It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

North Wales paedophilia ring exposed: Masonic involvement.

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2006 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Edelweiss Pirate

I think if you systematically ignore every Mason, OTOer, and Witch, then this site starts to make a bit more sense..

Good work those of you who have rallied to the call of an end to the satanic manipulation of our world.

Oh and here's a thought, there are some people posting on this site who are LYING to protect their brotherhood. With a death threat oath hanging over your head you would do just about anything... no, in fact, you would do anything.

Thing is I won't ignore these guys, I'm keeping my eyes on the poop level, to make sure it doesn't overflow .

Funny how they attack my credibility even when I post a real live proper news story.

But then that's all I've ever done.

My only agenda is the future of the human race.

With the mason, there is no future, only hell.

[edit on 9-5-2006 by Edelweiss Pirate]


Your credibility might be under attack because of your dubious and overreactive take on things.

I say again. If some Christians engage in immoral acts like pedophilia (and there are a number that do) does that make all Christians perverts?

A while back, an article was posted about a Christian man who had raped his 12 year old daughter repeatedly. The girl committed suicide. His church protected him and were covering up for him. Does this imply a Christian conspiracy?

Answer the question, and perhaps we shall get somewhere.

But so far, you have not proved anything showing Masons to be evil immoral satanists hellbent on world domination.

Show me proof of Masonry being a sinister cult. Show me proof not from some nutjob site. Show me legit news articles that blatantly state and show Masonic evil and conspiracy.

Then I will be willing to consider my view that freemasonry is more than just an estoric spiritual brotherhood.

The fact that they are secretive does not prove anything. People are entitled to keep beliefs and practices secret. To you defecate in a glass room, or leave your door open when engaging in romantic encounters? If you do, maybe you are hiding evil activity of your own.




posted on May, 10 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I'd suggest that we all focus less on EP and more on the facts of the case. ML has been very good to show how to contact these lodges, and apparently one of the men involved in this ring, or who engaged in its services, is a mason and is still out there.


IF the organization is as open as sometimes claimed, we should get responses on what Lodge Mr. Ketland belongs to, at the very least. So we will see. I haven't heard from UGLE or the N.Wales organization yet.



posted on May, 12 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
What's funny is these people who defend Masons. Can someone please explain to me why the world's most powerful fraternity needs to be defended


What makes you say that it is the world’s most powerful fraternity? Because it has a large number of members? Because some of those members happen to be men of power or influence in certain circles? Or is it because the lessons of Freemasonry are powerful, and the men who join and actually work to improve themselves and their communities reap a benefit from it? It’s been said before countless times, and I’ll say it again. Masonry is only as much good to a man as he makes it to himself. If he does not join with the intention of bettering himself, he likely won’t. As Masonic Light mentioned, if we would do a better job of investigating candidates it would go a long way toward preventing this kind of thing.

Am I making excuses? No. Am I defending child molesters? No. Would I love to be the one to hog-tie and beat the tar out of anyone caught molesting children? Absolutely. I honestly don’t think there is a fitting punishment for such things. Children are precious, innocent, and they look to us (adults) to protect and care for them. To betray that inherent, natural trust is in effect to destroy another human being, and anyone who is guilty of it should be punished to the extent of the law and then some.


What conclusion? [...] Do you think this is an isolated event? Your answer will tell me all I need to know about you.


I think that these kinds of situations are likely more common than any of us would like to admit, but that’s not to say it’s a rampant pedophile conspiracy or anything. To admit that one Mason would be involved in something like this is more than I would like to admit, but I’m realistic. Isolated? No. Infrequent? Yes.


Originally posted by smallpeeps
Even when it is clearly shown that two Masons conspired to molest, this does not cause the Masonic defenders to pause. No, they just wail, "Shameful! This is not Masonry at all, but just a couple of rogues!"


OK, OK... first of all, that is what most Masons would say, because that is true. To put this in perspective, how many MILLIONS of dollars has the Catholic Church shelled out in settlements for child molestation cases? Hell there was just a story on the Dallas news the other day (might have been yesterday) where a priest or bishop has been arrested, and the Diocese KNEW he was a pedophile and yet allowed him to continue in his capacity as a church leader. Disgraceful. How about teachers? Scout leaders? Babysitters? Big brother’s friend who’s sleeping over? Moms? Dads? What seems to be the issue here is not that these two men committed a heinous crime for which they should be summarily castrated and beaten (at the very least), but that they happened to be members of a certain fraternity.

I fail to see how one can hold the fraternity responsible or even suggest that this kind of behavior is accepted or covered up by lodges, save for a gross misunderstanding of Masonry and what it is about. Masonry itself is no more at fault here than the Church, the Scouts, or any other organization to which individual people with individual behavioral patterns and thought processes may belong.

