21 year old GI killed in Masonic mystery

No they're not..

What tactics?

My only interest is that you foul creatures don't use this forum to recruit more souls for hell...


That's all.....

I've been where you are now.... that's why I sincerely pity you.

I got away, maybe you can too, if you have any residual goodness in you...

Judging from your previous posts, your violation of ATS rules by calling other members childish names, and constant barrage of adolescent fantasy, it would appear that the foul is on you.

Better luck next time.

These are your simplistic tactics. You open with the idea that I am foul, and that my motivation to be here is to recruit souls for hell. There are two faulty arguments at play in this one sentence, an argument from authority along with an ad hominem attack.

You have no basis of authority, you are as anonymous as I am. Meaning you can speak till the cows come home about what you "think" you know, and that you "know better" about this topic than I do. Pointless rhetoric.

Ad hominem in the idea that you think I'm foul. You lose credibility by attacking the character of the person you debate. Keep it above the belt, and you won't be discounted as simply wasting bandwidth.

My dear friends, these are not tactics. It is simply the truth.

I do not like having my experiences discounted nor being made out to be a liar.

Hence my sharp reply.


Perhaps you Masons should not appear in a public arena such as this?

How can you converse with someone who must keep their secrets from the profane and iat all times under pain of death and ntentionally give misleading impressions about certain things to do this. It is a senseless situation.




[edit on 11-3-2006 by Edelweiss Pirate]

[edit on 11-3-2006 by Edelweiss Pirate]

It's simply ranting. End of story.



I doubt that. Internet anti-Masons are a dime a dozen. Most don't really know anything about Masonry; they just read a couple of webpages from Cutting Edge or Freemasonry Watch, and become self-proclaimed "experts". From what I've seen so far, you fit into this category completely.



[edit on 11-3-2006 by Masonic Light]

With all due respect, I'm sorry you had bad experiences but it does not necessarily mean that it is an accurate representation of the organisation.
As I said before you will often get groups who fantasise about rumoured dark rituals and carry them out, calling themselves Masons (or any other organisation for that matter) on the way. This does not mean they are ambassadors for the entire organisation however.
If I could find some sicko friends, we could start a group, wear the symbols, etc and call ourselves some sort of Lodge, but real Masons would condemn it - it would not be fair for people to use my hypothetical actions as a way to judge others. In the same way you might get a group which started off as a genuine lodge and technically still is, but they have since devolved into some sort of really weird behaviour which they hide even from other lodges.
And before you ask, though you probably won't believe me anyway, no I'm not a Mason and I never have been. I don't think I would be allowed to join anyway (for private reasons),

Agent,

I personally dispute the claim that Pirate has ever had contact with Masonry. I'll even go as far as to state it is a full-fledged lie.

If Pirate is telling the truth, he can give us the name and number of the Lodge who "offended" him, as well as the names of the members who stole his Christmas. Otherwise, like good ol' Mr. Necros, he's just blowing hot air.

[edit on 11-3-2006 by Masonic Light]

The Masonry you speak about is the pretend 'we alll do good' public image bunkum. It simply doesn't exist. Only as a falsehood intended to mislead.

Why don't we talk about the real deal?

Oh and I do speak with authority, but I won't go into where my authority comes from here, with people who cannot deal with truth....

Edelweiss, if that was a sharp reply, I'd hate to see your knife drawer!

Even though you're editing your posts as quickly as possible, I did snag this:



You must've had second thoughts on that...too bad, because in truth you're making yourself out to be far less than a good debating partner.

Can't deal with the truth? Bring it...I am ready to hear your version of "truth" and correct it to help you understand.

So you refuse to give the Lodge name and number whom you claim to have had "contact" with. How convenient.

Once again, if Pirate can give this information, his story can be verified. If not, he's been caught red-handed lying.

I was illuminated but managed to escape before initiation.

You see I got all the power but wasn't forced to serve the darkness.

Pretty cool huh? I bet you're jealous.

Too bad you don't even have the proper words...

No lodge number and no verifying proof. You haven't a leg to stand on.

Any Masonic involvement in his death should be not be condoned, but it seems to me that everyone is missing the most important facts in the story, which is that Wilder died on a military base and that the military publication, "Stars & Stripes", is pinning all the blame on the PH Masons.

It sure seems that somebody should be asking some querstions about the military. Where was his supervisor and others in the military chain of command during all of this PH hazing? Was the high school where this hazing occurred also on a military base?

IMHO "Stars and Stripes" is not a credible news source as it has a pro-military bias and it is clearing covering someones butt.

[edit on 11-3-2006 by df1]

You were illuminated? Does that mean you wearing light bulbs?

For the the fourth time, what was the Lodge name and number? Are you telling the truth, or just blowing smoke again?

Now I understand you perfectly Masonic Light....

I cannot talk with a man who deals only in lies. It is futile.

You know very well what illumination is, that you would deny the very core of your creed shows that you take the people on this forum for great fools.

Illumination, as you very well know is the key to the warrior on the block.

And you should know what that means...








[edit on 11-3-2006 by Edelweiss Pirate]

[edit on 11-3-2006 by Edelweiss Pirate]

Well, it's good to know you can sympathize with my situation then. It is indeed futile, because if you had been telling the truth, you could have posted the Lodge information to the board. Yet we see that you cannot.

You, sir, are a liar, and I will no longer provide your Saturday morning amusement by dignifying your foolishness with a response.

Sounds like he's just blowing smoke...too bad.

I'm so looking forward to a real debate, something not based on made up phrases. I'll say it again, Edelweiss, Bring it! Let's hear your "truth!"

Can you give us the Lodge name and number? I know people who can help me in research, I will happily try and find out what I can.

OK, this has gone on long enough. Discuss the topic and let's quite with the useless bickering.

Edelweiss Pirate,

I don't think that the analogy of the burning house fits here, since the connection is only by location, plus that would give the situation an unnecessary sense of urgency. This boy is getting an autopsy right now. Why can't we all wait for the results, and THEN come to some conclusions. Yes, something was done in the Lodge. Does that mean that the boy was killed in there? No one knows.

If I'm reading your posts correctly, you seem very emotionally charged by this whole thing, as if you already have a preconcieved notion about what's going on, which you clearly state to be the case. Without the proof to back up these claims, I'm sorry but I can't agree with you. You have shown no verifiable proof for any of the claims that you've stated, other than some seemingly unrelated news stories that don't seem to amke any sense bing placed here. Now I want you to know that that does not mean that you're not right; it just means that you haven't found the evidence to make a stable case. You find that evidence, and you'll have my ear.

Good Luck.

TheBorg