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.

 

Is there special treatment for Masons from Masons

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2005 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Weeeeeelllllll, not to be confused with a Mason, not that that's a bad thing, just not true, I've gotten out of a ticket just having a Ministry of Corrections badge on my coat. Wooooooo, scary thing there.

Am I right in assuming if I become a Mason, I can add the 2 together and become INVINCIBLE?



I think you must also include "itchy scalp". That way if people couldn't see your badge or ring they'd see you neurotically scratching your head. And then and only then would everyone cower in fear




posted on May, 26 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
...because an eldery member of your organization, one who I imagine has been a mason much longer than any of you, told me that to this day every american president is sworn in on a masonic bible.

But lemme guess, he was lying, or ignorant, a bad apple, a member of an 'irregular lodge', or maybe I just fabricated the story to suit some hateful agenda?



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
...because an eldery member of your organization, one who I imagine has been a mason much longer than any of you, told me that to this day every american president is sworn in on a masonic bible.

But lemme guess, he was lying, or ignorant, a bad apple, a member of an 'irregular lodge', or maybe I just fabricated the story to suit some hateful agenda?


Wrong on all counts, there is no such thing as a "Masonic Bible" in terms of content (it's the King James Version), it merely has a different cover, and a section that members of the Lodge can sign after each Degree. I provide this in a vain attempt to head off a tangent that has been replayed more than once. If you are still interested, ATS Search is your friend.

On to swearing in U.S. Presidents (also known as an inauguration). I've provided this link before, it even adds some more esoteric details, such as passage opened to, origin of Bible, and if more than one was present. Guess your source isn't as knowledgeable as you hoped (I'm sure he's a great guy, and would love to hang out with the ATS Masons, give him the website).

memory.loc.gov...

Solemnly Swear Monkeys, not just for cross your heart and hope to die...






[edit on 26/5/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by sebatwerk

Originally posted by yanchek
So morality is the highest standard in masonry. So how come G. Washington was a slave owner even when the masonry preaches equality of all people under God. That doesn't sound moral to me.


At the time, it was not considered immoral to own slaves. It was a practice used in many parts of the world. Thoughts of equality have nothing to do with slavery. We do not know Washington's reasons for owning slaves, but we do know that it was considered moral at the time.


This the most ignorant and reactionary garbage I have ever heard.

But I suppose this isn't any different than what your average white american thinks, or should i say, is taught in your schools.

Do you think the 10 million Africans whose lives your forefathers stole didn't know slavery was wrong?

There was a strong and influential anti-slavery movement in Europe in the 1700s. Only your great masonic heroes had nothing to do with it. They were busy opposing it and getting rich off slavery and genocide.

Whats-his-name raises an important point. That masons were the architects of the worst genocide in history. But this should be saved for a whole other thread.

Yes, I believe soon I will compile some facts and make a new post. It will have a provacative name and be sure to incur lots of whining and feet kicking from certain touchy american masons who are so fond of capital letters and exclamation points.

But since I enjoy your spazzy defensive outrages so much, let me leave you with a little quote.

"...from the 10 million Indians that once inhabited North America, after four centuries of settler invasion and rule there were in 1900 perhaps 200,000-300,000 surviving descendents in the USA....So when we hear that the settlers "pushed out the Indians" or "forced the Indians to leave their traditional hunting grounds", we know that these are just code-phrases to refer politely to the most barbaric genocide imaginable. It could well be the greatest crime in all of human history. Only here the Adolph Eichmanns and Heinrich Himmlers had names like Benjamin Franklin and Andrew Jackson."

J.Sakai, Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
Do you think the 10 million Africans whose lives your forefathers stole didn't know slavery was wrong?


No, I think it was thought as being perfectly acceptable among wealthy land-owners. How can you argue against this?



There was a strong and influential anti-slavery movement in Europe in the 1700s. Only your great masonic heroes had nothing to do with it. They were busy opposing it and getting rich off slavery and genocide.