That young girl’s life is destroyed, and if guilty, the bastards should fry. Period.



posted on May, 12 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
As I have said, Masonry (or any fraternity) is always able to reward its members. Would George Washington be such a great man if he were not a Mason? As I recall, the indians said Washington had guardian angels protecting him and he couldn't be shot on the battlefield. Seems to me that Masons benefited from having him as a member, not vice versa. I have asked Masons, for example, if Albert Pike would have been a less-great man if he'd not known Masonry. I wonder if people are able to find supreme enlightenment without Masonry? No answer yet from Masons.


Oh come off it. Of course George Washington would have been a great man, regardless of his affiliation with Masonry. He was a war hero, and if there is anything history tells us it’s that people love a war hero. I firmly believe that he would have done many of the same great things had he not been a Mason.

Pike, on the other hand, probably would not be so well known had it not been for his role in the Scottish Rite. He was a poet, writer, editor, lawyer, and General in the Army. His real claim to fame though, was his work for the Scottish Rite.

As far as enlightenment without Masonry? Of course one can find enlightenment without Masonry. Enlightenment is a very personal thing; it’s not something that can just be handed to you like, “here you go dude, you’re enlightened.” One has to seek it, and there are many, many, many other avenues besides Masonry. Hell, I don’t even believe (and I am a Mason myself mind you) that the Masonic forms and rituals have anything to do with enlightenment aside from the fact that the curiosities and desire to learn and discover things are aroused within the candidate by the degrees. More of a map than an endowment, if you will. You still have to find it for yourself.

Viewing the three degrees together, I think they more present a problem rather than give some great explanation; and the man who can work out the problems for himself in his own way is the true "Adept," and he who can’t, or won’t, is the one who is “intentionally misled,” as Brother Pike said.



... it seems to me that Masonry exists for those whose own lives and their place in the world are not sufficient, and who want to believe in a larger structure that will surpass them when they die. They want so badly to believe that their mundane existance has a greater meaning. ...I am speaking of course of those Masons who DO NOT join just for graft and reward.


Well it sounds to me like you’re getting more into religion territory than Mason, but still... you’re probably right to an extent. A lot of people join for the fellowship, etc. and that’s fine. A lot of people join for a lot of reasons. Point is, that while your thoughts may be true for some, and I’m sure more than a few, they do not and can not represent all or even a majority of the membership, IMHO.


The Masons I know, do not have some superior attitude. They tell me the lodges are filled with old men and they are simply part of it because their status in life afforded them an invitation to join (dad was a member, etc).


Well I don’t know you or your friends but I can say that in most jurisdictions in the world, invitations are not allowed; strictly forbidden, even. Now if their father was a Mason, I can see that as an in, simply because any Mason would want his son to be a Mason, therefore his son would likely have a good idea of what it was about. If the dad was a scumbag they probably wouldn’t want to join, eh? I think that is the single most repetitive thing in the ritual; that is, if it’s on your own accord you ask to be admitted.



On the contrary, I find much pleasure in being apart from that fraternity, and all fraternities. I do not pledge myself to anyone or any group.


Your choice to make and I’ll defend your right to make it.



posted on May, 12 2006 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
And yes, I know Masons and yes, I have read the books by Masons...


Could I trouble you for a few examples of books you’ve read? I’d really like to know. Honestly.

And you said yourself that your friends who are Masons are alright. Why is it you believe internet garbage more readily than your own eyes and judge of character?


...and yes, I was in a religion founded by a Mason (Charles Taze Russell) and I am sure you know the blood/name Russell and how powerful it has been through history. Also you may know that this man was ALSO accused of sex with children. Also that his church has a massive molestation scandal which they are trying to hide.


Honestly I don’t know much about Jehovah’s witnesses, and certainly had never heard of what you are talking about... You did prompt me to do some digging around though, and I found this:

I think it sums up this topic quite nicely, actually.


from: www.religioustolerance.org...

Placing abuse in perspective:
Since the year 2000, evidence has emerged of widespread child sexual abuse within the Roman Catholic Church, and of subsequent payoffs and cover-ups by the church. Some evidence of sexual abuse within the Watchtower Society (WTS) has also appeared in the media in recent years. What is missing is a measure of balance.
Sexual abuse is found throughout society. Approximately 1% of girls are so abused by their fathers before puberty, and about 1% by their step-fathers. Abuse of boys is at a lower level. There is really no reliable data which demonstrates whether religion plays a role in this phenomenon. We have never located any trustworthy evidence that sexual abuse of children is higher or lower in the WTS and Roman Catholic Church than in other faith groups or in society as a whole.

(emphasis mine)

So then I think the same can be said about Masonry (though I would wager that it happens less frequently within the fraternity, but that’s just personal conjecture), which leaves the Pirate’s tirade on masons quickly deflating.

