21 year old GI killed in Masonic mystery

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by BassClef

Fair enough but in a previous post, in this thread, I already stated that Freemasonry is only one of many agencies associated with high government and I mentioned Freemasonry because this happens to be the topic.

I'm still confused about this claim. How exactly do you believe that Freemasonry is "associate with high government"? Certainly, many notable American statesmen of the past have been Masons, but this number has shrunk dramatically. And even then, Freemasonry itself was not associated with government, but only some of its individual members, just like some guys in high government are Eagle Scouts, but that doesn't mean the Scout organization itself has anything to do with government, other than helping mould the principles a person should live by.

The Scout organisation doesn't have its symbols all over the infrastructure of high government. America was built on Masonic principals, so it's there right in the very fabric of high government, even if there's no Masonic President in office at the time.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

I also make a distinction between Freemasons and the institution of Freemasonry, which obviously has a greater impact than do individuals within the organisation.

I made the same distinction above, but apparently in an opposite context. Are you saying that the actual fraternity of Freemasonry has association with the government, while individual Masons do not. If so, then obviously, I would have to make the opposite claim.

It's obviously a mixture of both (see my last comment above).

Originally posted by Masonic Light

I didn't say he (George Washington) was a great adept, not even a small one but, as a high ranking Freemason he still chose to the path Jesus rejected, a path Jesus rejected because he knew who dishes out political power, namely Satan and Satan told him so!

Again, I'm sort of perplexed by your meaning. Are you saying that you think Satan made George Washington the President? Earlier, I made a statement that an Adept would refuse political power, but I don't think a good, ordinary honest guy should refuse. If they do, all that's left are the scoundrels.

I refer back to the comments I made earlier, regarding the knowledge Jesus shared with us that Satan is the one who bestows kingdoms and political power. If Freemasonry were so enlightened, Washington would have known not to have accepted what Jesus refused to accept but there will always be the man who will seek after power and in this example, it was Washington.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Satan never said anything about crowns, although some Freemasons have accepted crowns... no, Satan said all the kingdoms of the world belong to him, which is exactly what Washington accepted.

Washington didn't accept a kingdom, he accepted an administrative office temporarily. Obviously, there's a difference.

He accepted leadership of a political office, which is the same as accepting a kingdom.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

With respect, this isn't so. Capitalism is itself a religion, even the US money supply bears the logo, "IN GOD WE TRUST". Modern capitalism, with it's practises of usury, originated in ancient Babylon, where every aspect of the state came under the umbrella of the Mystery Schools. There was no separation then and there isn't today either. It's just that today, people have been hoodwinked into thinking otherwise. Even the dollar bill is embedded with occult symbols of the Ancient Mystery Religion!

This is historically inaccurate. To begin with, capitalism isn't a religion....

It depends how you look at it. Many people follow money as if it were a religion and "IN GOD WE TRUST" is embedded on the currency but it's a fact that the system of usury originated in ancient Babylon.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
Secondly, it did not originate in ancient Babylon, but in medieval Europe, as the system of feudalism began to erode under the strains of modern industry (without modern industry there can be no capitalism, which obviously didn't exist in Babylon).

Usury originated in Babylon.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
Thirdly, the Great Seal of the United States was invented in 1786. It's symbolism is quite appropriate in regards to a struggle toward individual freedom and democracy.

That's only a matter of opinion and in reality very questionable because money is the ideal tool with which to enslave and control people. It can bring material freedom to some but at the same time, it makes slaves of others and sometimes through no fault of their own.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

There's also the wider subject of political agendas, and the drive towards globalisation having to do with this Ancient Mystery Religion but I'll leave it you whether you want to expand the discussion in this direction and believe me it's a big one! I'm happy to oblige though!

As a practitioner of the Mysteries, I'm quite aware of the conspiracy theories of the far-rightwing of fundamentalist Christianity concerning it. It would certainly be nice to a united world living in peace and perfect harmony, as John Lennon so eloquently sang about. But I'm no head-in-the-cloud utopian all the time; being also a pragmatist and practical person, I'm very aware that the world is not anywhere close to such a thing. Humanity, for the most part, still act like barbarians at the most crucial moments. Perhaps, mankind will eventually evolve to the point where each can see that everyone else is truly his brother and sister, put down his gun, and lift a dove.

But trust me, it ain't gonna happen tomorrow.

