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.

 

Masons and the NWO: The Darker Soul

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loungerist
If you want to say the society isn't secret,just the members that the society is composed of are,then you're free to do so. It's semantic at this point. But the end result remains the same:a society of people acting vehemently in secret from those who are not members. Which according to my view,the encyclopedia,and wikipedia,is the very definition of a secret society.


Freemasonry doesn't even qualify as a secret society by Wikipedias standards. It gives a definition of a secret society as:


"Political parties and other organizations whose programmes are based upon totalitarian methods and the modes of activity of nazism, fascism and communism, as well as those whose programmes or activities sanction racial or national hatred, the application of violence for the purpose of obtaining power or to influence the State policy, or provide for the secrecy of their own structure or membership..."


I think you'll agree that the only part of this that might apply is "provide for the secrecy of their own structure or membership".

Well, the structure is well known...

www.mastermason.com...

... and how we are organised is not hidden...

en.wikipedia.org...

... and our leaders publish their bios...

www.grandlodge-england.org...

www.glmasons-mass.org...

... and our members are listed in yearbooks...

i20.ebayimg.com...

... so tell me again - which part of freemasonry is secret?

The fact that there are freemasons out there who don't wish to talk to non-masons about freemasonry is entirely up to them - all of us have a perfect right to discuss as much or as little about anything as we wish.

I don't know in which country you live, Loungerist, but I can tell you that in mine people have a Right to Privacy and can do whatever they like in private as long as its legal. That Right protects everyone against interfering busybodies like the government and people who think they know how to run my life better than I do.

I'm hope you're not one of those people but I know there are a lot of them out there.




posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   
I think its kind of silly to say too strongly that masonry is not a secret society. True enough, its not some world devouring evil cabal, but its clearly a secret society. Mackey has no problem refering to it as such and he notes that secret socities have things like Secret Handshakes and modes of recognition, and secret rites. Given this, Freemasonry is a secret society. The Knights of Columbus are a secret society, the Rosicurians (all of 'em), the Knight of Pythias, the Elks and Lions clubs too no? These are teh things that people normally think of as secret societies. And then there are the conspiratorial secret socities, like the Sons of Liberty, the actual bavarian Illuminati, The levantine Unitarians (oft called Druze but apparently they dislike that).

Also, while I don't think that there are hard definitions for it, I do think that we can say that there are Secret Societies, and then Mystery Religions, that are seperate, even tho freemasonry operates somewhat in the manner of a mystery religion, with initiates, entered members, and masters.
The difference being of course that one is an out and out religion and the other is a social club.

Of course, the Rosicurians might be seen as a Secret Society that blends into the religion realm, and the 'druze' are probably better described as a highly secretive religion, and groups like the Sufis and Alawis are perhaps best left out of consideration, for clarity.



posted on Aug, 17 2005 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trinityman

Freemasonry doesn't even qualify as a secret society by Wikipedias standards.


"A secret society is a social organization that requires its members to conceal certain activities—such as rites of initiation or club ceremonies—from outsiders. Members may be required to conceal or deny their membership, and are often sworn to hold the society's secrets by an oath. The term "secret society" is often used to describe fraternal organizations (e.g. Freemasonry) that may have secret ceremonies"

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dave Ravin
I am trying to get across the point that, though there are masons, and lodges including all members that are engaged in completely respectable and legal doings, there is a certain sect of the masons that is connected with the Illuminati and the New World Order.


Yet you have no way to prove this...? I hear this nonsense all the time, but have yet to see not even proof, but just a little sliver of SOMETHING that could HINT at the possibility. But, not only is there no evidence that Freemasons are connected to the NWO, there is no evidence that the NWO itself exists, or that anyone is attempting to bring it about in a conspiratorial manner!



It is unlikely that the [Grand Poobah] of your fraternity is unaware of these masons and lodges that undertake unscrupulous tasks.


It's very likely, because there is no such thing as a Grand Poobah! There is NO CENTRAL AUTHORITY in Freemasonry. The highest level of authority is a Grand Lodge for each masonic jurisdiction, which, in the US, is one for each state. Officers to run the Grand Lodge, including the Grand Master, are elected to one-year terms by ALL the brethren in the jurisdiction (state). Once their term is up, they return to their local lodge and rejoin the brethren.