Just so you know, there are and were masons in all walks of life, in all social classes and all positions of society. Just because one group of masons were of getting rich on the backs of black slaves, doesn't mean that there weren't other masons in Europe and America fighting for their rights. It would be convenient for your agenda if ALL masons felt the same way, and did the same things, but the fact of the matter is that Freemasons are a VERY diverse group of people, and no two Freemasons think alike.



Whats-his-name raises an important point. That masons were the architects of the worst genocide in history. But this should be saved for a whole other thread.


And nobody will argue with this... of course I'm sure you think that Americans are proud of having killed off the natives? You're a typical European American-hater. I can tell just by your post. Get over it. Start posting something of value or just move on.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
This the most ignorant *SNIP*


You said it.

On to George Washington, and slavery:


www.mountvernon.org
Privately, however, Washington could -- and did -- lead by example. In his will, he arranged for all of the slaves he owned to be freed after the death of his wife, Martha. He also left instructions for the continued care and education of some of his former slaves, support and training for all of the children until they came of age, and continuing support for the elderly.


Progressive and moral I say.

For those interested in perusing the entirety of this article.

www.mountvernon.org...

An extra article thrown in for good measure.

www.thehistorynet.com...

Modulok, you are a new member, so I will humbly suggest researching positions that you espouse within the forums, and documenting those positions through quotes and links. If you have any questions regarding how to do that, use the Gripe/Help Button, contact a moderator, or feel free to contact me.

Good Deed Monkeys, not just for helping little old ladies cross the street anymore...



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me

Wrong on all counts, there is no such thing as a "Masonic Bible" in terms of content (it's the King James Version), it merely has a different cover, and a section that members of the Lodge can sign after each Degree.


Its funny you'd object to me calling it a 'masonic bible' and then back this up with a link to a document that also refers to it as a 'masonic bible.' I'm aware of the nature of its contents, I have one.

Your response does not prove me or the mason I quoted wrong. In fact the link you provided stated that George Bush Senior was sworn in on the same masonic bible as George Washington, and that that Bush Junior wanted to be sworn in on the same one but it "had been transported, under guard, from New York to Washington for the inauguration but, due to inclement weather, a family Bible was substituted instead." Weren't you masons just claiming that neither of these two men were masons? This site also simply lacks the details of what kind of Bible was used in the augauration of most of your presidents.

C'mon, can't you do better than that?



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
Your response does not prove me or the mason I quoted wrong. In fact the link you provided stated that George Bush Senior was sworn in on the same masonic bible


Your source is not wrong. All presidents are sworn in on the same Bible, because it is tradition. This happens to be a masonic bible, simply because the first president to begin this tradition was a mason, and wanted to be sworn on such a bible. All presidents there after have followed the tradition by using the very same bible. It doesn't mean that they are swearinng any kind of allegiance to Freemasonry, though. It's just tradition.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by sebatwerk

Originally posted by Modulok
Do you think the 10 million Africans whose lives your forefathers stole didn't know slavery was wrong?


No, I think it was thought as being perfectly acceptable among wealthy land-owners. How can you argue against this?



And the German holocaust was thought as being perfectly acceptable among the Nazis and the German and American industrialists that bankrolled them. Whats your point?



Just so you know, there are and were masons in all walks of life, in all social classes and all positions of society. Just because one group of masons were of getting rich on the backs of black slaves, doesn't mean that there weren't other masons in Europe and America fighting for their rights. It would be convenient for your agenda if ALL masons felt the same way, and did the same things, but the fact of the matter is that Freemasons are a VERY diverse group of people, and no two Freemasons think alike.


Freemasonry in Europe and America in the 18th and 19th centuary was stricty an aristocratic bourgeois phenomenon and you know it. Please prove me wrong.

If there were elements of European or American feemasonry which were fighting for African liberation in the 18th or 19th centuary I'd love to learn about it, please provide some proof.

