Originally posted by DeltaT
He was a scapegoat for all the people in 'high position'. He diverted attention. It was the lone nut tactic all over again. Yes, he was sick, but he worked for even sicker ones. I guess you're one of those who don't 'believe' in paedophilic networks.

Let me elaborate a little on this. Practically every 6 months to a year people get arrested for child pornography and often this is shared with other persons in different countries. So, is there a network of some kind? In a sense yes, although it doesn't give me the impression that they are "professionals". So the notion that networks can exist is certainly there, and I'm not denying that.

What I do find hard to accept is that powerfull political figures are sometimes belonging to the peadophile network. Let me tell you why. If the slightest hint arises that such a political figure is involved with these crimes, their careers are over. I'm not kidding. If a journalist finds out a politician is involved then it would be in the news. Of course there must be some evidence of the politician's involvement. That's how "news" work. So a politician would think not twice but ten times before getting involved with something like this.

But DeltaT, make a seperate thread with the Dutroux story. It was rather unusual that he managed to escape. You could argue that 'the powers that be' arranged for him to escape hoping that he'd get shot. Present your case, maybe you can show "dark groups" are involved.

.
The Masons USED to enjoy public esteem. Many of our grandfathers and uncles were members of Masonic lodges, back when it was mildly prestigious, particularly amongst owners of small businesses etc. And those grandfathers and uncles took themselves very seriously sometimes. Others simply advised their sons and nephews that gaining membership of a Masonic lodge was 'the way to get on in business'.

There has always been a certain type of person who 'needs' to belong to a club, committee or lodge in order to feel 'safe' and 'important'. And the Masonic heirarchy are all too aware of the snivelling type of individual who will toady for years in order to gain membership. They ostentatiously engage in infantile ritual and imagine they are important links in a mighty chain. But let's face it: the vast majority of Masons are nothing more than lowly foot soldiers. They are the banal foundations of a pyramid they will never scale. They know no more about actual Masonic agendas than the public in general. They are pretenders. In truth, they are the male equivalent of the women who belong to the Ophrah book of the month club. In fact, from the public's perspective, Masons and Cub Scouts seem to share a lot in common.

Masons no longer enjoy public respect or esteem. Just the opposite. The cats are out of the bag. The Masons, the OTO and similar groups are generally reviled by the public. Too many truths have been aired. The Masons have been exposed and the disclosures have sickened decent men and women. So the Masons have an image problem and seem to believe that self-righteous, self-serving propaganda in open forums is the way to repair it. Not working. Counter productive in fact.

Vulnerable young people are being subjected to perverted, sickening ritualistic abuse by pot-bellied, foul-breathed, dandruff-scalped males who enjoy protection from 'government connections'. The public knows about it and about the young people who are led to the slaughter and never seen again -- or whose murders are claimed to be the result of self-inflicted drugs, alcohol and 'accidents'.

As other posters have remarked, it would be fitting if there were less self-righteous justification of perverse 'lodge' ritual (and origins) and more evidence of *genuine* concern for the victims of loathesome paedophile rings.

The reality is: people do not trust or respect secret 'lodges', 'brotherhoods' or their members. What little illusory glory was once bestowed via membership is long gone. And it's not coming back.

It's clear the OTO used every card in the pack to try to discredit, i.e., 'silence' Gaiaguys.

Yet all OTO achieved was to attract suspicious public scrutiny of itself, the Masons, the police, the judiciary, the political octopus. Leaving the public with the firm conviction that (1) OTO and its friends-in-authority must have had a LOT to hide ... and (2) that the Gaiaguys claims about OTO/Masons must have been VERY close to the mark !

Instead of trying to blame the victims and destroy the messengers --- secret societies would be better employed in ridding themselves of the depraved lunatics who lurk in their midst.

Any organisation that believes itself entitled to engage in 'blood sacrifice' or to base itself on the ravings of a psychotic in this the 21st. century, urgently requires to be sent en masse to a prison psychiatric facility until it's shown it's prepared to conform with society.

After all --- SECRET societies? Secret? Secrets are for those with much to hide. Society can't afford to harbour men who lurk in 'secret' societies. We need to know what those 'secret' societies are getting up to. So it's society itself which determines if it will tolerate 'secret' societies in its midst.