I suppose it is possible for a lodge to be able to choose, through its leadership, what sorts of functions a given lodge would endorse. The one thing that I keep hearing from the masonic point of view is that there simply is no masonic connection to the New World Order. But how can someone continually see arguments stating that there is a connection, and not entertain the possibility?


A lodge can choose whether or not to participate in the extracurricular programs that the Grand Lodge of that jurisdiction puts forth, such as charity events, etc. But the Grand Lodge does control things such as masonic constitution in that jurisdiction, rituals, membership issues, etc. Nothing to do with an NWO, a Grand Lodge is busy enough running the fraternity.



Adam Weishaupt wanted a New World Order. HE is the culprit that took Feemasonry's framework and shored-up the foundation of his Illuminati.


The Bavarian Illuminati wanted nothing more than to overthrown the government that was running Bavarian Germany at the time! They had a very liberal, enlightenment-era view of what the world should be like, but they made no attempts at gaining it.

The bavarian Illuminati was the least secret of all secret societies, and lasted no more than 20 years because they were eventually disbanded due to government intrusion and internal bickering among senior officers. There is evidence to show this, and NO evidence to show they continued to exist after the late 1700s.

Riiiiight, they're the ones that started the NWO




Again, it isn't that the Illuminati is a masonic organization... rather, the Illuminati is an organization that uses masonic-inspired practices to extract a convoluted, aggressive method of attempting to dominate the world.


Yet you STILL can't prove that they exist! Do you believe EVERYTHING you read in Icke books?




These masons are adept at many techniques that can both expediate untidy tasks, and help to influence others, including fellow-masons, to break away and to influence new recruits to perform without questioning orders from above.


No mason would ever perform an "order from above" because, first, masons do not give or take orders from each other and, second, there is no "above" to take orders from. There is no such thing as suboordination in a fraternity such as Freemasonry.



But those masons, or former-masons, who have sided with criminal conspirators to wreak havoc upon the citizenry, to effect a one-government control of wealth and power, and to engage in subterfuge that makes secret handshakes seem very harmless, are not doing anyone any good, least of all the freemasons.


Can you please show me evidence that such masons, or ex-masons, EXIST?!?



So, the claim is made that I know nothing about freemasonry. I know as much as a person can know, and not be a member of the masononic order.


Absolutely false! There is a WEALTH of information in books and in the library regarding Freemasonry, it's structure, constitutions, history, aims, by-laws, rituals, symbols and anything else you may want to know! There are several users on this forum, such as The Axeman, Intrepid and Nygdan who are not Freemasons but know the Craft almost inside and out (as much as anyone can without being a member).



Careful study reveals that there is also a breed of mason whose function is to perpetuate the idea that freemasonry is a wholly benevolent organization.


Oh God!!! Yes, of course! Freemasonry has disinformation agents! Maybe all the masons on this forum are ones, such as me! I've certainly been accused of it before, and it's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. "Careful study reveals" that huh? I'm curious to know what you have been carefully studying that demonstrates this.

Good God, don't you ever get sick of this nonsensical speculation and heresay?!? You take it so seriously, and you couldn't be more far from the truth! LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE, STUDY THE FRATERNITY!!! You will see for yourself that Freemasonry is NOTHING like what you think. I'm done trying to correct your false information, go out and see it for yourself.

I'm sick of banging my head against a wall with you and your absurd beliefs. You're one gullible dude. Try being a little more scrutinous of the information you read. :bnghd:

You will NEVER find evidence for what you claim, because it is not there.

[edit on 18-8-2005 by sebatwerk]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I think its kind of silly to say too strongly that masonry is not a secret society.

Bit harsh, don't you think?


... but its clearly a secret society.


I don't think it's that clear at all. What I'm try to do is challenge some of the assumed wisdom about freemasonry, both outside and sometimes within the fraternity. In Europe freemasonry went underground due to Nazi aggression, and in England it stayed there for far too long. But it isn't there any more.

I don't think most people would regards Scouts or Rotary as secret societies, and IMO there is no difference between them and freemasonry in this regard. The fact that there is an initiation is not relevant.

I believe when most people talk about secret they mean private. A secret society would meet in secret, it's membership would be hidden and in all likelihood members would deny its existence. The word clandestine jumps to mind.