I was speaking of Freemasonry in Europe and America in the 18th and19th centuary, not all freemasons everywhere in all times. But no two Freemasons think alike? Hmm, all the masons on this forum seem to think alike.



... of course I'm sure you think that Americans are proud of having killed off the natives? .


Why are you so sure? I never said that.


You're a typical European American-hater. I can tell just by your post. Get over it. Start posting something of value or just move on.


Sebatwerk, you sound like a child. I point out the masonic involvement in what you yourself concide was the worst genocide in history, and that makes me a "European American-hater"? So, does that mean I'm a European who hates Americans or just someone who hates European Americans?
Is this what you mean by "posting something of value?"

You masons are too much...

Oh, and by the way Sebatwerk, whats my agenda?



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
...because an eldery member of your organization, one who I imagine has been a mason much longer than any of you, told me that to this day every american president is sworn in on a masonic bible.


Emphasis mine.


Originally posted by Modulok
Your response does not prove me or the mason I quoted wrong. In fact the link you provided stated that George Bush Senior was sworn in on the same masonic bible as George Washington, and that that Bush Junior wanted to be sworn in on the same one but it "had been transported, under guard, from New York to Washington for the inauguration but, due to inclement weather, a family Bible was substituted instead." Weren't you masons just claiming that neither of these two men were masons? This site also simply lacks the details of what kind of Bible was used in the augauration of most of your presidents.


The link most definitely debunks your claim (and your source's), unless you purport George H. Bush as the only President of the United States. The term Masonic Bible is a misnomer, it is most often used to infer that it is a version unto itself, as I previously stated, it is not. Washington’s “Masonic Bible” is no different than any other KJV of the period, it is simply the one used in his Lodge. Neither Bush is a Mason, the last Freemason U.S. President was Gerald Ford, the last elected Freemason President was Harry S. Truman. Since it is obvious you eschew any due diligence, I’ll go ahead and provide you with the list:

www.bessel.org...

Additional "fun facts."

www....-------------------------/library/conspiracy/freemasonry/

Presidential Monkeys, not just for swearing anymore...



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
And the German holocaust was thought as being perfectly acceptable among the Nazis and the German and American industrialists that bankrolled them. Whats your point?


My point goes back to the original post of this topic, that you cannot blame someone for what they did in a time period when what they were doing was considered to be OK.



Freemasonry in Europe and America in the 18th and 19th centuary was stricty an aristocratic bourgeois phenomenon and you know it. Please prove me wrong.


It was not STRICTLY. Predominately, maybe, but not strictly.



If there were elements of European or American feemasonry which were fighting for African liberation in the 18th or 19th centuary I'd love to learn about it, please provide some proof.


Please provide some proof of masons who were doing the opposite. The point is that nobody was doing these things AS MASONS. They were doing these as politicians, activists, landowners, etc etc. They just happenedto be masons. You need to understand that Freemasonry as a fraternity is not politically active. Whoever was a Freemason and doing these things, they were not acting on the part of Freemasonry.



But no two Freemasons think alike? Hmm, all the masons on this forum seem to think alike.


We all think alike about the fraternity, but that is not what I meant. There are certain facts about the fraternity that cannnot be disputed, and in that sense we DO think alike. In regards to political, religious, social, economic views, Freemasons are as diverse as any random group of people. Freemaosnry and Freemasons take no position on these subjects, so NO, no two Freemasons think alike.



Sebatwerk, you sound like a child. I point out the masonic involvement in what you yourself concide was the worst genocide in history, and that makes me a "European American-hater"? So, does that mean I'm a European who hates Americans or just someone who hates European Americans?
Is this what you mean by "posting something of value?"


I sound like a child? Is insulting people who dont agree with you a normal component of your arguments, or do I actually deserve to be insulted by the likes of you? I called you a European American-hater because of the way you spoke of Americans in your previous thread.

