Masonry at it's finest!

Leveller, I understand the point which your trying to relay but please don’t misunderstand a democracy with a Republic, big difference as a democracy (brought in via Thomas Jefferson) as the “liberal party” is just a fancy name for “socialism” and thus with bloated government it will eventually lead further into communism/fascism. America was a Republic and we have lost it.
Democracies do not work, as it is by definition a Republican yet with fewer rights granted to the people. So, we do not need any democracy in the first and we don’t need any secret societies in the second. But I accept your right to chose BUT

If you are a member of a Lodge and agree to certain terms (or shall we call them rules or oaths) and I have said this consistently many times, the rules or oaths must in no way interfere with those God given rights of the American “Sovereign” – I did not say citizen.

Now I have much concern that the Masonic lodges have violated, on several occasions the laws of the American people; once again the Morgan incident was not a small issue and when I read the Masonic writings like this:

The Scottish Rite Third-Degree Master Mason Oath

This commits the occult initiate to commit murder, if necessary:

I do promise and swear upon the Holy Bible never to reveal where I have received this degree . . . and in failure of this I consent to have my body opened perpendicularly and to be exposed for eight hours in the open air, so that the venomous flies may eat my entrails, my head to be cut off and put on the highest pinnacle of the world, and I will always be ready to inflict the same punishment on those who shall disclose this degree and break this obligation. So may God help and maintain me. Amen.
Later if he 'advances' in his Masonic career he will learn the secret identity of the God of the Lodge

I’m afraid that I’m going to lose my temper and fight with the enforcers of any such policy if implemented, in any way, shape or form. I think it is fair to say that there is much, much more of this kind of Masonic text and rather than continue to post more to fully prove my point that this was not set-up to only symbolically mediate upon, I think Masons better come to grips that this kind of writing being explained and exposed rather than hidden away. I am not going to say Masonry is a religion but I will say that many religious texts are not hidden or banned simply because there is information which makes it look less than holy. Righteousness should rise above it all and a man should only need to render in generosity, open himself up to the divine spark of the selfhood and by “being the others keeper” and live fully these tenants without being bound into secrecy, nor to one particular faction – but to all mankind. Naturally, in this new age secrets are harder now to keep. This can be a used for good also, as Godly men do not EVER write nonsense like this without coming into conflict with people like me – I would like that to be clear. Especially, if it’s not a religion or spiritual system of some sort as per many Masons who post ay ATS.

If people vote for the rules and then break them, they are punished. This works in every social system in the world. The people of democracies create the rules and therefore are liable to punishment when they break them.

I agree “somewhat” however, sometimes it is not so much about being punished, as it is about learning the lesson whether through Karma or some other retribution. An understanding of love and at times, forgiveness (a tenet of a time far before Christianity) will destroy any hierarchy that lays claim to having superiority over any other. No man may have that right to lay claim in dominance (including Bush and the Pope) in anything other than being a guide or he is not the person you should bind with. Once more, that punishment with impending severity plays a major facet and opens up an entire new field of inquire into just what gives a man the right to punish another etc.

Contrary to your claims, the Constitutions can be changed - but again, only with the agreement of all Freemasons. Individually, each Lodge also has a set of it's own Constitutions that are agreed upon by members of that specific Lodge.

Referring to a Constitution affecting only the Masonic Lodge and not the general populace, I do agree. However, looking into history a Mason would feign ignorance to the Morgan incidence and in the coincidental occurrence we read the writings of Masonry, it truly baffles the mind how the President that being one John Quincy Adams was so mistaken in his decision to shut down the lodges. Had the lodges not been so secretive, perhaps there would have had less of an issue. If the police investigate a potential murder, and they were not being assisted, can they not subpoena you or get a warrant to search the premise? John Q Adams did just that and came to the conclusion (through reading the Masonic writings and supporting evidence) which ultimately led to the closing of the lodges and do you why it happened, so quickly? It was because people tend to get spooked more easily when are those who may lie in secrecy. I believe in the Lord Yesua or Christ and as an Esoteric Christian, who understands much of Egyptology and the teachings of antiquity and the understanding the need to keep some knowledge of the Kabala at bay (to protect people and coach), I still see no need for such stringent rules as to what the Handbook of Masonry and other Masonic writings speak of. I find it coy, childish and bringing upon itself suspicion and rightfully so.

I mentioned that “A democratic vote is perfectly acceptable however, only if it does not violate the Constitution & Bill of Rights etc” and I was referring to your quote regarding Masons making use of their own COnsistution with the lodges and nothing more.