Freemasonry just doesn't fit this mould.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Loungerist
"A secret society is a social organization that requires its members to conceal certain activities—such as rites of initiation or club ceremonies—from outsiders. Members may be required to conceal or deny their membership, and are often sworn to hold the society's secrets by an oath. The term "secret society" is often used to describe fraternal organizations (e.g. Freemasonry) that may have secret ceremonies"

en.wikipedia.org...



Sorry Loungerist - I missed that bit even though it was right in front of my eyes and went for the definition from Poland instead. My mistake.

I don't accept this definition. The phrase 'secret society e.g. freemasonry' is the clue - this definition attempts to define a secret society by the features of initiaic fraternities and is effectively saying the terms are synonymous.

Freemasonry does not require its members to conceal any of the activities that we do - it is well known that the three degrees take the form of morality plays based on lessons from the Old Testament. The text of which is available to purchase at many retail outlets including on-line stores if you're interested.
So the content of the ceremonies are not secret, but they are performed in private. If they were performed in secret you would not know where or when or even if they were being performed.

Although we promise not to reveal the specific secrets freemasons on this forum and elsewhere have been only to happy to tell you what the secrets are - they are the modes of recognition by which freemasions traditionally recognise each other.

So yes, freemasonry has a 'secret'. But millions of people and organisations have 'secrets'. That does not make them secret societies.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   
I'm not one who really shies away from the label of "secret society". After all, Mackey listed in his Landmarks that "Masonry is a secret society, in possession of secrets that cannot be divulged."

These secrets, though, are of course, no interest to the non-Mason. I remember several years ago I heard of a case in (I think) Australia where a man was taking his Masonic Lodge to court. He thought that he was going to learn the great secrets of the universe in his initiation. After he discovered that the only secrets he got were passwords and handshakes, he wanted his money back!



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 11:02 AM
link   
originally posted by Trinityman

It is not enough for you to ask people to disprove your allegations. Hypotheses must be tested before they can become theories. I could just as easily claim that you have two heads, but it would surely be up to me to substantiate that claim rather than just ask you to prove that you haven't, as I would suggest it would hard for you to disprove that assertion on this forum?

originally posted by Loungerist

But can you present numerous other people who all say from their studies that he has two heads? Can you cite people who have seen and associated with him that cooberate that he indeed has two heads? Is their literature around charting out and explaining in detail where the idea of Dave's second head came from and it's orgins? These all can and have been done with Masonry unlike Dave's dual skull theory. One must substanciate claims,sure. But when evidence is presented(and despite popular Masonic claims,it has been) then I'd have to agree that it falls to those denying the veracity of the evidence to disprove it.


There's a vicious rumor currently on these pages that I, Dave, have two heads. This was mentioned first as an example of how to prove or disprove certain claims. It wasn't long before someone got the whole thing totally mixed-up, and soon, the idea that "this guy Dave" has two heads was being tossed around as truth.

The next thing you know, there is an entire movement dedicated to the Two-Headed-Dave conspiracy. Many people claim to have seen me, Dave, and claim they can verify that it's nonsense that I, Dave, or in fact anyone they have ever seen, has more than the traditional one head. However, many that have indeed seen me, Dave, will readily admit that, at the time they saw me, Dave, it was dark- and they really can't be sure if they saw one head or two- but common sense tells them to reserve judgement.

It is rumored that there are photographs of me, Dave, in circulation that depict more than one head in the usual location. As Dave, let me assure you that there are no such pictures going around. Any image that anyone happens to see that shows a Two-Headed Dave would be some sort of re-touched concoction digitally created to perpetuate the myth the I, Dave, have more than one head, and that the number of heads that I have is two.

If you are reading this, please take this post as an attempt to dispel what has become a clever, yet futile effort on the part of certain individuals to disseminate false information about obvious innuendos and who have no regard for accuracy. These individuals offer no proof whatsoever of the claim that I, Dave have any more than the typical number of heads, and that that number is one.

Thank You
Dave


df1

posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dave Ravin
There's a vicious rumor currently on these pages that I, Dave, have two heads.


