the Nazarene said, oaths are of the evil one. While I do believe that pearls aren't for swine I don't believe that Freemasonry possesses any pearls and is the swine, as are all secrecy based organizations that simply would be destroyed if their dirty and naturally repugnant secrets ever got out. Your modern day efforts (Freemasons) to depict secrecy as a good thing and Freemasonry as a benevolent fraternity are failing miserably.



Organizations like Freemasonry were who the great JFK was going to expose before he got killed. Although his speech about secret societies is still available for anyone who wants to read it, I guarantee your sect was one of many that he was speaking of.

a reply to: LucianusXVII
We all have our opinions, but what I said is based on first hand experience.

Freemasonry is not just "Grown men playing dress up based on a few Biblical characters who are not real and revering a man who never existed (Hiram Abiff) because he wouldn't reveal a secret." Give it a few millenia people will say that George Washington wasn't real or that [insert any famous name] wasn't real. The tomb of King Hiram of Tyre, a figure used in the Hiramic legend of Freemasonry, still exists: www.travelingtemplar.com...

Freemasonry is not about "not snitching." Freemasonry has many qualities that it actually reveres.

There's nothing wrong with secrets or secrecy. Everyone has secrets and practices secrecy...even you. The fact that you're attempting to bind it to criminality shows how little you understand of human nature.

If you are so law abiding, what use have you for secrets?

There's nothing illegal about having secrets.

If your secrets are great truths beneficial to humanity then your version of secrecy is repugnant and selfish. If.

That's a mighty big "if" situation.

I find it far more likely that your organization is so despised because it deserves to be, what you call secrets I call skeletons in the closet.

LOL A tyrant will always find a pretext for its tyranny.

Piety and righteousness needs no secrets or oaths.

It seems what you're peddling isn't piety or righteousness, but rather self-righteousness, sanctimony, and moral narcissism.

Do you demonize soldiers for their oaths of enlistment? Public servants? Politicians? Wedding vows?

While I do believe that pearls aren't for swine I don't believe that Freemasonry possesses any pearls and is the swine, as are all secrecy based organizations that simply would be destroyed if their dirty and naturally repugnant secrets ever got out.

And what you believe is wrong.

Your modern day efforts (Freemasons) to depict secrecy as a good thing and Freemasonry as a benevolent fraternity are failing miserably.

Except we can show the fruits of our labors, of our benevolence.

As I said before there's nothing wrong with secrecy. The word "secret" comes from the Latin secretus which means to set apart or hide. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary a secret society is "any of various oath-bound societies often devoted to brotherhood, moral discipline, and mutual assistance." This is a fair description of Freemasonry, although I still disagree that we [Freemasonry] are a secret society -- maybe it's my bias. I do agree that Freemasonry is a private organization that possesses secrets. It is important to note that privacy is synonymous with secrecy. Privacy is the "quality or state of being apart from company and observation." Privacy is a natural right as everyone has a right to hide or conceal that which they possess or own whether it is a person, place, thing, belief or ideal.

As anti-Masons are as diverse as the fraternity is, they denounce secrecy and secrets for a variety of reasons; most simply believe that keeping secrets and secrecy is wrong as it is indicative of plotting against benevolent governments and religious organizations. Even when faced with the proposition that secrecy is the same thing as privacy, many still denounce it often for irrational reasons. Regardless, whether one calls it secrecy or privacy, everyone has a need for it and that is the main focus of this article. Understandably, our secrecy is what feeds their argument as without information they are left with only their imagination and rumors to guide them as to what occurs within the walls of Masonic bodies. Even when faced with the facts they will still stand by the fact that they don't like our private nature.