You state this as if it were an anomaly. But the reality is that every democratic vote for every organisation has a set of guidelines and a framework in which votes and elections are held. This basic structure is put into place to ensure a fair vote and is totally contrary to the implication that you are making. Would you like to justify to me what right a nation would have to create a vote which specifically violates the rights of it's Constitution and therefore the rights of it's citizens, without the full support of it's citizens? Sadly, some nations do actually partake in this distasteful action (ie: the Patriot's Act in the US) but Freemasonry can not even be accused of coming close to doing so.

As this paragraph pertains to my meaning above – keep the Constitution of America separate from any other and I’m a happy camper. Now consider the huge political influence of the society of the Skull and Bones (Order of Death). Now the Patriotic Act seems to me like something made up in a lodge at Skull and Bones, see? So why are you not standing up with the rest of us people who want to stops this evil, and reveal societies like those that may do us harm? Time is running out and everything will be revealed sooner or later; as we see the secrets tend to get bigger, still our privacy only gets smaller. Which one you care more about?

Firstly, the 3rd degree oath you keep repeating is not the oath I took. So printing it ad nauseum is a bit of a waste of time.

Secondly, you have shown that you are no fan of Democracy nor of Socialism. Under what banner would you have Freemasonry fly it's flag? Fascism? Communism?

Sorry dude. Democracy may not work within your world and your society, but it works well within Freemasonry where each member has a vote, each member can table a motion and each member has input.

[edit on 25-11-2005 by Leveller]

Originally posted by markusjharper
Dear moonchild - A Mason is taught to avoid engaging in this kind of discussion, thus it is wise for you to deny.

Ha! Thus is rich coming from someone who has steadfastly refused to answer a question I posed on another thread three times now.

It seems markus only wants to spout his own fantasy about freemasonry rather than engage in any meaningful discussion.

Compare...

Originally posted by markusjharper
You must conceal all crimes of your brother Masons...and should you be summoned as a witness against a brother Mason be always sure to shield him...It may be perjury to do this, it is true, but you're keeping your obligations.

Ronayne
Handbook of Masonry, page 183

...with...

Originally posted by senrak
"In the state, you are to be a quiet and peaceful citizen, true to your government and just to your country. You are not to countenance disloyalty or rebellion, but patiently submit to legal authority, and conform with cheerfulness to the government of the country in which you live."

source-The Kentucky Monitor, by Henry Pirtle

...and...

"As a citizen of the world, I am to enjoin you to be exemplary in the discharge of your civil duties, by never proposing or at all countenancing any act that may have a tendency to subvert the peace and good order of society, by paying due obedience to the laws of any State which may for a time become the place of your residence or afford you its protection, and above all, by never losing sight of the allegiance due to the Sovereign of your native land, ever remembering that nature has implanted in your breast a sacred and indissoluble attachment towards that country whence you derived your birth and infant nurture."
Source - Emulation Ritual

Shome mishtake shurely???

I intend to rout you out - all in good sport of course.

Of course. When will you be starting?

Originally posted by markusjharper
Disobedience and want of respect to Masonic superiors is an offense for which the transgressor subjects himself to punishment."

Mackey's Masonic Jurisprudence , p. 511

This is not a masonic offense in my jurisdiction.

Originally posted by markusjharper
You must conceal all crimes of your brother Masons...and should you be summoned as a witness against a brother Mason be always sure to shield him...It may be perjury to do this, it is true, but you're keeping your obligations.

Ronayne
Handbook of Masonry, page 183

All of the other business about taking oaths to 'pull toungues out by their roots and slit throats' is pretty silly, but this iis interesting. Are any of the mason's here familiar with this work? Is it being presented out of context in some way? Is the Author confirmed to be a mason?How popular was the work and how authoratative the author?

edit to add
Its seems that this guy is a 'former mason'. Was this masonic handbook published while he was a mason even? I don't see how it can be taken as evidence against them if not. Also, if it wasn't, then this guy is pretty unscroupulous and untrustworthy no, presenting somethin as a "Masonic Handbook" when he is in no position to write one?