The fact of the matter is that there was no masonic involvement in the worst genocide in history because the men were not acting on behalf of Freemasonry. They were acting on behalf of their own interests. They were not all masons, and for every mason on one side of an issue, there is always a mason on the other. You seem unable to understand that Freemasons are first Husbands, fathers, public officers, employees, business owners, laborers, etc etc BEFORE they are Freemasons.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 01:47 PM
link   
So George Washington arranged to have his slaves freed AFTER he died? What a humanitarian. THIS is supposed to prove my post wrong? This is a pathetic attempt at a counter-point and demonstrates a serious flaw in your reasoning. In fact there is nothing of substance in your "rebuttal" at all.

And it seems even Sebatwerk can see the glaring inaccuracies of your masonic-bible-inauguration post.

My lack of internet links? I do most of my studying in real libraries, not the internet. But here are some *BOOKS*, mostly written by some of your fellow americans, where you can find all these facts.

Of Plymouth Plantation - William Bradford, 1952
Social Origins of Some Early Americans - Mildred Campbell, 1972
Reformation to Industrial Revolution - Christopher Hill, 1967
America at 1750 - Richard Hofstadter - 1973
Indians Of North America - Harold E. Driver - 1968
The Southern Frontier, 1670-1732 - Verner W.Crane
Red, White and Black - Gary B. Nash - 1974
The European Discovery of America: The Northern Voyages - Samuel Eliot Morison - 1971
The First American Revolution - Clinton Rossiter - 1956
Virginia 1705-1786: Democracy or Aristocracy? - Robert E. & B. Katherine Brown - 1964
Bases of the Plantation Society - Audrey C.Land - 1969
The Shaping Of Colonial Virginia - Thomas J. Wertenbaker - 1958
The Colonial Era - Herbert Aptheker - 1959
A Nation of Nations - Louis Adamic - 1945
The First American Revolution - Jack Hardy - 1937
White Over Black - Winthrop D. Jordan - 1969
Black Odyssey - Roi Ottley - 1949
Industrial Slavery in the Old South - Robert S. Starobin - 1975
The Political Economy of Slavery - Eugene D. Genovese - 1965
Jacksonian America - Edward Pessen - 1969
Man's Rise to Civilization - Peter Farb - 1968

All my posts have been solid. You don't like them so you make baseless accusations that im lying or posting false information. Please, feel free to dispute (i mean *actually* dispute) anything I've ever said. You shouldn't be so quick to speak - your quickly eroding your credibility.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
My lack of internet links? I do most of my studying in real libraries, not the internet. But here are some *BOOKS*, mostly written by some of your fellow americans, where you can find all these facts.

Of Plymouth Plantation - William Bradford, 1952
Social Origins of Some Early Americans - Mildred Campbell, 1972
Reformation to Industrial Revolution - Christopher Hill, 1967
America at 1750 - Richard Hofstadter - 1973
Indians Of North America - Harold E. Driver - 1968
The Southern Frontier, 1670-1732 - Verner W.Crane
Red, White and Black - Gary B. Nash - 1974
The European Discovery of America: The Northern Voyages - Samuel Eliot Morison - 1971
The First American Revolution - Clinton Rossiter - 1956
Virginia 1705-1786: Democracy or Aristocracy? - Robert E. & B. Katherine Brown - 1964
Bases of the Plantation Society - Audrey C.Land - 1969
The Shaping Of Colonial Virginia - Thomas J. Wertenbaker - 1958
The Colonial Era - Herbert Aptheker - 1959
A Nation of Nations - Louis Adamic - 1945
The First American Revolution - Jack Hardy - 1937
White Over Black - Winthrop D. Jordan - 1969
Black Odyssey - Roi Ottley - 1949
Industrial Slavery in the Old South - Robert S. Starobin - 1975
The Political Economy of Slavery - Eugene D. Genovese - 1965
Jacksonian America - Edward Pessen - 1969
Man's Rise to Civilization - Peter Farb - 1968


Your book list (of which I'm sure you've read all
) appears in the same order on this webpage (very bottom):

www.maoism.ru...