Then there’s this:



from: en.wikipedia.org...
In recent times, Russell has been accused of having had close ties with Freemasonry. Critics have not only attempted to connect him with any of several different rites of the Free Masons, but have also attempted to show that such associations are connected with occult practices. It has been pointed out that in later editions of his Studies in the Scriptures series a winged solar disk appears on the front cover, which some have claimed is an exclusively Masonic symbol. In his writings, Russell stated that membership in Freemasonry, Knights of Pythias, Theosophy, and other similar groups are unscriptural. He also denied having direct knowledge of Masonic practices. His use of the winged solar-disk originated from his understanding that Malachi 4:2, (which denotes a sun with wings), is a symbol that Christ's millennial Kingdom had begun.


So it looks like he wasn’t a Mason after all. I’d say unless you can come up with some lodge records (there are membership rolls, and you don’t have to be Secret Squirrel to find out if someone was a member), I’m going to have to call you on that one.

I’m looking forward to your reply.



posted on May, 12 2006 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I would like to note that I still haven't received even a preliminary response from any of the organizations that I emailed.

We very often hear that the organization is not secret, but I can't get an answer on even what lodge this guy was in.



posted on May, 13 2006 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I would like to note that I still haven't received even a preliminary response from any of the organizations that I emailed.

We very often hear that the organization is not secret, but I can't get an answer on even what lodge this guy was in.


Why would they even bother to reply to you, though?
They don't know you and may not want the bad publicity of that guy reflecting on the lodge he was in.



posted on May, 13 2006 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I would like to note that I still haven't received even a preliminary response from any of the organizations that I emailed.

We very often hear that the organization is not secret, but I can't get an answer on even what lodge this guy was in.


Well you have to consider that, first of all, those emails might be checked less often than every day, or even every week. I honestly do not know. I do know that sometimes even for candidates looking to join the fraternity it can take a long time to get a response by email, if you get one at all. Don't know what that's about. Usually it will be the Secretary or one of the other officers (or a certain member of a committee) that is in charge of checking for and replying to messages via the email. Sometimes it's a while before anyone even reads them, so I wouldn't get too discouraged. Like I said, from my own experience, sometimes you have to try a little harder than just sending an email.

If you really want to find out, why don't you try calling on the phone? You'd probably have more luck that way, but I can't say for sure.


Originally posted by I_AM_that_I_AM
Why would they even bother to reply to you, though?
They don't know you and may not want the bad publicity of that guy reflecting on the lodge he was in.


A valid point, I think. Maybe they don't know who the guy is who is supposedly still on the loose, and don't want to make any statements until they find out who it is. I know that if there were a suspected child molester in my lodge, I would certainly do everything in my power to see to his exposure, expulsion, and his being handed over to the authorities.

If no one knows which of the members it is, then by some people's logic, they are all guilty (or at least suspect) until the offender is dealt with. It really is a very disconcerting situation, and I certainly do not envy the good men in that lodge who now have to deal with this terrible thing that has been done by a few of our "supposed" Brothers.

I said it before, I'll say it again; they should fry.



posted on May, 14 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
I would like to note that I still haven't received even a preliminary response from any of the organizations that I emailed.

We very often hear that the organization is not secret, but I can't get an answer on even what lodge this guy was in.


That sucks, but the lack of response could just as easily be due to administrative inefficiency. My own lodge has a website with contact details that haven't been updated in some time. As someone has already kinda suggested, they may be in "fire control" mode because of the bad publicity... I expect this would be pretty damning and embarrassing to everyone who thought they knew these guys as "brothers".

Would you like to U2U me the lodge email addresses? I'm happy to ask my lodge Master to try...



posted on May, 15 2006 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roark
Would you like to U2U me the lodge email addresses? I'm happy to ask my lodge Master to try...

Yes, send to me too. Many of the provincial offices are run by retired volunteers and aren't the fastest to respond.

Plus, they have no obligation to respond at all and may not if they think you are a journo or someone with an agenda.



posted on May, 15 2006 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Naphtalite
Well you have to consider that, first of all, those emails might be checked less often than every day, or even every week.

This is a good point. These aren't personal emails for people at home, they might only check the email once a month when they are in the lodge for some specific sort of meeting or something.








Maybe they don't know who the guy is who is supposedly still on the loose,

Well, jesus, I hope that they don't know and are protecting him!




If no one knows which of the members it is, then by some people's logic, they are all guilty (or at least suspect) until the offender is dealt with.

I don' think that that 'logic' makes any sense, agreed. However, this guy who was caught, you'd think that his fellow lodge-mates would be doing their own internal investigation, considering that, while the unnamed co-conspirator could be in any lodge in the region, its rather reasonable to suspect that he is in the same lodge.



trinityman
they have no obligation to respond at all and may not if they think you are a journo or someone with an agenda.