Info on him here
[url=http://www.religiouscounterfeits.org/ml_gaotu.htm] Now let me prove to you that the God of Freemasonry is the pantheistic God of Nature. Former Mason Edmond Ronayne stated: "Freemasonry 'carefully excludes' the Lord Jesus Christ from the lodge and chapter, repudiates His mediatorship, rejects his atonement, denies and disowns His gospel, frowns upon his religion and his church, ignores the Holy Spirit, and sets up for itself a spiritual empire, a religious theocracy, at the head of which it places the G.A.O.T.U. -the god of nature- and from which the only living true God is expelled by resolution." Former Mason- Edmond Ronayne, The Master's Carpet or Masonry and Baal-Worship-Identical, pg. 87]

[edit on 25-11-2005 by Nygdan]

Originally posted by Nygdan
Its seems that this guy is a 'former mason'. Was this masonic handbook published while he was a mason even? I don't see how it can be taken as evidence against them if not. Also, if it wasn't, then this guy is pretty unscroupulous and untrustworthy no, presenting somethin as a "Masonic Handbook" when he is in no position to write one?

Edmund Ronayne was a noted anti-mason from the early years of the last century. There is no evidence that I can find that he was a Freemason although many anti-masonic sites refer to him alternatively as a "Master-mason" or a "Past-master".
There is something very fishy about the passage in question though. It does not appear in official print anywhere and even the anti-masonic sites claim that the book in which it was contained was "quickly revised and the passage removed". Hardly the basis for a good piece of evidence. We only have Ronayne's word that it was there.

Ronayne was a Christian fundamentalist so it wouldn't be suprising if he did actually write the passage as an attempt to smear Freemasonry (as you can see by his bibliography he had a major axe to grind with those he deemed against his god). The problem is that the passage directly contradicts the Masonic oath of the First Degree where a candidate swears to uphold the laws of his country before the needs of another Freemason. If Ronayne were truly a Freemason, he would have known this. Above all, it is highly doubtful that any Grand Lodge would authorise a passage which would go against it's basic precepts and it's very ethos. Possibly this is an addition that Ronayne inserted in an attempt to besmirch Freemasonry but equally there is a possibility that it did not exist at all.

Ladies and gents: Take a look at what happens when a brother Mason decides to reveal too much: ...

Ah, Markus... Honey... Ain't you learnt nuthin' yet?

We've all been asking you for evidence. More importantly though, I've suggested to you repeatedly to stop parroting the nonsense you find on the more schizophrenic websites out there and actually do some research. You've claimed to have done LOTS, but all you're accomplishing is to make yourself look silly.

I must also tell you that you're also treading on very dangerous ground. Plagiarizing the work of others -- even if said others are mad as hatters -- is a big no-no in polite society, and especially among the learned. Presenting someone else's "research" as if it were your own, without giving credit to the source, is not only dishonest and just plain wrong, it's actually ILLEGAL.

Your opening "Usenet" quote, and the link you posted, came from the same wacko website as everything else you've posted here.

(NOTE For those with weak stomachs, scroll to near the bottom of the page I linked and look for the yellow box, or just search the page for the phrase "SSG Russo")

You know, Marky, that ain't right...

You must conceal ...
Ronayne
Handbook of Masonry, page 183

Another bit of nonsense which you also copied in whole cloth from the same exact page.

(NOTE: to save time for the rest of the readers here, search the page for the phrase "You must conceal")

Do you own a copy of the Ronayne book? Ever even SEEN a copy? Do you know anyone who has ever seen a copy?

Can you place the quote in context for us -- that means show us what came before, and after, the little snippet you posted?

Can you tell us what words were replaced by the two (2) sets of ellipsis in the middle of your quote?

Can you tell us anything about the author?

'Course not -- you're just doing the same thing you've done since you arrived here -- parroting and plagiarizing nonsense from the websites of other ignorant and irrational Mason-haters.

Any interested party can click here for proof -- where you'll find the very page where Marky pointed and click-ted all of his "evidence".

I can tell you something about Mr. Ronayne: He was a notorious Mason-hater who published a number of books between 1887 and 1919. He presented his work as if it were legitimate "Masonic" material, thus fooling the gullible and fueling the market for his fiction. From all appearances it must have been a lucrative undertaking.

For clarity, in case anyone's nodded off by now, what we have here is:
(1) A Mason-hater (Markus) stealing the work of another Mason-hater("Watchy") and
(2) presenting it as his own.
(3) "Watchy" posting the 100 year-old "work" of
(4) a third Mason-hater (Ronayne) as if it were valid information.

Anyone who is paying attention may begin to see a pattern here...

The Scottish Rite Third-Degree Master Mason Oath
This commits the occult initiate to commit murder, if necessary

Your next bit of nonsense was copied -- again verbatim -- from
a different page on the same site.