I'm also in favour of a united world living in peace and harmony. In fact, the Bible speaks about one a lot and Jesus instructed his disciples to pray for it in the Lord's Prayer but man always has other ideas and wants to create a global order out of his own philosophies and wisdom but he always has a habit of screwing up, just like Nimrod's Babel project... in fact, Mackay had very interesting things to say about Nimrod!

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by BassClef

Freemasonry works with "forces" and "energies" but science has no way of scientifically establishing where these forces orginate from or who controls or influences them.

No. Freemasonry does not work with "forces and energies". I said that occultists, not Freemasons, do. I happen to be both, but most are not.

Of course Freemasonry works with "energies and forces" because Freemasonry embraces the occult and occultists.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
I would not completely agree that science can tell us nothing of them. In fact, it has told us much. Also, these forces are not outside of us, but are a part of us, and give us life.

It's meaningless to say these forces are part of us because the whole universe is an extension of our consciousness which always comes from within because this is where everything is processed. Science is about applying physical tools as an extension of our physical senses to explore the unknown but because science relies on the physical, it can never find the spiritual because rather than looking inwardly, science can only look out into the physical world of illusion.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Given that Freemasonry has involved itself in the politics of the world, which, according to Jesus are in Satan's domain

Again, there is not a single incident in history where Freemasonry as an organization has gotten involved in politics. There are plenty of instances where individual Masons have done this, and then only because they were tired of being oppressed.

Freemasonry has got involved in the structures that support political reality, which is what I meant by getting involved in politics. Freemasonry is an agency that helps uphold Satan's kingdoms!

Originally posted by Masonic Light

It's correct he did write "The Book of Black Magic", which is a perfect illustration of the path from whence he came!

Considering the facts mentioned above, that isn't an honest assessment. Waite knew nothing of occultism or Magisk when he wrote the book, but just quoted from various grimoires he found at the British Museum. He was also ordered to write the book by his publisher, it was not his idea.

So, the for the fourth time, let me state again unequivocally, that I do not consider Waite to be a good guide to occultism, and most practicing occultists don't pay him much attention. Serious students of occultism generally focus more on Regardie, Case, Crowley, Fortune, Mathers, and those that were their students. If you'd like to discuss any of these, I'd be more than happy to, but your insistence on using Waite as a guide will get us nowhere: it's like using Stevie Wonder to drive us to Disney Land!

I'm not setting up Waite as a guide... you're making presumptions about what I think. Waite may well have been instructed to write what he did but, for the fourth time, he still wrote out his thoughts on the subject matter that he was given to write about because that was where his interests and knowledge lay and it demonstrates where he was coming from before getting involved as a highly esteemed Freemason and Freemasonry embraced him as one of their own.

Originally posted by BassClef

The Scout organisation doesn't have its symbols all over the infrastructure of high government.

Nor does Masonry.

America was built on Masonic principals, so it's there right in the very fabric of high government, even if there's no Masonic President in office at the time.

I would agree with your first statement, but let's take a look it. The principles that America was based on were individual liberty and representative government. Before the founding of the USA, we lived under a practical political tyranny. Men who lived under this sytem would then go the Lodge, and notice the difference. In the fraternity, Masonic leaders were elected by popular vote of the membership. Each invidual Brother had a say in everything through his vote. Finally, the fraternity stressed that each had the right to his own ideas and opinions. So is it any wonder that they began thinking that perhaps this system would be better than monarchies, and do you believe it's a bad thing?

I must then disagree with the second part of your comment. While the original Masonic ideals put forth in the US Constitution are still intact on paper, they are, in a practical sense, ignored. An example would be the Bush administration's sidestepping permission of the courts to spy on US citizens. Therefore, I would argue that while today's government may still pay lip service to the Founders' ideals, there hearts are far from them.

I didn't say he (George Washington) was a great adept, not even a small one but, as a high ranking Freemason he still chose to the path Jesus rejected, a path Jesus rejected because he knew who dishes out political power, namely Satan and Satan told him so!

Then there seems to be a contradiction in your theology. Did not Paul claim that leaders were ordained by God (a claim which led to the infamous doctrine of "divine right of kings")?

He accepted leadership of a political office, which is the same as accepting a kingdom.

Not at all. A kingdom in an absolute monarchy, and a freely elected president of a democratic republic are as different as night and day. There is an obvious difference between, say, Jimmy Carter and Benito Mussolini.

It depends how you look at it. Many people follow money as if it were a religion and "IN GOD WE TRUST" is embedded on the currency but it's a fact that the system of usury originated in ancient Babylon.