Dock6 Awesome post, exactly me thoughts on the matter.

Excellent work

TK

Awesome?

It was an opinion piece full of baseless insinuations.

Do you guys even understanding the difference between O.T.O and the Freemasons?

Like the Gaiaguys, your zealotry is obvious and your passion for defending victims of child abuse is commendable, but you're dead short on facts.

Your understanding of Freemasonry seems to be based on some kind of vast pyramidic tentacular structure. As has been pointed out many times already, this is not the case.

to forum

Roark, "baseless insinuation" you refered to dock6's statement should be backed up with your own evidence to support your vehement objection if it is to be taken seriously.
I mean seriously there is so much evidence, cases based on actual testimony from victims, reports, testimony from the people who directly work with the victims and so forth to not dismiss their claims as obsurd.
I realise where your alliegence and loyality lies BUT C'mon, if you are at all one of the members of such organisation along with some others here on this forum who swore to defend the principles which may have appealed to you for you to join in the first place, you may still be left in the dark about the true nature of such organisations.
In all honesty the book of law and the thelemic scriptures condones and even promotes a lifestyle of human depravity designed to live one's life based on murder, torture, degradation, hate, domination of the weak, exploitation of people for one's own end, human sacrifice, etc etc.
What is the fundamental reason for joining such organisation in the first place then for one to follows its doctrines and scriptures to one's own life. Isn't this what the appeal is?
Yet how hopelessly lost are those that contemplate such a depraved vile lifestyle, who cannot tune into their own conscience to know what is right from wrong. How could such person know one thing and yet not know another, that their vested interest is in the maintenance and upholding of true justice, liberty, freedom, love, peace and harmony that all life depends on for the preservation and continuation of life yet feel self justified to inflict pain on another on the grounds that if God gave them the freedom of action and the power to choose, then it is at their own discretion thereby throwing out any notion of self responsibilities for another yet they also depend on for their own continuation and preservation of their own lives.

If they have been given unalienable right as individuals, then likewise others would also be given the same in equal measures, yet why trample upon anothers right to live and be happy if they realise if their own rights have been trampled upon that they'd move haven and earth to defend themselves and seek justice. So people, another person's pain is really your own pain just as we are our own brothers keeper.

Sure you would criticize me by omitting the matter of who in the end from OTO pulled the trigger that justified the accusation levelled at them by gaiaguys and Dr mickelson, BUT how could I expect you people to understand and know, if you people don't even know what true justice is. Just as well you'd see OTO and freemasonry as the victims of false accusation without considering for a minute that vile elements within these ranks are responsible for some of the worse crimes against humanity and that of the poor victimized childrens which is in the end the heart of the matter. And on what proof you continue to ferverently ask? Read.

In the end, the worse enemy to a better world lies deep within all of us. Its in whether we choose to know it and amend the degenerate element within our nature for the good of all mankind or whether we continue to rationalise, deny, justify, let loose this demonic force if I could coin it in such a term and to further give credence to it that all hell breaks loose thereby seeking the answers to the problems elsewhere where it cannot be found.

So in closing, there lurking behind the anononimity of various pseudonyms on this forum will be the real paedophiles, child molestors, rapists, abusers, those that have engaged in satanic rituals of child sacrifices sworn to defend to your last drop of blood the organization which you belong to. Obviously not all but you know who you are.

So, now you're saying that there's child molesters here on the ATS Secret Societies forum? Nice one. Your demons-behind-bushes attitude reeks of the worst kind of fundamentalism. I suppose it is kinda pointless to try and reason with a zealot, but anyway:

Your concept of Masonic allegiance is somewhat flawed, mate. Upon my initiation, I was told not to protect any brother who had broken the law, but to aid in bringing him to justice. Every other Mason is told the same thing. It's in the common ritual.

I haven't met a single person here who feels anything but disgust for child molestation.

I'm just a little flabbergasted that someone can look at that website and consider it "evidence". It's just like Freemasonwatch: An incomprehensible maelstrom of faux-research and bizarre "links" between unrelated things.