(NOTE to readers: Search the page for the phrase "Scottish Rite)

Note that it is placed there, as here, without attribution. In any case, the simple fact that it begins with a reference to "the occult initiate" indicates that it wasn't written by a Mason.

For clarity, in case anyone's nodded off by now, what we have here is
(1) A Mason-hater (Markus) stealing the work of another Mason-hater("Watchy") and
(2) presenting it as his own.
(3) "Watchy" posting an unattributed quote (either stolen in turn by "Watchy or invented by himself) as if it were valid information.

Here's a hint, Marky -- Just because someone writes something on a website doesn't make it true. Before quoting a source, one should be careful to verify its legitimacy -- especially a source like "Watchy."

At least we know now where you found all your scary pictures, but I digress.

Here again you demonstrate your ignorance (and that of the wing-nut you plagiarize) as regards any aspect of Masonry.

Blue lodges in the United States generally follow "York Rite" ceremonies -- not Scottish Rite. Therefore you are quoting something that -- if it WERE an accurate quote -- no American Mason is likely to have ever heard, much less promised.

Even so...

Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia (1961 & 1996), p.467
Albert Pike, in revising the rituals of the Southern Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite about 1855-1860, completely eradicated all such penalties from the degrees and substituted mental, moral, and symbolic condemnation...

So, even if the quote you posted had ever been true, it was changed some 145+ years ago.

Your next quote:

"disobedience and want of respect"

(in addition to being another bit of plagiarism) is simply ridiculous.

(NOTE to reader: search page for "disobedience and want")

You know, Marky, all institutions have rules.

Insubordination is a punishable offense in any sort of hierarchical organization. What exactly does this prove?

Further in the thread, you provide another quote...

"The one unpardonable crime in a Mason is contumacy..."

The semi-literate grammar provided therein makes proving the fact of your plagiarism even simpler yet. This "quote" was again stolen in its entirety from the same one of "Watchy's pages as your others above. (Search for "contumacy")

What's more amazing still is that you blindly accept Watchy's claim that it came from "Webb's Freemasons' Monitor, p. 196"

Anyone with the desire to do so can check Webb's Freemason's Monitor for themselves. They'll find when they do so that it ends at page 143

Yeah, Marky -- thanks for providing us with some "evidence." It's up to each person here to decide exactly what you've provided evidence *OF* -- but in my opinion you've proven beyond any question that you are both dishonest and gullible.

I'm sure you'll now squeal like a scalded dog, and accuse me of "twisting" your words around or something, but the evidence -- YOUR "evidence" once again speaks for itself.

Nice job -- I doubt if you could have done it better if you'd tried.

Still "having fun"?

Wanna toss me a few more softballs?

DD

Leveller wrote:

Secondly, you have shown that you are no fan of Democracy or of Socialism. Under what banner would you have Freemasonry fly it's flag? Fascism? Communism?

I suggest that you go back and read over what I said the differences were between a Republic and a Democracy. Correct, I do not prefer a Democracy or Socialism, as I understand what it can do in political arena. We are now witnessing socialism to a greater extent; some are even calling this a rise to fascism. Whatever name you ascribe or phoney left or right paraxial reality you champion, the truth is that a Republic is indeed truly free and was always true America.

Masonry has a right to claim a flag or banner and if the club wishes to do a democratic vote within, it is acceptable and free to do so. If the club wishes for the lodge to have a communist-like approach, that is fine also but be it known that this lodge will eventually fail under communism. Yet, no lodge shall have any bearing on the Laws of the Republic of America. Any attempt to effect change in America, thus altering the life of its people, is a crime and Un-Constitutional. Bush and Kerry are members of 2 different parties, yet with the same treasonous goal! They are two members of a secret society called Skull and Bones, yet loyal each other – into death and not the people of America. That is treason and they should be brought to justice, as should many of these leaders. J Q Adams saw Masonry as treasonous and a huge threat to America. He was correct.

Sorry dude. Democracy may not work within your world and your society, but it works well within Freemasonry where each member has a vote, each member can table a motion and each member has input

Democracy does not work well in OUR society of America. Would you like to still be part of the Republic?


[edit on 25-11-2005 by markusjharper]

Originally posted by markusjharper
J Q Adams saw Masonry as treasonous and a huge threat to America. He was correct.

markus, I couldnt agree with you more. Imagine those darned Masons and their threatening ways! I mean...helping crippled and burned children...providing for widows and orphans, supporting local charities, giving scholarships to college students.

Burn them. Burn them all!!!!

A witch! A witch! We've found a witch!!!!