It's not my intent here to defend usury, as I could do without my own interest debt. Nevertheless, to deny the essentiality of usury would be to show non-understanding of economics, and without it nobody could get a loan. No one is going to let anyone else borrow money without interest because they could invest the money and receive the same income as interest payments. Interest, therefore, is just a method of covering their own costs to provide a loan.

Also, there is no evidence that interest, although practiced in ancient Mesopotamia, originated there, as it was a common practice all over.

That's only a matter of opinion and in reality very questionable because money is the ideal tool with which to enslave and control people. It can bring material freedom to some but at the same time, it makes slaves of others and sometimes through no fault of their own.

I do not disagree, and will again refer to John Lennon's song. However, it's not money itself that is evil; it's just that we have abused it. Nevertheless, render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and unto God what belongs to God.

I'm also in favour of a united world living in peace and harmony. In fact, the Bible speaks about one a lot and Jesus instructed his disciples to pray for it in the Lord's Prayer but man always has other ideas and wants to create a global order out of his own philosophies and wisdom but he always has a habit of screwing up, just like Nimrod's Babel project... in fact, Mackay had very interesting things to say about Nimrod!

BTW...the Bible never said anything about Nimrod being involved in the Tower of Babel. That is simply later Talmudic traditions...the wisdom of men!

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by BassClef

The Scout organisation doesn't have its symbols all over the infrastructure of high government.

Nor does Masonry.

David Ovason would disagree with you on that and many other authors!

Originally posted by Masonic Light

America was built on Masonic principals, so it's there right in the very fabric of high government, even if there's no Masonic President in office at the time.

I would agree with your first statement, but let's take a look it. The principles that America was based on were individual liberty and representative government. Before the founding of the USA, we lived under a practical political tyranny. Men who lived under this sytem would then go the Lodge, and notice the difference. In the fraternity, Masonic leaders were elected by popular vote of the membership. Each invidual Brother had a say in everything through his vote. Finally, the fraternity stressed that each had the right to his own ideas and opinions. So is it any wonder that they began thinking that perhaps this system would be better than monarchies, and do you believe it's a bad thing?

I must then disagree with the second part of your comment. While the original Masonic ideals put forth in the US Constitution are still intact on paper, they are, in a practical sense, ignored. An example would be the Bush administration's sidestepping permission of the courts to spy on US citizens. Therefore, I would argue that while today's government may still pay lip service to the Founders' ideals, there hearts are far from them.

It's very sad but all man made endeavours to form government end up in disappointment because power always corrupts. This is also what God told his people when the Israelites demanded human rulers but they wouldn't listen!

Originally posted by Masonic Light

I didn't say he (George Washington) was a great adept, not even a small one but, as a high ranking Freemason he still chose to the path Jesus rejected, a path Jesus rejected because he knew who dishes out political power, namely Satan and Satan told him so!

Then there seems to be a contradiction in your theology. Did not Paul claim that leaders were ordained by God (a claim which led to the infamous doctrine of "divine right of kings")?

This is confirmed in the OT also because God ordained the 70 fallen hosts of heaven to rule the nations, so Paul was technically correct in saying rulers are ordained by God but with the knowledge we have from the OT and also from Revelation, we know that the rulers serve these fallen hosts, whose leader is Satan, rather than God. This is why Jesus acknowledged Satan had the power to bestow power on whomsoever he wishes. The rulers of the nations are governed by fallen angels who made themselves into gods and when we look around in the world for evidence of this, this is exactly what we find because the logo "IN GOD WE TRUST" on the dollar bill refers not to the God of the Bible but the god who is represented by the All Seeing Eye, which is Horus. Interestingly, there isn't a political sovereignty on earth that pays respect to the God of the Bible... they only pay lip service but their customs and logos of office highlight their Janus-faced hypocrisy in this matter.

The Bible states that Satan is the "Lord of this World", the "Prince of the Power of the Air" and is generally in control of this wicked world until Jesus Christ returns:

"...the whole world lies in the power of the Evil One." - 1 John 5:19

"Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out." - John 12:31

"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places." - Ephesians 6:12

"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." - Ephesians 6: 12

Originally posted by Masonic Light

He accepted leadership of a political office, which is the same as accepting a kingdom.

Not at all. A kingdom in an absolute monarchy, and a freely elected president of a democratic republic are as different as night and day. There is an obvious difference between, say, Jimmy Carter and Benito Mussolini.

