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.

 

A question for the masons

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by billmcelligott
If it is left un - challenged the reader may well think it is fact.


Sorry Bill, I challenge that. I have no choice reading this forum, my job but it becomes appearent very quickly that the EVIDENCE leans towards those that present it and you know who that is. Continued bickering actually turns one off of both sides.



So are you saying that any accusation should be left un challenged then ? Should I stand by at let untruths stand alone?
Or that I do not produce evidence ?

And lastly is continued bickering turns one off, why are there so many posts at ATS. ?

[edit on 14-4-2005 by billmcelligott]




posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by sebatwerk

I don't know intrepid, that attitude is what got Masonry to where it is now, in the firts place. I see your point, but these antis have gone un-challenged for too long, and look what's happened:

all the books bashing masons
all the "popular myths" about masons
all the conspiracy theories about masons

And all this is at least in partn due to the fact that masons have adopted a policy of silence and non-confrontation in the past.



I have to agree, we get blasted for being silent and when we speak up we are told it is better if we say nothing.

Well I am not the silent type.

Lets look at the fortunes of Freemasonery Watch as an example.

Freemasonry Watch was the number one web site on 'anti Masonic lists' and the number one web site on 'Masonic lists'. Every search made with anything to do with Freemasonry brought up Freemasonry Watch.

Then about 3 years ago we had a surge of Masonic Web Sites challenge that supemecy. I am proud to say I was one of those upstarts that played a part in this. Today if you put a search into Google , say 'Masonic Books' you will end up with a list that does not show FW at all.

So tell me, was it reasonable and fair that two years ago only the Anti Masonic sites were available on search engines.

Why? because it was thought in Masonic Circles , pushing yourself forward was not good form. It was not the Masonic way.

Freemasonry Watch was a powerful and unchallenged tool for Mr. Icke. He did a great job of promoting and using the systems he had. Today he says he does not control the site, but they do sell his books, and why not.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by sebatwerk

Originally posted by Zystesxt9
Hey Seb, was it not you, who said, " show me some info to some of MY claims, and I ( YOU) will shut up"?

if not sorry .

if so, when do u propose tom shut up?
it doesnt matter how much info u guys get... You will always defend your truth... That is only human.
And Ilks will do the same.


I said I would shut up if you could provide CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE of your claims. Up until now, you have done no such thing, only heresay, circumstance, supposition and assumption. Read the terms and conditions.


[edit on 13-4-2005 by sebatwerk]


Sebatwerk, It would not matter how much information I, or any one of the ilks, put up regarding the matters on this thread. You will never read them with any such respect, because it is based at yourselves, so anything I say to you is taken as severe regurgitated BS, and anything you say to me is certainly taken with regard to the trash I put out yesterday and the stuff my cat leaves on the ground after a good feed, so all in all, this thread is just a complete waste of time to you and me. would that be a true sentence?
Anyway, In regard to the Freemasons on this site, and to all other Freemasons who may visit this thread in the near future.
What the hell is wrong with a great debate, nothing. but nothing ventured is nothing gained, especially when the information posted on here by the so-called ilks, is well known to everyone, but you and your queer mates who only wish to laugh at us, and poke fun at the spelling mistakes others make.
Thats a funny thing, aye? Because obviously, You can not make any other true statements to mark the truth that you so wish to make known.
So, if you really want to know something from one of us ilks...

Thanks for the no info on your behalf that is true enough to be regarded as gospel.
Ciao

[edited out line that circumvents auto-censors for vulgarity - nygdan]


[edit on 14-4-2005 by Nygdan]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Axeman
Good stuff my friend, but I was talking about Eliphas Levi. Perhaps he didn't "come up with" Baphomet, but he did elaborate and he drew this representation


That is actually rather remarkable, and excuse me "ilks", but my thanks goes to THE AXEMAN for this incredible piece of information.
And I mean this in the nicest possible way.
Blessed Be.

[edit on 14-4-2005 by Nygdan]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by senrak

Originally posted by Zystesxt9
You will always defend your truth...


That we will. We WILL defend the truth....while you continue to lie.



And Ilks will do the same.


HA HA HA HA! Do you even know what the word "ilk" means? Do you understand the context in which it was originally used by me? I admire that you've taken it upon yourself to call yourself that...but the word is "trolls"


Yes, senrak, I do infact know what ilk means.
It means ... A kind of person.
I aint as silly as you would like to think.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 05:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by sebatwerk
And by the way "NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM" Means "A new Order For The Ages", NOT "New World Order". Just another example of how you try to twist facts to suit your agenda.