THESE GUYS ARE EVVVVIIIILLLLLLLLL!!!!!

I mean....well....uhmmm....well just LOOK AT 'EM!!!



BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!









[edit on 25-11-2005 by senrak]

All of the other business about taking oaths to 'pull toungues out by their roots and slit throats' is pretty silly, but this iis interesting. Are any of the mason's here familiar with this work? Is it being presented out of context in some way? Is the Author confirmed to be a mason?How popular was the work and how authoratative the author?

Nydan – The truth is yes Masons have done this and some still do. Have you received an acceptable answer yet which woudl make it hard to accept? Things are not always as they appear and only the fool would deny all of the evidence which people of different perspectives, through all different times, have allowed the reader to understand, thus leading us to the to conclusion that at least some of it is indeed true. Thus, since some of it is true and the Mason still refuses it all earnest outright, they are either conspiring, or simply ignorant-unaware, or in denial.

Trinity wrote:

Ha! Thus is rich coming from someone who has steadfastly refused to answer a question I posed on another thread three times now.

It seems markus only wants to spout his own fantasy about freemasonry rather than engage in any meaningful discussion.

Concerning your question on what defines a secret society:

That was your question another thread and such an obvious question as this, I tend not to bother answering. However, I did write back to you that ATS has already placed Freemasonry in the Secret Society section, so that it should grant you permission to find perspective into such a simple matter.

Originally posted by markusjharper
Nydan – The truth is yes Masons have done this and some still do. [garbage snipped]

The truth is...markus has no clue what he's talking about.

www.freemason.org...

"The penalties by which every Mason symbolically binds himself to fulfill his obligations are ancient in Masonry. No man is certain of their origins. But they were probably added to the ritual at a time of great persecution, when the very lives of Masons depended upon the secrecy of their Brothers.

Our enemies believe that Masonic metaphors mean exactly what they say and nothing else. In other words, they believe that Masonry is composed of "signs" like "stop" and "yield traffic signs or the "exit" sign over a door.

To them signs mean exactly what they say and are not liable to interpretation. But the fact is that Freemasonry is made up of metaphors and symbols which allow multiple interpretation. When a man comes into Masonry, his life changes from the dead letter of "sign" to the living letter of metaphor.

The metaphoric content of Freemasonry is signaled to the proto-Mason exactly where it should be - at the obligation, the most solemn, emotional, and impressive part of the initiation, not at some other "explanation" part where only the intellect is concerned. The candidate has already been told that the obligation contains nothing contrary to moral, civil and religious duties.

The only penalties Masonry inflicts are reprimand, suspension and expulsion. We retain the ancient penalties, not to frighten or disgust, but because they are important symbols in the tradition and in the study of the fraternity.

At the very least, they make plain the torture and agony of conscience any good man should feel at the thought that he had violated his sworn word - for the good and honest man is ever his own most severe judge, censor and critic. We may escape the judgment of others for our misdeeds, but never the condemnation of our own conscience.

In the symbolism of the penalties, as in all things Masonic, let wise man seek for further enlightenment."

and...

www.msana.com...

"The only penalties known to Freemasonry are reprimand: definite suspension from membership; indefinite suspension from membership; and expulsion from the Fraternity. To these must be added that intangible penalty which comes to any one who loses all or part of his reputation. Other penalties suggested in the ritual are wholly symbolic are not now and never have been enforced. They were legal punishments in the middle ages, designed with special reference to the religious beliefs of the time that an incomplete body could not "rise from the dead"; that a body buried in unconsecrated ground (as between high and low water mark) could not ascend into heaven. Some Grand Lodges offer an interpretation of the ritualistic penalties, in order to be sure the initiate understands the symbolic character of these otherwise difficult phrases. "

and...

www.pagrandlodge.org...

54. What Masonic penalties are actually enforced?

Censure, suspension and expulsion. Other penalties mentioned in the Ritual are only symbolic.

...but since those are from legitimate Masonic sources, i.e. people who KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, I'm sure ol' markus won't be able to comprehend them.

So, keep spreading lies markus. Keep spreading lies.

Originally posted by Someone Else
All of the other business about taking oaths to 'pull toungues out by their roots and slit throats' is pretty silly

Originally posted by markusjharper
Nydan – The truth is yes Masons have done this and some still do

Evidence?

Thus, since some of it is true and the Mason still refuses it all earnest outright, they are either conspiring, or simply ignorant-unaware, or in denial.

Evidence?