I know it's just a link, but it sure does seem... A unique coincidence. Cyrillic text as well, speaking of genocide and mass murder, why not give the kudos to the real master, Josef Stalin? My question is, what’s the chance a communist philosophy website in Cyrillic would match your “reading list?” So much for the library theory, care to play some more?

Well Read Monkeys, not just for actually cracking a book anymore...


[edit on 26/5/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 02:20 PM
link   


My point goes back to the original post of this topic, that you cannot blame someone for what they did in a time period when what they were doing was considered to be OK.


Sorry, this argument doesn't stand up. Lots've people knew slavery was wrong and were being quite vocal about it. Sides were drawn and people like George Washington made a concious and educated decision to stand on the evil side.



It was not STRICTLY. Predominately, maybe, but not strictly.


I'm open minded, but i can't take this seriously unless you show me some evidence.



Please provide some proof of masons who were doing the opposite.


You've already acknowledged there were. But i will show you some proof. In another thread.



The point is that nobody was doing these things AS MASONS. They were doing these as politicians, activists, landowners, etc etc. They just happenedto be masons.


Even if I grant you that - which I won't - would you not agree you can judge an organization by a pattern in the moral character of its members? People go to masonry to LEARN, do they not? Masonry is supposed to shape the intellectual, spiritual, moral character of the intiate, is it not? My point is this: if masons were responsible for these horrible crimes, what does this say about what was taught in their lodges?

The European anti-slavery movement was foundied in the 1700s by Quakers, and Quakers always played a large and influential role in it. This is because the Quakers believed that all human beings were equal before God. Did the masons? in the 1760s Quakers began expelling all slave-owners from their congregations. Did the masons?


You need to understand that Freemasonry as a fraternity is not politically active. Whoever was a Freemason and doing these things, they were not acting on the part of Freemasonry.


Now Sebatwerk, we both know there were various events in European history where masonic lodges were engaging in political causes. Would you really dispute this? If so, fine, but I think we can agree thats a whole other thread.



I sound like a child? Is insulting people who dont agree with you a normal component of your arguments, or do I actually deserve to be insulted by the likes of you? I called you a European American-hater because of the way you spoke of Americans in your previous thread.


You said that you "knew" that I was a european american-hater (which i'm not) and that my posts had no value (which is unfair). I said you sounded like a child. Don't dish it out if you can't take it.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 02:37 PM
link   



Your book list (of which I'm sure you've read all
) appears in the same order on this webpage (very bottom):

www.maoism.ru...

I know it's just a link, but it sure does seem... A unique coincidence. Cyrillic text as well, speaking of genocide and mass murder, why not give the kudos to the real master, Josef Stalin? My question is, what’s the chance a communist philosophy website in Cyrillic would match your “reading list?” So much for the library theory, care to play some more?


mirthful, this is a cheap way of avoiding the fact I exposed and utterly demolished your baseless arguments. Again, i would suggest you not be too quick to speak, because Im about to make you look silly (again).

I've never been to that website in my life, I am not Russian, I cannot speak and I cannot read Russian.

If you spent a few seconds you would see it is a Maoist website that has reprinted a Russian translation of Settlers: Mythology of the White Proletariot by J. Sakai. J.Sakai is not a Maoist and in fact his book contains scathing criticism of communists. The "book list" you mention is the bibliography of that book. Yes, the books I posted are included within it, because I learned about those books through reading J.Sakai's book, and consulted my copy of the book to get the name's and authors. You see if you really after the truth you need to not just read a book but examine its research sources as well.

I am not a communist, a Stalinist, or any other nonsense, so please, don't resort to this kind of nonsense.