Here's a couple of interesting "links" with about the same amount of integrity as the Gaiaguys website:

- The judge ruled against Gaiaguys and one of the first things they did was to create a cartoon about how he was a freemason acting to protect his brethren.

- Some of us questioned the veracity of Gaiaguys' evidence, and now you suggest that ATS contains some hidden network of child molesters.

Hmm... they are certainly "interesting" ways of responding to people who don't agree with you.

Look fellas, I don't apportion every ill that is happening in our world to freemasons or for that matter OTO alone. Just as well irrespective of which organization, country, profession, race, creed, colour, nationality, beliefs, age, sex, etc etc the criminality extends to every corner of this globe. You and I are also capable of various other heinous crimes against our fellow persons if driven to the brink of sheer madness through circumstances our reasons may not be able to defend ourselves from.

What I am stipulating is that where the vultures fly there will be a carcass and where there is a carcass there will lurk hyenas ready to feed. The catholic church and the paedophile priests who indecently molested childrens is a prime example and the present day parents have reasons to worry as it extends to childcare centres, schools, in every corridors of institutions both public and private in every suburb, district, town, city, state, territory, region, country etc, practically everywhere.

Now because of such moral bravehearts as gaiaguys, Dr michaelson and many others that we are enlightened about these things for who would've thought how extensive paedophilia was within our society with spurious news coverage from the mainstream media touching briefly on the subject now and then.

CUG I think I know enough to make my judgements as the facts are, on the 6th of November 1941 issue of Liber OZ or The book of strength they otherwise call it where what Crowley calls'The right of man' contain 4 short excerpts from 'The book of law' and among it, the passage 'do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law' followed by 'Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights' augmented by this saying 'love is the law; love under will'.
I mean seriously, the man, if he was ever destined to become the next prophet of a new religion obviously lived by the moral permissiveness for which he defended himself from the criticizm of others of incorrectly misinterpreting his dictas.
Wouldn't logic dictate to you that he was a hypocrite, not to mention of him admitting that he didn't understand all that he has written in 'the book of the law'.

If you read Crowley's lapdog Neuburgs records, it reflects an abundance of sado masochistic elements. Does gorse and nettles ring a bell to you?
Now this is just a tip of the ice berg of Crowley's lifestyle as you know but how can rational people find anything appealing about such ideals of life other than Crowley's intellectualism and his fortitude in re-establishing or rather expressing what no other mortals even dare to suggest.

Isn't life in the end about live and help live? to love and be loved.

Not one commentator of Crowley's that I have read so far ever forthrightly condoned or even agreed with his conduct let alone the fundamental priniciples underpinning his organization he established which isn't short of admirers and seems to thrive behind the scene.

Anyway, what goes against natural laws will meet its demise in the end through the laws of causality that once the breaking point has passed, the tide will swiftly turn the other way and recede with it the same forces it was impelled by.
I see a day when people will wake up and sense the unrighteous path they have tread for too long to suddenly and even violently shudder at the realization that they had been ignoring the truth all these years.

Originally posted by newinitiation
'The book of law' and among it, the passage 'do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law' followed by 'Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights' augmented by this saying 'love is the law; love under will'.

I'm under the slight impression that this is no longer a fringe viewpoint... It's the political tone du jour.

By lack of inner strength, virtue and good will, men fall into easy decadence, cowardice and cruelty towards others. The bad news is that they're calling it 'power'.

Originally posted by newinitiation

CUG I think I know enough to make my judgements as the facts are, on the 6th of November 1941 issue of Liber OZ or The book of strength they otherwise call it where what Crowley calls'The right of man' contain 4 short excerpts from 'The book of law' and among it, the passage 'do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law' followed by 'Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights' augmented by this saying 'love is the law; love under will'.

First of all Liber Oz is not one of our holy books. When I joined the Army I took an oath to defend the Constitution, In other words I was willing to kill someone defending the rights given in the Constitution. That is what that line means, it gives man the right to defend his rights. It does not say go kill little children if you wish. it doesn't say kill someone just because it's your will to do so.

Wouldn't logic dictate to you that he was a hypocrite, not to mention of him admitting that he didn't understand all that he has written in 'the book of the law'.

Sure Crowley was a hypocrate. But is that a reason to think he and his followers kill/rape babies?