The so-called "penalties" are both obviously and explicitly symbolic. They refer to the sort of extreme pain that any good man would feel at having broken a solemn vow. In my Grand Lodge Jurisdiction, as well as the ones which border it, this fact is stated in plain and unmistakeable language during the ceremony. In many other jurisdictions they've been removed altogether.

The first page of results from a simple Google Search will turn up six (6) Masonic websites making the plain and unequivocal statement that the "penalties" are purely symbolic. It will also turn up a couple of anti-masonic sites claiming otherwise.

The fact is that there has never been any regulation or rule within Masonry indicating that these penalties were anything other than symbolic, nor (in spite of a huge and ever-growing list of men who have violated their Obligations) has there been there any case where they were imposed. Where are all the mutilated bodies? How can these (past) people have lived to a ripe old age, and how can the current crop of charlatans be selling their books and videos, enriching themselves at the expense of the gullible?

Evidence?

It's really a question of who to believe about what something means to Masons: Those who ARE MASONS or those who AREN'T?

Would you ask an Iranian what Americans think? At best, you'd find out what an Iranian thinks Americans think.

This is really just common sense, a commodity that's generally in short supply among the more rabid "anti"-types...

If you need proof of THAT, you've not been reading these threads lately...


DD

DD,

For someone who speaks volumes and makes assumptions and then tries to present them as fact, all the while calling me a plagiarist, I will answer what little I could extract from your typically pompous and foul smelling, insulting post:

For clarity, in case anyone's nodded off by now, what we have here is:
(1) A Mason-hater (Markus) stealing the work of another Mason-hater("Watchy") and
(2) presenting it as his own.
(3) "Watchy" posting the 100 year-old "work" of
(4) a third Mason-hater (Ronayne) as if it were valid information.

You assume I predispose myself to ism’s of "hating", or hating anything, when in fact all I am doing is disapproving of secret societies and their interfering with procedures in the public arena. Shall you be so inclined and continue to pundit the "anti-mason" card which you place o highly on a pedestal above all else, only you see nothing more than that huge blinding egoism and that of the pretence authority of your colourful new dress. Enjoy basking while you still can brother, as I intent to share several things more.

Regarding your 4 points: To steal something is to first of all deprive one person of something and that is not copyright, nor plagiarism. I have done neither and yet you claim I stole from an anti-Masonic website but you fail to understand what my affiliation to this website is? Let it be understood that you also assume too much in that you decided to claim that I was somehow a criminal to take a quote which belongs to the original author anyhow, and no-one else. Just what do you think a 3'rd party will think seeing how the Masons continually lie and constantly deny, deny, deny, centuries of evidence which all point to something, shall we say less than holy.

You wrote:

Watchy" posting the 100 year-old "work" of
(4) a third Mason-hater (Ronayne) as if it were valid information.

Pathetically obvious is your inability to correlate the potential 100 and greater years of research. Whether, yesterday or 100 years ago it does relieve evidence of a crime to anything less or worse, but nor does it prove your claim that it is not VALID evidence. Moreover, once again you resort to petty name calling by writing that Ronayne is a “Mason-hater” and then try to imply that what he spoke of was untrue. Next you slime your way into implying that I am even more disgraceful by posting the words of this individual.

Where is your evidence that this person hated Masons? Do you supply any evidence of this by claiming that he hates Masons because he was a Christian - How dare you! With all due respect, you have offered very little evidence, your websites are all biased (they are Mason) whereas I can post from ANY website and not only one; which you would lend your graceful opinion as being people who “hate masons”. And since you would try and discredit me by quoting websites that speak in a condescending manner about a man as virtuous as J Q Adams, and thus try and discredit him, I have no respect for your assumptions about what you consider a mason-hater, or a plagiarist for that matter.

So apparent is it that you have no idea who and what masters you serve that you would try and imply that Christians are the reason for all the negativity about Masonry. You have yoursel to blame and you make it sound like Christians have never been under any scrutiny; have then you forgotten the Reformation? So where is this Masonic Reformation? Could it be that these men (like Morgan) have all been silenced, or their books banned, or formally attacked or discredited. I find it difficult to accept that all these Ex-Masons were lying and also bigots.

I intent to go further than soft-ball, Mason.


[edit on 25-11-2005 by markusjharper]

Well, if you are going to do that, please say, "intend", rather than intent, as the improper use of words really pisses me off.

Thank you for your attentiveness,

TC

Originally posted by markusjharper
For someone who speaks volumes and makes assumptions and then tries to present them as fact

Pot? Kettle. Kettle? Pot.