Now it is laughable to think Freemasonry is truly secret as one only needs to go to a library or get onto the internet to find a vast amount of information regarding our Fraternity, although more often than not some websites information is and was exaggerated and sensationalized. Even many of our own writings are published publicly and open for non-Masons to read. If so much is published why do we keep them private? There are many reasons why we Freemasons continue our private nature and the keeping of secrets. Freemasonry was traditionally extremely private during eras of totalitarianism out of obvious necessity as free-thinking and liberal ideas were seen as dangerous, condemned by tyrants, and forced from public view.

Overlooking the traditional need for secrecy anti-Masons often state, "If you have nothing hide, why keep it secret?" This is indicative of a nosy personality and one counter to liberty. Many seek to know what a Mason knows without the effort, without going through the process and earning the information which devalues the information, and would mean nothing to the unworthy and uninitiated.

While some denounce secrecy on moral grounds, Georg Simmel states that secrecy is a universal sociological form and has nothing to do with moral valuations. Those who believe that secrecy is naturally wrong and use the "nothing-to-hide" argument do so based on assumptions not fact. They presume that secrets are kept only to hide something wrong, but often privacy and secrecy enhance freedom and liberty since living in a police state, in a state of forced "transparency", inhibits the exercise of natural rights like freedom of speech, association/assembly, and all of those essential to a free society.

Others argue that secrecy is against their faith and religious doctrine, and in the case of those who are Christian, they often overlook Holy Scripture that states there is nothing wrong with secrecy or privacy. Many also seem to forget that since secrecy is universal that everyone keeps secrets and practices secrecy at some level. Those who would deny their own personal secrecy couldn't withstand much questioning concerning intimate aspects of their lives without, as David Flaherty says, "capitulating to the intrusiveness of certain subject matters." They also forget that a key element of a free government, like a Republican or Democratic one, is secrecy.

In my opinion, it is not about Freemasonry having anything to hide, but rather it has everything to do with the sense of entitlement some feel to know the business of others...and frankly, they don't have that right. Entitlement is the belief that one deserves something without putting labor or effort into properly receiving it which is the antithesis to the natural rights that protect secrecy and privacy. As free men we are endowed with the right to keep what is our personal, confidential, private, and secret; and as free men we do not need to justify the exercise of our Natural Rights.

Organizations like Freemasonry were who the great JFK was going to expose before he got killed. Although his speech about secret societies is still available for anyone who wants to read it, I guarantee your sect was one of many that he was speaking of.

JFK was not trying to expose Freemasonry. And many haven't read or heard the entire speech where JFK calls for greater secrecy, you're clearly one of them.

a reply to: KSigMason

You didn't answer my question you just said secrecy isn't illegal.

What use have you for secrets if the secrets themselves, not secrecy itself, are not skeletons in the closet.

Secrets are secrets because they are ugly and the keepers of the secret would suffer if they were told. People who have nothing to hide don't overly espouse secrecy as a virtue.

Like I said I am no snitch myself, but I also don't have secrets that I have to worry about people finding out. So the secrets that I know that could get people in trouble I keep to myself out of honor, not because I am a member of a secretive organization.

I understand not snitching and I don't care what you or anyone else does in secret, honestly.

But to think that secretive organizations are benevolent fraternities out to "Make good men better" is not ever going to be believed by anyone with any sense.

You are probably a good guy, I don't actually know, but I don't believe that Freemasonry is a good organization. I believe it's a sinister fraternity that has despicable secrets.

End of conversation.

a reply to: LucianusXVII
I did answer your question if you read my entire post.

What use have you for secrets if the secrets themselves, not secrecy itself, are not skeletons in the closet.