Again, you are quickly eroding your credibility.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
Lots've people knew slavery was wrong and were being quite vocal about it. Sides were drawn and people like George Washington made a concious and educated decision to stand on the evil side.


You cannot claim to know what people knew or didnt know at the time. Ans you also cannot claim that you know somebody's reason for taking an action.





It was not STRICTLY. Predominately, maybe, but not strictly.


I'm open minded, but i can't take this seriously unless you show me some evidence.


It's on its way...



The point is that nobody was doing these things AS MASONS. They were doing these as politicians, activists, landowners, etc etc. They just happenedto be masons.


Even if I grant you that - which I won't - would you not agree you can judge an organization by a pattern in the moral character of its members? People go to masonry to LEARN, do they not? Masonry is supposed to shape the intellectual, spiritual, moral character of the intiate, is it not? My point is this: if masons were responsible for these horrible crimes, what does this say about what was taught in their lodges?


Oh please! Freemasonry is not responsible for the actions of its members when what they were doing was not considered immoral! In the society in which they were living and active, it was perfectly acceptable to own slaves and kill indians, and it was NOT JUST MASONS that were doing these things! You can NOT state that they knew that what they were doing was wrong! You're kidding yourself if you think you know exactly what each person was thinking!

You seem to have a bone to pick with Freemasons, but why are you singling them out only? What about the thousands of other organizations that the people doing these things represented? The fact of the matter is that very few masons actually learn and develop morally based on Freemasonry's teachings. You cannot blame an organization for men's actions by saying that the fraternity should have taught them better! That's absolutely absurd! This is not about freemasonry, and you will not hold the fraternity responsible for these things.

You can hold society responsible, the government, the businesses, even the men. But leave your silly accusations against an organization that doesn't involve itself with such things out of this conversation.



Now Sebatwerk, we both know there were various events in European history where masonic lodges were engaging in political causes. Would you really dispute this?


Again, these were individual lodges acting on their own, and did not represent the views of positions of the fraternity. You fail to realize that Freemasonry is a HUGE organization, LOOSELY managed and BARELY held together by recognition between different lodges. While one lodge may have been politically involved and attracted men with similar opinions, other lodges may have not.



You said that you "knew" that I was a european american-hater (which i'm not) and that my posts had no value (which is unfair). I said you sounded like a child. Don't dish it out if you can't take it.


I told you that based on your post, I could tell that you were. Don't write something if you can't stand to be criticized for it. On the other hand, a personal attack/ insult based on nothing I wrote is uncalled for. THAT is unfair.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
And it seems even Sebatwerk can see the glaring inaccuracies of your masonic-bible-inauguration post.


Actually I was mistaken. A quick search n the subject shows that only Bush Sr. used the masonic bible sworn on by George Washington. Bush Jr. tried using that same bible also, but inclement weather caused them to have to use a family bible instead.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
mirthful, this is a cheap way of avoiding the fact I exposed and utterly demolished your baseless arguments. Again, i would suggest you not be too quick to speak, because Im about to make you look silly (again).


You seem to like tooting your own horn quite a bit. The fact of the matter is that YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE who believes you "utterly demolished" his post. I would suggest you not be so full of yourself, especially when arguing with people who know what they're talking about. That is a surefire way to make yourself look like a sucker.



Again, you are quickly eroding your credibility.


And again, you resort to baseless attacks and opinions to try to make someone seem the way you are painting them. You're been on these forums a VERY short time, and have the slightest clue as to the status of Mirthful's credibility. You, on the other hand, haven't done much to gain any credibility, yet you don't see anyone resorting to attacking YOUR credibility.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok
mirthful, this is a cheap way of avoiding the fact I exposed and utterly demolished your baseless arguments. Again, i would suggest you not be too quick to speak, because Im about to make you look silly (again).

I've never been to that website in my life, I am not Russian, I cannot speak and I cannot read Russian.