This is arguable. I think we covered the meaning of this latin quote in Dollar Bill thread. It is not about twisting the fact it's about different point of view.

About disclosure of "secret" Masonic knowledge.
They are following a simple rule. "You don't give whats holy to the dogs, and you don't feed pearls to the swine."



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zystesxt9
So, if you really want to know something from one of us ilks...


Still haven't found a dictionary to look that up yet, huh?



I think you guys are full of SH**.


The feeling is mutual, I assure you



and thats all I wish to say.


REALLY? You're leaving???? REALLY???? YIPEEEEEEEE!



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zystesxt9
Yes, senrak, I do infact know what ilk means.
It means ... A kind of person.
I aint as silly as you would like to think.


Apparently you are indeed as silly as I think. That or you don't understand word usage.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 07:15 AM
link   
ilk according to digital Webster

1ilk \'ilk\ pron
[ME, fr. OE ilca, fr. a prehistoric compound whose constituents are akin respectively to Goth is he (akin to L is hetthat) and OE gelı‾c like — more at ITERATE, LIKE]
chiefly Scot
(bef. 12c)
:SAME — used with that esp. in the names of landed families

2ilk n
(1790)
:SORT, KIND Æthe rejection of these books or others of like ilk —Kathleen Molzæ

3ilk pron
[ME, adj. & pron., fr. OE ylc, æ‾lc — more at EACH]
chiefly Scot
(bef. 12c)
:EACH



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zystesxt9
Sebatwerk, It would not matter how much information I, or any one of the ilks, put up regarding the matters on this thread. You will never read them with any such respect, because it is based at yourselves, so anything I say to you is taken as severe regurgitated BS, and anything you say to me is certainly taken with regard to the trash I put out yesterday and the stuff my cat leaves on the ground after a good feed, so all in all, this thread is just a complete waste of time to you and me. would that be a true sentence?


Absolutely not. That would not be true at all. If you provided a link to some kind of fact or statements or evidence that supported your claims, I would ABSLUTELY click on the link, browse the evidence, and then we would have a REAL, HONEST DISCUSSION. But everything you guys say is what we masons KNOW to be pure lies, and we try to tell you guys that. But it is YOU that is not interested in what we have to say, it is YOU who do not believe the things we say, not the other way around.

Everytime you guys say one of these OFFENSIVE things about masonry, it's like calling my mother a whore. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT!?!?!? Would you like it if I said your mom wears earrings as anklets!?!?!?? Then don't say those things about masonry unless you have some hard fact to support it.



Anyway, In regard to the Freemasons on this site, and to all other Freemasons who may visit this thread in the near future.
What the hell is wrong with a great debate, nothing. but nothing ventured is nothing gained, especially when the information posted on here by the so-called ilks, is well known to everyone, but you and your queer mates who only wish to laugh at us, and poke fun at the spelling mistakes others make.


Like I've told you before, we are just sick and tired of dealing with peoplel who make baseless claims. It happens ALL THE TIME, I've dealt with it since before I became a mason, and we're just sick of it. The things you guys claim have been REFUTED BY EVIDENCE hundreds of times on this forum. We're tired of doing it, so we resort to making eachh other laugh about how silly your guys' claims are. And we CAN laugh, because we KNOW they are not true. We have proof.


Thanks for the no info on your behalf that is true enough to be regarded as gospel.
I think you guys are full of SH**. and thats all I wish to say.


We have given anti-masons like yourselves BOOKS-WORTH of TRUE information on this forum. It's not our fault if you guys choose not to believe it.

And by the way, I will notify the mods about the lovely insult you just threw at me above. We do not say things like this to you, please don't do that to us. Please stick to the TOS.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   


ILKS

they have made up their minds. Don't confuse them with facts.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek

Originally posted by sebatwerk
And by the way "NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM" Means "A new Order For The Ages", NOT "New World Order". Just another example of how you try to twist facts to suit your agenda.


This is arguable. I think we covered the meaning of this latin quote in Dollar Bill thread. It is not about twisting the fact it's about different point of view.


But that different point of view is based on an incorrect translation and therefore incorrect meaning of the phrase.



About disclosure of "secret" Masonic knowledge.
They are following a simple rule. "You don't give whats holy to the dogs, and you don't feed pearls to the swine."


Masonic knowledge is available to ANY mason. This is not an elitist issue, masons don't regard people as being "unworthy" of the knowledge. Anybody can become a mason provided that they are a law-abiding man and they believe in God. There are masons of all types, not just upper-class republicans. But they are masonic secrets and therefore available only to masons. If someone wants to learn, they can join without problem.