That's your ignorant assumption as to why we keep secrets. Again, read my previous response, but I'll add more here:

Another major reason why secrecy is advocated for the knowledge imparted by Freemasonry is to impart the lesson that our teachings are valuable. We leave many inexpensive items lying carelessly about our homes and offices, whereas truly valuable items are kept locked in safe deposit boxes or other repositories, or are carried with us at all times. In Poe's story, "The Purloined Letter," many hiding places are searched for the letter; having been left in plain view, it is overlooked as worthless. Since knowledge, per se, cannot be locked up physically, keeping it secret is the method used to restrict its circulation and ownership. If the teachings of Freemasonry were made available to anyone as a matter of routine, it would indicate to both members and outsiders that we attach only a modest value to them. Instead, we have spent centuries of effort keeping the truths of Masonry secret and passing them down the generations by memory. This should convince us that what we have labored so hard to possess is valuable indeed.
- Roger Firestone

There are many reasons we may love our spouses, but believing we can share anything with them is an important aspect to a healthy relationship. The idea that your closest companion will not share your private moments with anyone else is what allows you to trust them. The idea that we can trust them gives of the courage to share with them. This is the basis of the secrecy of Masonry.
- Cliff Porter

The obsessive fear of secrets leads to the denial of the right of secrecy and a rise in the demand for publicity. Concomitantly, distrust of privacy is accompanied by obsession with secrecy. Likewise, an open attitude toward privacy leads to a lessening of concern with secrecy.
- Beryl Bellman, Paradox of Secrecy

The link between trust and secrecy supports group cohesion while leaving room for personal investments.
- Gary Fine and Lori Holyfield

Secrecy is a universal sociological form and has nothing to do with your moral valuations. Those who believe that secrecy is naturally wrong and use the "nothing-to-hide" argument do so based on assumptions not fact. Everyone has secrets, even you, but you're attempting to play a nice game of double standard where you having secrets is okay, but not for Freemasonry. Get rid of your Entitlement Syndrome.

But to think that secretive organizations are benevolent fraternities out to "Make good men better" is not ever going to be believed by anyone with any sense.

That's your stupid opinion to have.

I believe it's a sinister fraternity that has despicable secrets.

And you're wrong.

originally posted by: LucianusXVII
Organizations like Freemasonry were who the great JFK was going to expose before he got killed. Although his speech about secret societies is still available for anyone who wants to read it, I guarantee your sect was one of many that he was speaking of.

If Kennedy was going to expose organizations like Masonry why was he in an organization like Masonry?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What the K of C?

Please. He took that about as serious as he did Catholicism which is not all.

Not to mention Knights of Columbus actually is a benign fraternity and doesn't have anywhere near the level of influence as Freemasonry or the Jesuits.

That's a really weak argument, Knights of Columbus, lol. Nobody thinks that the Knights of Columbus was an influence on Kennedy he probably just joined to make his father happy. It's a Papally sanctioned charitable trust for widows that has no skeletons like Freemasonry does.

a reply to: LucianusXVII

What "skeletons" do you think freemasonry has? I'd be truly interested to know.

originally posted by: LucianusXVII
Please. He took that about as serious as he did Catholicism which is not all.

And you know he did not take it seriously how? He tell you this during some channeling experience? He invited the Supreme Knight to the White House and participated in Knights of Columbus events while President. It looks to me that he took it serious enough.

You really need to try harder.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
What "skeletons" do you think freemasonry has?

Jimmy Hoffa, Elvis and Amelia Earhart to name a few.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: TerryDon79
What "skeletons" do you think freemasonry has?

Jimmy Hoffa, Elvis and Amelia Earhart to name a few.

Have you got them in stasis in your NJ lodge?

a reply to: TerryDon79

Stasis? You asked about skeletons that we have, I took that as a literal question.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: TerryDon79

Stasis? You asked about skeletons that we have, I took that as a literal question.

Oh.

I guess cannibalism is rife in those parts.

a reply to: TerryDon79

So a non-mason speaks for the mason community? I love this!!!
So where has your research taken you? Into the world of storytelling?

Two eyes, two ears, a sixth sense and no clue..

a reply to: tikbalang

Care to say that a bit clearer? I just couldn't understand it.

a reply to: TerryDon79

You speak for something you arent part of, yet still claim you done extensive research on.. Its like explaining the colors of the rainbow to a blind man, its a parable..