You assume I predispose myself to ism’s of "hating", or hating anything, when in fact all I am doing is disapproving of secret societies and their interfering with procedures in the public arena.

Yep -- you've done reams and reams of "disapproving" of all sorts of things -- I daresay you've expressed your "disapproval" of more "group" labels and names than I've seen from one poster in ... well... ever. All without providing any evidence to support even one of your allegations of "interference" nor even one of the other things you've gotten on about. Not one thing.

To steal something is to first of all deprive one person of something and that is not copyright, nor plagiarism. I have done neither and yet you claim I stole from an anti-Masonic website

Wrong, Again.
To steal is "To take (the [intellectual] property of another) without right or permission."

To plagiarize is "to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source"

Plainly it is, and you have done, both.

but you fail to understand what my affiliation to this website is?

As much as it pains me to admit it, you actually have a point here.

Well, then please enlighten me!
If this is your website then I will happily retract my statement.
Is that what you are claiming?
If not, exactly what are you claiming is your relationship with "Watchy's" website?

Your expected refusal to answer these simple and direct questions should serve quite nicely as still further proof of your utter lack of credibility.

Let it be understood that you also assume too much in that you decided to claim that I was somehow a criminal to take a quote which belongs to the original author anyhow, and no-one else.

Surely a man of your "studies" understands both the legitimacy of quoting, the work of others and the necessity of attibution. If not, you'll probably learn something about it when you get up into the 9th or 10th grade. If you're going to keep debating with adults, though, it might be good for you to ask a teacher about this now so as to avoid further embarrassment

Just what do you think a 3'rd party will think seeing how the Masons continually lie and constantly deny, deny, deny, centuries of evidence which all point to something, shall we say less than holy.

I expect an intelligent "third party" to notice how you keep making these blanket accusations and claims, while referring to "evidence" that somehow never seems to materialize. I figure they'll see that I (and others) keep asking you to provide some evidence, and that we are all still waiting. I figure they'll notice that the few things you have provided have been shown to either be evident of the opposite of what you claim, or from a source so dubious as to be frankly comical. You should really plagiarize a better class of website.

[blah-blah-snip]...and then try to imply that what [Ronayne] spoke of was untrue. Next you slime your way into implying that I am even more disgraceful by posting the words of this individual.

I didn't "imply" anything -- I stated quite plainly, without any reservation or equivocation -- on both counts. For the record, though, the biggest "disgrace" on your part as regards your (stolen) "Ronayne" quote was that of taking someone else's words and using them without validation or attribution.

Where is your evidence that this person hated Masons?

It is self-evident by the simple fact that he made a career of publishing untruths about them. The only other option seems to be that he was a con-artist. I felt it more charitable to believe that his actions were born of hatred than avarice. You seem to disagree...

Do you supply any evidence of this by claiming that he hates Masons because he was a Christian - How dare you!

I said nothing about Ronayne's (alleged) "Christianity" -- this is a childish diversionary maneuver. Kindly refrain from attempting to put words in my mouth.

your websites are all biased (they are Mason)

Again you make a nice, blanket (and utterly false) statement, but which "websites", exactly, are you referring to?

See, Marky, anyone who is paying attention would notice that the overwhelming majority of the websites I've referenced or linked have been carefully and deliberately chosen for their non-Masonic origin. Where I've referenced Masonic websites, I've done so in the process of citing Masonic material -- although much of that has even come from other, neutral sources wherever possible. Even you should be able to comprehend that Masons are more qualified than non-Masons to speak on the subject of Masonry, even though I don't expect you to be equipped to admit even this simple fact of irrefutable logic.

And since you would try and discredit me by quoting websites that speak in a condescending manner about a man as virtuous as J Q Adams, and thus try and discredit him, I have no respect for your assumptions about what you consider a mason-hater, or a plagiarist for that matter.

Huh? Earlier it was Brother Washington, now (having been proven oh-so-painfully-wrong) you've leapt down to J.Q. Adams. In spite of your lies, I haven't said a negative word about him -- again you try the childish deflection and put words in my mouth.

I must ask, though, if being "President" gives one some special authority to make judgements as to the merits of Masonry:
Fourteen Presidents of the United States were Masons (including George Washington)
One President was an Anti-Mason, elected to a single term, running on the "Anti-Masonic Party." As an interesting historical footnote, though, I would love to hear your comments on the circumstances of J.Q.'s election. Want to pontificate on that one for a while?