If you read Crowley's lapdog Neuburgs records, it reflects an abundance of sado masochistic elements. Does gorse and nettles ring a bell to you?

So? I don't care what consenting adults do behind closed doors.

Now this is just a tip of the ice berg of Crowley's lifestyle as you know but how can rational people find anything appealing about such ideals of life other than Crowley's intellectualism and his fortitude in re-establishing or rather expressing what no other mortals even dare to suggest.

Who said any Thelemite found Crowley's lifestyle appealing? I'm sure there are some that do, but there are many that don't. What it sounds like your doing is thinking of Crowley as our Jesus, he is nothing of the sort, Thelemites do not worship Crowley.

Lets put it this way say it was found out that Einstein had wild BDSM orgies and was an alltogether unpleasant man. Would that make his theory of relativity any less valid?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems like you are saying because Crowley was a class A jerk at times that means the followers of his teachings molest children? I don't think Evil Knievel could make a jump that far!

I see a day when people will wake up and sense the unrighteous path they have tread for too long to suddenly and even violently shudder at the realization that they had been ignoring the truth all these years.

Now your talking like a Thelemite again

"Freedom is a two-edged sword of which one edge is liberty and the other, responsibility."

That's a great ideal.

I'm seeing a LOT of 'liberty' and hardly any responsibility in masonic actions and current politics in general. They're limited to total selfishness -- which is not what 'liberty' means.

If you're propagating freedom without immediate responsibility towards human and natural variables, present and future, you're merely creating lots of entropy... engendering tons of damage. All this under the impression of being 'free' and 'in control' over the world, while really serving a chimera.

Originally posted by DeltaT
I'm seeing a LOT of 'liberty' and hardly any responsibility in masonic actions and current politics in general. They're limited to total selfishness -- which is not what 'liberty' means.

Selfishness in the form of charity for the sick or injured?

Selfishness in the form of providing education to those who can't afford it?

An obviously imbalanced view doesn't contribute to the veracity of your argument.

If your exposure to "Masonic actions" amounts to nothing more than regurgitated hearsay from sites like Gaiaguys, you are not doing your research any favours.

They don't even seem to understand the distinction between O.T.O and Freemasonry.

Originally posted by DeltaT
I'm seeing a LOT of 'liberty' and hardly any responsibility in masonic actions and current politics in general. They're limited to total selfishness -- which is not what 'liberty' means.

First of all who is talking about the Masons? Secondly that quote is from a "high ranking" O.T.O. member. Thirdly if you don't bother to read more than a few quotes how do you expect to see anything about responsibility?

Originally posted by Cug

Originally posted by DeltaT
I'm seeing a LOT of 'liberty' and hardly any responsibility in masonic actions and current politics in general. They're limited to total selfishness -- which is not what 'liberty' means.

First of all who is talking about the Masons?

My sentiments exactly. This guy is not "seeing any responsibility in masonic actions"? What "masonic actions" is he "seeing"?

None, I'd reckon. "Masonic actions" happen in Masonic Lodges, not on DeltaT's TV.

Originally posted by Dock6
.
The Masons USED to enjoy public esteem...Masons no longer enjoy public respect or esteem. Just the opposite.

Wow, that would be news to the general public, then. Every time my Lodge holds a fundraiser, we have plenty of community involvement, with the public showing their respect and esteem. Same thing with Shrine parades, and fundraisers for the Childrens Hospital.

Perhaps you've mistaken "public esteem" with your own subjective prejudices?

Dock6 wrote:

It's clear the OTO used every card in the pack to try to discredit, i.e., 'silence' Gaiaguys.

From what I have been able to gather, I thought O.T.O. used only one card, i.e. the "evidence card."

If gaiaguys really had something on them, don't you think they would at least show up at the hearing and argue their case? They didn't even show their faces, let alone offer any real "evidence." Apparently what they did present as a "defense" was considered frivolous.

Originally posted by Roark
Your understanding of Freemasonry seems to be based on some kind of vast pyramidic tentacular structure. As has been pointed out many times already, this is not the case.

Enlighten us then: would you distance yourself and freemasonry in general from the likes of Alceister Crowley? Or would you call him a brother?