I see your point but the above scriptures I quoted, plainly state that Satan holds dominion over rulers. George Washington was a ruler.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

It depends how you look at it. Many people follow money as if it were a religion and "IN GOD WE TRUST" is embedded on the currency but it's a fact that the system of usury originated in ancient Babylon.

It's not my intent here to defend usury, as I could do without my own interest debt. Nevertheless, to deny the essentiality of usury would be to show non-understanding of economics, and without it nobody could get a loan. No one is going to let anyone else borrow money without interest because they could invest the money and receive the same income as interest payments. Interest, therefore, is just a method of covering their own costs to provide a loan.

Usury is a tool used by a shadowy elite to control and influence peoples and nations through debt and not for altruistic purposes. This is why usury is condemned a dozen or so times, in the Bible, in the most certain terms.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

That's only a matter of opinion and in reality very questionable because money is the ideal tool with which to enslave and control people. It can bring material freedom to some but at the same time, it makes slaves of others and sometimes through no fault of their own.

I do not disagree, and will again refer to John Lennon's song. However, it's not money itself that is evil; it's just that we have abused it. Nevertheless, render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and unto God what belongs to God.

I agree, it's the love of money that leads to evil and there's plenty of that in the world, it goes without saying...

Originally posted by Masonic Light

I'm also in favour of a united world living in peace and harmony. In fact, the Bible speaks about one a lot and Jesus instructed his disciples to pray for it in the Lord's Prayer but man always has other ideas and wants to create a global order out of his own philosophies and wisdom but he always has a habit of screwing up, just like Nimrod's Babel project... in fact, Mackay had very interesting things to say about Nimrod!

BTW...the Bible never said anything about Nimrod being involved in the Tower of Babel. That is simply later Talmudic traditions...the wisdom of men!

Haven't looked at the story recently but if I made a mistake, I shall have to brush up on the story but the main point still stands that every enterprise orchestrated by man to rule, ends up in confusion and failure...

[edit on 14-3-2006 by BassClef]

accidental double post (deleted)

[edit on 14-3-2006 by BassClef]

Originally posted by BassClef

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by BassClef

The Scout organisation doesn't have its symbols all over the infrastructure of high government.

Nor does Masonry.

David Ovason would disagree with you on that and many other authors!

I'm sure Icke would as well. Doesn't mean that it is so.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by BassClef

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by BassClef

The Scout organisation doesn't have its symbols all over the infrastructure of high government.

Nor does Masonry.

David Ovason would disagree with you on that and many other authors!

I'm sure Icke would as well. Doesn't mean that it is so.

David Ovason is a Freemason! lol

Understood. Freemasons can have differing opinions, y'know. This is something most anti-Masons apparently fail to realise. They seem to think that we're some kind of hive-mind cult. They snatch quotes from a historical Freemason (uhh... Pike...) and seem to think that we're all supposed to agree with everything he's ever written, like it's a Bible or something.

So let's get to the bare bones: Which symbolism are you referring to?

Originally posted by Roark

So let's get to the bare bones: Which symbolism are you referring to?

Washington DC is full of Masonic symbolism but the most obvious Masonic symbolism in Washington DC is the Washington Monument that the Oval office looks out to. This is interesting in itself because in this we have two principle symbols used in witchcraft. Not amazingly, Washington isn't the only city in the world to have such symbolism, connected to the old Mystery Religion.

This is something most anti-Masons apparently fail to realise. They seem to think that we're some kind of hive-mind cult. They snatch quotes from a historical Freemason (uhh... Pike...) and seem to think that we're all supposed to agree with everything he's ever written, like it's a Bible or something.

No. But Masons could use Pike when it serves them and then throw him away at a moments notice. That is why Masonry today has no consistency, nor any accountability. Like today’s crappy Corporations, the people at the bottom are all running around stressed out and in chaos – reminds me of how Bush never knew about the 4 planes, rite? Well anyway, I hate to piss in a brother Mason’s pool here but at the top of most of these things it is not so chaotic and frankly, it’s very organized to try and keep those below frustrated. The Roman church does the same thing by not teaching the bottom much of what is known at the top. But the Masons - they are perfect Angels, denying Esoteric ties who think that every lodge is in full control and indpendant of the higher agencies which cover their tax-exempt status etc.

So let's get to the bare bones: Which symbolism are you referring to?