So apparent is it that you have no idea who and what masters you serve that you would try and imply that Christians are the reason for all the negativity about Masonry. You have yoursel to blame and you make it sound like Christians have never been under any scrutiny

Listen, son, you don't know a thing about me. The attempt to smear me with the "anti-Christian brush is childish and ludicrous. Here, again, you attempt to put words in my mouth, and divert attention from your failures. Please try to resist. It's not flattering.

I find it difficult to accept that all these Ex-Masons were lying and also bigots.

But you find it easy to believe that some six million Americans are part of some boogey-man conspiracy to ... do what exactly?

You also fail to define exactly who you mean when you say "all these Ex-Masons" -- would you please provide a list? This would be good for the discussion -- we could then evaluate whatever evidence is available as regards each of them. Surely that would be more productive than simply referring to them with blanket statements. Of course, I can understand why (given recent experience) you'd be a bit skittish to actually say anything that could be verified...

I intent to go further than soft-ball, Mason

I've been waiting since you got here -- can you do it soon? Like, maybe in the next few thousand words or so? I'm getting bored...

For the record, "Mason" is a high compliment -- even from one such as you.

DD

Well, if you are going to do that, please say, "intend", rather than intent, as the improper use of words really pisses me off.

Thank you for your attentiveness,

TC

Ah...thanks for catching the spell check but please don't become so pissed off that you turn into a Mason - we got enough here already bro.

Originally posted by markusjharper
Democracy does not work well in OUR society of America. Would you like to still be part of the Republic?

Not my problem. I'm British. The fact that guys like you whine about a screwed up system, when it's the people like you who have screwed it up
in the first place kinda makes me laugh. It's even more laughable that you blame others for your predicament

"I used to be a Republican".

Rabidly Republican, I'll bet. It does't even matter to me if you had said you were a Democrat. The fact is that you went out there and pushed your political system down your nation's and the world's throat. You supported and furthered their agenda.


You made your bed. You lie in it.

Originally posted by markusjharper

All of the other business about taking oaths to 'pull toungues out by their roots and slit throats' is pretty silly, but this iis interesting. Are any of the mason's here familiar with this work? Is it being presented out of context in some way? Is the Author confirmed to be a mason?How popular was the work and how authoratative the author?

Nydan – The truth is yes Masons have done this and some still do.

You have entirely ignored my response. I re-iterate;

1. Are you here familiar with Royanes work personally?
   
2. Is it being presented out of context in some way?
   
3. Is the Author confirmed to be a mason and if so how?
   
4. How popular was the work and how authoritative the author?

all the while calling me a plagiarist,

Why shouldn't he point out that you are? On this site, you need to provide citations for the works of others. Normally a 'cut and paste' warning woudl be sent out, but DD's evisceration of your post was far more damaging that one of our slaps on the wrist. It'd be redundant at this point.

but you fail to understand what my affiliation to this website is?

What affiliation? You haven't claimed any affiliation that I am aware? Are you hiding your affiliation with them or something?

Surely a man of your "studies" understands both the legitimacy of quoting, the work of others and the necessity of attibution

Surely you understand that you haven't stated that you are the author of the information on freemasonrywatch, and surely you also understand that who ever runs those pages doesn't create all the content there.

from your typically pompous and foul smelling, insulting post:

Once agian, when you signed up to use the services of this website, you agreed not to bait and insult other members. This is a discussion site, not an 'internet bravado' site.

senrak
The truth is...markus has no clue what he's talking about.

You will not abuse or bait other members by using language like that. Its perfectly permissible to point out that someone is incorrect and perhaps not overly familiar with the bylaws of a particular group, but keep the baiting and hostile language down.


edit to add:
I mean, you are using the posting name of Markus Harper. As far as I know, Markus Harper isn't the owner/administrator/techie for freemasonrywatch. This is markus harper

Markus Harper completed the task by taking the ball into the end zone for the Panthers’ next score. Petal went into the locker room at halftime leading 21-0.

This is Markus Harper:

2005 - Youth Boy's 100 Meter Dash
931 Markus Harper 00:12.97(A)

And this is Marcus J Harper. So you can hardly expect anyone to think that you are affiliated with freemasonrywatch when you use a fake name and don't tell anyone that you are associated with them. I mean, why are you hiding it then, are you embarrassed by them? I do recall the the guy who made freemasonrywatch used to post on the freemasonry usenet newsgroups, and that he was laughed out of there and embarassed away into oblivion, only to make his own little website about 'evil masonry', safe and secure in his own little world where others couldn't comment or criticise.

[edit on 27-11-2005 by Nygdan]