IMHO I believe you do have 2 heads. One head goes by the name of "Dave Ravin" and the other goes by the name of " Loungerist". While you do have 2 heads, it is obvious that these heads share a single brain, because both say the same things and have the same writing style.

What do you think Dave or is it Loungerist today?
.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   
They're different people. Unless he's crossing continents to post.


df1

posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
They're different people. Unless he's crossing continents to post.

It trust your assessment as your field of view is better than mine. Can you confirm that these continents are on the same planet as the rest of us?


[edit on 18-8-2005 by df1]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

IMHO I believe you do have 2 heads. One head goes by the name of "Dave Ravin" and the other goes by the name of " Loungerist". While you do have 2 heads, it is obvious that these heads share a single brain, because both say the same things and have the same writing style.



Which is ironic because a quick browse is all you need to see that the people saying the same things are those of the group in question. As usual,I might add.

[edit on 18-8-2005 by Loungerist]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   
SEcret societies being fairly widespread, and membership being pretty common, secret societies are not necessarily in themselves that harmful. But presidents and other very powerful people are often in them, and these people at the top may be doing more than the average member. This may have more to do with bloodline than with learning a craft. According to Burk's Peerage, almost all US presidents have royal blood, even though they also happen to be elected. Why would this happen, unless they have special powers to rule that are in the blood. HItler was open about his bloodline, saying that he was descended from a race of giants. He had one testicle and blue eyes, obviously unusual genetic makeup. He was in the Thule society, a secret society for contacting a distant civilization that gave him direction for leading mankind. I would think that being descended from a race of giants would give him secret knowledge that a normal human cannot pick up as well, allowing him to rise to the top better than those with more average genetic background.

In America, where many of the presidents have royal bloodlines from the British Isles, it would not be a surprise if these people at the very top are mixed with other races, 'fairy folk'. To be descended from supernatural beings like this would give them the power and knowledge to rule the world. This gives them secret knowledge that helps them get into secret societies such as the masons and much more. President Bush most likely has knowledge and ability that is unusual and hard to transmit. When he was inducted into the skull and bones society, it's not like he asked to get in, but rather he was 'tapped'. People somehow knew who he was and understood, 'he is one of us'. It sounds like you just can't get into a society like that too easily. NOt everyone can learn, you just have to be special. So I think it is not simply masonry that characterizes the new world order but instead it is special blood, which gives secret knowledge, which can be used in various secret societies at top levels.

I don't think that freemasonry per se is necessarily anything bad, but if we are going to think about the new world order and the special knowledge it takes to rule the world as it is, why is it so improbable to think that people at the top have something supernatural in the blood, and that they are in contact with other races of beings. After all, this nation has 'area 51', a place where ufo's have been sited, so there is evidence that they are in contact with other races. After all, that's where Hitler said he got his advice for how to run things, from another race. Throughout history, some rulers have claimed to be divine, and in Europe there was a 'divine rite of kings'.


df1

posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by missingperson
This may have more to do with bloodline...


I suppose I do not buy this bloodline idea. I bet that if you were to pick any random individual and trace his/her bloodline, with same rigor used to trace a world leader, that you would find that said individual would be traced back to a royal bloodline. This type of investigation isn't done for the average "john doe", because most people don't care if the manager of the local Walmart is related to the queen.
.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Originally posted by missingperson
This may have more to do with bloodline...


I suppose I do not buy this bloodline idea. I bet that if you were to pick any random individual and trace his/her bloodline, with same rigor used to trace a world leader, that you would find that said individual would be traced back to a royal bloodline. This type of investigation isn't done for the average "john doe", because most people don't care if the manager of the local Walmart is related to the queen.
.


Yes most people don't care unless you admit to having a Baron in your ancestry, to indicate to someone like Senrak that you didn't come down in the last shower. Then he will use that admission to call you a deluded lier rather than admit your knowledge goes back generations.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 01:11 AM
link   
here is a nice nwo / illuminati piece of art




artofmarkbryan.com...


[edit on 19-8-2005 by moonchild]



posted on Aug, 23 2005 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Given the evidence that the US government is involved with UFO's at area 51, it is possible that they are working with alien races to get information to run the government. The problem with this is, why do these aliens want to be involved? Often you would think that they would demand something in return for their services. If you look back on ancient cultures, the 'gods' have demanded various sacrifices, including human beings. The US presidents have been descended from the British Isles, where the ancient magic used the human sacrifice of a 'wicker man', which was the structure of a man filled with people.