If you spent a few seconds you would see it is a Maoist website that has reprinted a Russian translation of Settlers: Mythology of the White Proletariot by J. Sakai. J.Sakai is not a Maoist and in fact his book contains scathing criticism of communists. The "book list" you mention is the bibliography of that book. Yes, the books I posted are included within it, because I learned about those books through reading J.Sakai's book, and consulted my copy of the book to get the name's and authors. You see if you really after the truth you need to not just read a book but examine its research sources as well.

I am not a communist, a Stalinist, or any other nonsense, so please, don't resort to this kind of nonsense.

Again, you are quickly eroding your credibility.


So from your list... You the bibliography of a book, veracity denied. You inferred that you read these books, then when confronted with the fact the list had been duplicated in order from another source, verbatim, you produce that source and then obfuscate by trying to impugn the website I used. I knew exactly what it was, my use was based on the ridiculousness of your claim to have read those books in a library. The reason quotes and links are used in a discussion forum is to facilitate access in a rapid and verifiable manner. That may be an impediment to what you are trying to accomplish, yet it's the only real way to be believed around here.

Quick list of things you've claimed, yet are not true.

All U.S. Presidents used a "Masonic Bible” during their inauguration.

False, Rutherford B. Hayes didn’t even use a Bible.

George H. Bush and George W. Bush are Freemasons.

False, they do belong to the society Skull & Bones (which is not Masonic), but they are not Freemasons.

Freemasons are the architects of the worst genocide in history.

False, Josef Stalin and Adolph Hitler run one and two in this department. Roosevelt, Truman, Churchhill, Macarthur, and Bradley (all Freemasons) were among those who fought the “moral” war against Hitler and contained Stalin.

So much for “demolishing” my posts, or are you inclined to try some revisionist posting in that regard as well?

As for J. Sakai, here is an interesting assessment of his “work.”

www.newsocialist.org...

Can’t count on those neo-communist for anything these days.


Settler Monkeys, not just for shaping a continent anymore…


[edit on 26/5/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Modulok


It was not STRICTLY. Predominately, maybe, but not strictly.


I'm open minded, but i can't take this seriously unless you show me some evidence.


You stated that Freemasonry in Europe in the 1700 and 1800s was STRICTLY upper-class. I said that, while it was predomenately upper-class, it was not solely. You asked me for proof, and here's a bit of proof. It's from an essay regarding the beginnings of the Orange Order, an Irish Quasi-Masonic organization:

free.freespeech.org...

Here's an excerpt. In it, it references instances of Lodge Masters being tailors, linen inspectors and inn keepers:



LOWER CLASS ORIGINS

Despite its militant loyalism and anti-revolutionary ideology, there are remarkable parallels between the early Orange lodges and the Defender-United Irish alliance that had emerged by 1795. Both were popular movements; both had antecedents in Freemasonry and Volunteering; both thrived in the divided, densely textured, modernising society and economy of Ulster. The first of these similarities concerned the government and its supporters most. Dan Winter was a publican and the first lodge masters included tailors, ‘linen inspectors’ and inn keepers. One early lodge, No 7, met in a disused lime kiln, other lodges, echoing ‘hedge’ or ‘unwarranted’ masonry, were known as ‘hedgers’ or ‘ditchers’ from their practice of assembling ‘behind hedges or in dry ditches’. Later apologists rather implausibly deny any connection between the Peep O’ Day Boys and the first Orangeman or, even less plausibly, between the Orangemen and the mass ‘wrecking’ of Catholic cottages in Armagh in the months following the Diamond; all of them, however, acknowledge the movement’s lower class origins. As one sympathetic, but socially ‘respectable’ chronicler of these years put it, Protestant farmers and linen manufacturers, all ‘humble men . . . decided to have a system of their own creation, and to control it themselves . . . an organisation formed and fashioned by their own hands, in harmony with their own ideas, and outside the control of landed proprietors, agents, bailiffs, baronial constables, and all the rest’.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join