The first tallest building in the world was built in Chicago, as a shrine to the Masons. Also the Great Albert Pike who was instantly made 32 degrees by a dirty President has his bones buried and a statue sitting in front of the Washington Lodge. Pike should have told that President to go fly a kite, and take his degrees and shove it, IMO.

Originally posted by markusjharper


The first tallest building in the world was built in Chicago, as a shrine to the Masons. Also the Great Albert Pike who was instantly made 32 degrees by a dirty President has his bones buried and a statue sitting in front of the Washington Lodge. Pike should have told that President to go fly a kite, and take his degrees and shove it, IMO.

Pike never received any degrees from any President. Pike was made a 32° Scottish Rite Mason by Dr. Albert Mackey, a surgeon, who at the time was Grand Secretary General of the Supreme Council 33°.

Originally posted by BassClef

David Ovason would disagree with you on that and many other authors!

I have no idea who David Ovason is.

It's very sad but all man made endeavours to form government end up in disappointment because power always corrupts. This is also what God told his people when the Israelites demanded human rulers but they wouldn't listen!

This was sort of the idea behind putting all the power in the hands of the people through democracy. In a democracy, when things go wrong, the people really have no one to blame but themselves because either the majority elected the offending people, or the majority didn't bother to go vote because they were too busy stuffing their faces with Big Macs and watching Jerry Springer. Sad, but most definitely true.

I see your point but the above scriptures I quoted, plainly state that Satan holds dominion over rulers. George Washington was a ruler.

Satan doesn't hold dominion over anybody any more than Santa does. To say each and every ruler is controlled by satan would be as ludicrous as to say that they're all saints. Nobody's perfect, but some are better than others. If there were more Washingtons, I tend to think that the world be at least a little better place.

Usury is a tool used by a shadowy elite to control and influence peoples and nations through debt and not for altruistic purposes. This is why usury is condemned a dozen or so times, in the Bible, in the most certain terms.

I don't have the time to entire into a long economic debate, but must disagree, as would most. Interest is simply covering the cost of providing a loan.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
I don't have the time to entire into a long economic debate, but must disagree, as would most. Interest is simply covering the cost of providing a loan.

But when that exact same loan is made 10 times, or there is nothing actually backing up the loan, then can THAT be called it usury? (usury is an inflated interest)

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

But when that exact same loan is made 10 times, or there is nothing actually backing up the loan, then can THAT be called it usury? (usury is an inflated interest)

I'm not a very big fan of modern capitalism, but at least within that type of system, some level of interest is necessary to make loans available to people who need them.

Of course, interest (like anything else) can be abused. Loansharking is a good example, whether it comes from mob thugs or in your example above about a loan rewritten 10 different times. In most cases, yes, I'd probably call that usury.

But if I take out a loan to buy a house, it would be naive of me not expect to pay some interest. The bank who's loaning me the money could invest the money and make a profit. Therefore, they have to make up this loss by charging me interest, which is understandable if they want to stay in business. It's only when they issue interest rates that are way above average that I would begin questioning their honesty, and investigating whether or not they were practicing usury.

OK, sorry for going off-topic with this, but now I think we can move on without getting into the evils of international banking.

Now about that 21 year old man, are there any news now? A statement must have been released by now.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by BassClef

David Ovason would disagree with you on that and many other authors!

I have no idea who David Ovason is.

Ovason has written several books about the Masonic symbolism of Washington DC:

The Secret Zodiacs of Washington DC

The Secret Architecture of Our Nation's Capital: The Masons and the Building of Washington, D.C.

The Secret Symbols of the Dollar Bill

Originally posted by Masonic Light

It's very sad but all man made endeavours to form government end up in disappointment because power always corrupts. This is also what God told his people when the Israelites demanded human rulers but they wouldn't listen!

This was sort of the idea behind putting all the power in the hands of the people through democracy. In a democracy, when things go wrong, the people really have no one to blame but themselves because either the majority elected the offending people, or the majority didn't bother to go vote because they were too busy stuffing their faces with Big Macs and watching Jerry Springer. Sad, but most definitely true.

There's no type of system of government man can create that can be successful. The history of the last 6,000 years of civilisation has born this out. Democracy was supposed to have been about putting power into the hands of the people but the opposite is happening with the consolidation of power into fewer and few hands. Of course, God prophesied about all this long ago, so I'm not surprised to see things turning out the way they are.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

I see your point but the above scriptures I quoted, plainly state that Satan holds dominion over rulers. George Washington was a ruler.