[edit on 14-4-2005 by sebatwerk]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by senrak

Originally posted by Driver
That knowledge could set this world free and would help stop the New World Order.


Perhaps that's what we're trying to do....just perhaps. Perhaps those "high-ranking" Masons everyone says is involved in the NWO are there to help destroy it from within. Just perhaps.



This doesn't make sense Senrak, George Bush Sr. Is a mason right? Bohemian Grove right? Former CIA director right? Omega agency member? Maybe... Why would the masons want to stop the NWO. I would think that the masons would see a good NWO scenario as ideal.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by JonestownRed
This doesn't make sense Senrak, George Bush Sr. Is a mason right? Bohemian Grove right? Former CIA director right? Omega agency member? Maybe... Why would the masons want to stop the NWO. I would think that the masons would see a good NWO scenario as ideal.


NO, George Bush Sr. is NOT a mason, neither is George W. They have no affiliation to masonry whatsoever.

[edit on 14-4-2005 by sebatwerk]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by billmcelligottSo are you saying that any accusation should be left un challenged then ? Should I stand by at let untruths stand alone?

Certainly not, you, and anyone, should discuss the issues. I think what intrepid is say is that tit for tat accusations don't do anyone anygood.

I mean, if someone comes in and says 'masons are mindcontrolled agents of the reptiloid illuminati', you've got every right, indeed, you have a duty to say its bunk, and explain why. But it doesn't do any good for anyone to say to that person 'you're a moron, toss off' and thats all.That just keeps the whole discussion in a state of strife, rather than a conversation out of which info can be gleaned.

And like wise, it didn't make sense in the first place for anyone to say 'masons are reptiles' and not even try to back it up. I mean, to say 'i read in a book by david icke that the masons are associated with the illuminati and are part of a conspiracy to control the world, is that true, what refutes it, what supports it' etc etc, is good. To just cite some book written by anyone as demonstrating fact is falsehood and silly. To discuss weird ideas is a good idea, but to take dogmatic positions over something read in a poorly written book is a bad idea.


I have to agree, we get blasted for being silent and when we speak up we are told it is better if we say nothing.

I've seen posters say 'why are you masons so quick and thorough to respond', which is assinine, they should be thanking for quick and thorough responses. Then again, some times, because they've been involved in this for a while, the masons are quick to get exasperated with a poster who has just gotten introduced to it all.


Zystesxt9
What the hell is wrong with a great debate, nothing

A great debate, or even a decent and honest discussion, would be wonderful. However, you are avoiding the questions put to you, and you are not providing sources to back up most of what you accuse nor are you, apparently, willing to consider that your sources aren't entirely accurate. That is pointless.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Are you sure GB Sr. isnt a mason? I thought he was. If not, I apologize for that. Anyways, why would the masons be against a good NWO?

[edit on 14-4-2005 by JonestownRed]



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by JonestownRed
Are you sure GB Sr. isnt a mason? I thought he was. If not, I apologize for that. Anyways, why would the masons be against a good NWO?

[edit on 14-4-2005 by JonestownRed]


GB is definitely not a mason.

While all masons are different, in general I believe that masons would be against the NWO because they believe in liberty and freedom. They always have, and their actions demonstrate this in the most obvious way. Masons have always resisted tyranny and abuse of power. Look at what happened in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco's Spain... look at the American and French revolutions.

Masons are promoters of harmony. If an NWO could bring harmony to the world, then maybe Freemasonry would be for it. Who knows.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Interesting. Harmony is my ideal as well. I am not a mason, however.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by JonestownRed
Interesting. Harmony is my ideal as well. I am not a mason, however.


The most important aspect of lodge meetings is maintaining the harmony between brothers in the lodge room. That's why no politics or religion discussions are allowed, for example. When in lodge, everyone does their best to maintain that attitude throughout. I think that converts to all of masonry.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Lets not forget that Freemasonry is apolitical and areligious. It has no political aspirations, doesn't get involved in politicking and will never ever ever give an opinion as regards any kind of politics.

Freemasons, however, are not freemasonry. We are all individuals who are members of all political parties and have political viewpoints that span the spectrum. What we do all have in common, however, is a tolerance of each others point of view.

So when you say 'masons do this' and 'masons think that' - yes they probably do but not in their capacity as freemasons. So if any given politician is a freemason, it cannot be said that his political view has anything to do with his masonic membership, and certainly doesn't imply that freemasonry as a whole shares that view.

JonestownRed - love the avatar. We don't get Kool-Aid in the UK so I have to import it via my sister-in-law in Care Packages
Tropical Punch, closely followed by Grape. Can't beat it




top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join