Currently there are thousands of people missing, some say 30,000. Often cases get dropped and are not pursued with that much rigour. Why is there not enough funding and technology in place to pursue them more? Famous criminal cases can often be pursued fairly well, wanted people are failry often caught. So it is not as though it is impossible for them to be found. So the problem of missing people seems in part related to the way things are set up, more could be found if time and money were allocated. Why aren't we being better serviced by our government? It's not as though we don't have a problem. Possibly some of these people are needed by the alien races. One web site indicated that streetkids are being exchanged for goods and services at area 51. So we have some evidence that these aliens still need humans in exchange for what they give us. Then the question is, how many? When we see that thousands of people are reported missing, we wonder, is there a sizeable percentage of these that the aliens need?



posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loungerist
But when evidence is presented(and despite popular Masonic claims,it has been) then I'd have to agree that it falls to those denying the veracity of the evidence to disprove it.


Originally posted by df1
If you subscribe to the premise of innocent till proven guilty the burden of proof is on the accusers. Placing the burden of proof on those being accused is called a "witch hunt". During the Salem Witch Trials once a person was labeled a "witch", accusations were called evidence by religous zealots and it was demanded that the accused prove otherwise. The questioning of the so called "witch" went something like below:


Except, those who are guilty will always claim they are innocent, no matter the level of proof on this forum. It is always the way and shockingly, this isn't a court of law so stop trying to make it out to be one.

Their is also burden on both parties, in a Civil Law Suit it doesn't have to be proven beyond a resonable doubt and this would be a Civil Case due to the fact no laws were broken.



posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trinityman

Originally posted by Loungerist
If you want to say the society isn't secret,just the members that the society is composed of are,then you're free to do so. It's semantic at this point. But the end result remains the same:a society of people acting vehemently in secret from those who are not members. Which according to my view,the encyclopedia,and wikipedia,is the very definition of a secret society.


Freemasonry doesn't even qualify as a secret society by Wikipedias standards. It gives a definition of a secret society as:


"Political parties and other organizations whose programmes are based upon totalitarian methods and the modes of activity of nazism, fascism and communism, as well as those whose programmes or activities sanction racial or national hatred, the application of violence for the purpose of obtaining power or to influence the State policy, or provide for the secrecy of their own structure or membership..."


I think you'll agree that the only part of this that might apply is "provide for the secrecy of their own structure or membership".

Well, the structure is well known...

www.mastermason.com...

... and how we are organised is not hidden...

en.wikipedia.org...

... and our leaders publish their bios...

www.grandlodge-england.org...

www.glmasons-mass.org...

... and our members are listed in yearbooks...

i20.ebayimg.com...

... so tell me again - which part of freemasonry is secret?

The fact that there are freemasons out there who don't wish to talk to non-masons about freemasonry is entirely up to them - all of us have a perfect right to discuss as much or as little about anything as we wish.

I don't know in which country you live, Loungerist, but I can tell you that in mine people have a Right to Privacy and can do whatever they like in private as long as its legal. That Right protects everyone against interfering busybodies like the government and people who think they know how to run my life better than I do.

I'm hope you're not one of those people but I know there are a lot of them out there.

way more degrees then three and thats what the
en.wikipedia.org... depicts is pure utter lies 3 degrees LOL

Note that this chart shows the 33rd degree as the highest degree. However, there are higher degrees that are even secret to most masons.
thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr...

a pic from a major masonic temple in london

thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr...

heres a pic froma masonic temple in paris

thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr...

here take a look at a Memphis 33 logo
Note the motto "Ordo ab chao", meaning "Order out of chaos". The motto on the banner below means "God and my right".





________________________________-




[edit on 20-12-2005 by LISTENTOME]

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 20/12/2005 by Mirthful Me]


Cug

posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LISTENTOME

Note that this chart shows the 33rd degree as the highest degree. However, there are higher degrees that are even secret to most masons.


I'll bite... OK what are they?



a pic from a major masonic temple in london


Sweet! Last O.T.O. doing I went to was in the back room of a coffee shop. "Cause I'm jealous, jealous again"




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join