Satan doesn't hold dominion over anybody any more than Santa does. To say each and every ruler is controlled by satan would be as ludicrous as to say that they're all saints. Nobody's perfect, but some are better than others. If there were more Washingtons, I tend to think that the world be at least a little better place.

Technically, you're correct because Satan only has dominion over the physical world and not the spirit but the more embroiled the spirit gets in physical reality, the more the spirit comes under Satan's influence, hence, this is why John said, "the whole world lies in the power of the Evil One" (1 John 5:19) - the ways of the world are materialistic.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Usury is a tool used by a shadowy elite to control and influence peoples and nations through debt and not for altruistic purposes. This is why usury is condemned a dozen or so times, in the Bible, in the most certain terms.

I don't have the time to entire into a long economic debate, but must disagree, as would most. Interest is simply covering the cost of providing a loan.

Ideally yes but unfortunately, usury in the capitalist system is synonymous with greed.

Originally posted by BassClef

Ovason has written several books about the Masonic symbolism of Washington DC:

Never heard of 'em.

There's no type of system of government man can create that can be successful.

I'll agree with that partially, but not completely. Since men are not perfect, the institutions they establish will not be perfect, but that doesn't mean they can't be successful. Surely you could agree that if men and women of integrity who believed in Constitutional ideals were elected into office, even the errors of the current administration could be corrected. Furthermore, it is partially relative, because we can say that some governments are more successful than others.

For example, the present Spanish constitutional monarchy is more successful than the Spanish Fascist dictatorship under Franco. I do understand what you're trying to say here, but I don't think we should give up just yet, and pessimism generally leads to apathy, which results in low voter turnout during elections, which in turn leads to guys like Bush becoming president. It seems to open the way for the proverbial "vicious circle" in American politics.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by BassClef

Ovason has written several books about the Masonic symbolism of Washington DC:

Never heard of 'em.

You have now!

Originally posted by Masonic Light

There's no type of system of government man can create that can be successful.

I'll agree with that partially, but not completely. Since men are not perfect, the institutions they establish will not be perfect, but that doesn't mean they can't be successful. Surely you could agree that if men and women of integrity who believed in Constitutional ideals were elected into office, even the errors of the current administration could be corrected. Furthermore, it is partially relative, because we can say that some governments are more successful than others.

Depends what definition is given for "success". Personally, I can't consider a government to be successful if, for example, it sucks up to the interests of big-bellied corporate executives, while masses of people suffer in abject poverty. Such a state is not successful and neither is a government successful if it lies to initiate wars and murders countless inncoent people as a result.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
...I don't think we should give up just yet, and pessimism generally leads to apathy, which results in low voter turnout during elections, which in turn leads to guys like Bush becoming president. It seems to open the way for the proverbial "vicious circle" in American politics.

I agree, "the proverbial "vicious circle" in American politics" is a very big problem. It looks like the system is rotten at the core and what's the point in building a new house on the old rotten foundations? Best to start afresh and according to Jesus Christ and the prophets, this shall come to pass.

Originally posted by BassClef
The history of the last 6,000 years of civilization has born this out. Democracy was supposed to have been about putting power into the hands of the people but the opposite is happening with the consolidation of power into fewer and few hands.

Do you have any system in mind that would work better? Such systems are easier to criticize than to create. For those same 6000 years, many great minds have sought to develop a system where people could live at an optimal level.

And Masonic Light, I love the Pascal quote. I don't get bassclef's denunciation of Washington either. If no one were to accept the mantle of responsibility of leader, we'd have anarchy. And also, correct me if I am wrong, but I am quite sure Washington was a Christian man.
I also read a poster above who wrote something like 'even if there is no Mason in office as president right now....'. If that was in reference to G. W. Bush, I doubt he is not one. I bet he is. I just noticed his initials too, lol, same as the first prez I just mentioned. Coincidence?
Sorry to post off topic, though. I just sought some clarification, and have no news to offer regarding the current state of affairs re: the thread subject.
I can say, though, I have known some very good Masons, and have read of some not so good ones, big surprise, they are just like everyone else.
Generally, I view them quite favourably, and that is not due to any lack of reading conspiracy books. I have a good 25 years of that behind me, and even went to see Icke speak....
I still don't buy the Illuminati tales though, after decades of giving the subject the third degree, I've found exactly zero proof that this chimerical band of global puppet masters even exist, I have become exceedingly skeptical.