Indeed, it woudl be within their rights to not respond. And, also, it'd be rather reasonable for them not to, in a certain sense. There's lots of really whacky people out there that are just interested in slandering the fraternity, not investigating any crimes; sensationalists.

For my own part, I am just hoping that, if there isn't an internal investigation, that perhaps one can be spurred into action, even if it is private. And, also, we do tend to hear that masonry isn't really a 'secret society', in that the membership is rather open, so a real test of this is, can we find out to which lodge anyone in particular belongs to.

I can fully understand a lodge not wanting that attention though, but, such is life.



posted on May, 15 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

For my own part, I am just hoping that, if there isn't an internal investigation, that perhaps one can be spurred into action, even if it is private. And, also, we do tend to hear that masonry isn't really a 'secret society', in that the membership is rather open, so a real test of this is, can we find out to which lodge anyone in particular belongs to.

I can fully understand a lodge not wanting that attention though, but, such is life.


There is another matter of privacy laws. I'm not sure how much they can confirm to you without getting the permission of the person involved.

Like you I hope a statement can be released confirming or dismissing the story. But if there is no substance to the story there's every chance it will be ignored.

In terms of an investigation, such a thing doesn't really happen under UGLE. If someone is found guilty of a serious offence (such as this) they will be immediately expelled. If the police don't press charges, or the man is cleared, then he is free to continue his masonry. There is still the rule Innocent until proven Guilty, even for freemasons.

We'll have to watch this space...



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
This one's for Appak.

Enjoy the thread!



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   
What I find most tragic about this post isn't the fact that a mason s/a a young girl, but the more simple fact that a young girl was s/a and most people posting on this thread are making a mockery of this young girls experience.

Conspiracy Board or not what is going on is F*&^^% up. I realize if I don't like it don't read it, but this is still wrong.

I am not trying to differ from the fact that the men who did this were masons and should be put to suffer in the same way they made this girl suffer, but not all masons are like this. Just as not every Iraqi is a terrorist, or not every priest is child abuser.

Is all this proves is that even in the most elite organizations sometimes scum can slip through, but not that every mason, or for that matter every man is an abuser of any kind.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon

Originally posted by Shane
It does not matter that they where police, because police do not have an agenda, (unless in a military state of course). No, it would make little difference if they where Cops, Preists or Bakers. The problem is that they are Masons. It's the appearance that matters.


I'd respectfully suggest that you're deluding yourself in suggesting that police don't have an agenda. As I said earlier, that they're Masons isn't germaine to the story. Had they been cricketeers, footballers, bakers or priests, a blanket assumption about all cricketeers, footballers, bakers or priests would have been just as incorrect.


there is a very basic difference.

masons swear to be loyal TO THE DEATH to EACH OTHER. the mason's whole purpose is hidden from the public.

crackheads are completely disloyal to each other.
police have more loyalty to each other(indeed there is a high masonic headcount in ANY police force), but are sworn to protect the law of the land(as long as it doesn't conflict with protecting the lodge, a higher order of oath).

priests are sworn to uphold the laws of god, but they have clearly 'fallen of the truck' when they are beating ploughshares into wheat(biblical mixed metaphors gone wild).

mind you, i'm not convinced masons in general are bad. i think MOST are REALLY GOOD. i think, like the us government, there is a bad CORE in the otherwise delicious apple.

it is only the inner circle of higher ups, and their aspiring successors that are PURE EVIL.

and don't forget to google 'franklin coverup'(as mentioned above) for further unfathomable horror.



posted on Jul, 12 2006 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
masons swear to be loyal TO THE DEATH to EACH OTHER.

This is entirely untrue. Please quote your source so we can have a good laugh.


the mason's whole purpose is hidden from the public.

The purpose of masonry is entirely open to the general public, some of whom choose not to believe it.


indeed there is a high masonic headcount in ANY police force

This is quite untrue, and stems largely from a book called The Brotherhood by Martin Shaw. The reality is that there are fewer freemasons in the police force than other occupations due to prejudice against freemasonry in the police. It is most certainly less than 1% of policemen.


...but are sworn to protect the law of the land(as long as it doesn't conflict with protecting the lodge, a higher order of oath...

You've actually got this the wrong way round. Freemasons pledge to the law of the land before anything else. They also put the moral law and their families before other freemasons.


mind you, i'm not convinced masons in general are bad. i think MOST are REALLY GOOD. i think, like the us government, there is a bad CORE in the otherwise delicious apple.

Based on your misconceptions above I'm absolutely staggered that you think this. Again though, you have this the wrong way round - the core is fine but there may be one or two individuals as members who fall short of the mark. Not that anyone can actually name any, mind you


[quoteit is only the inner circle of higher ups, and their aspiring successors that are PURE EVIL.
Could you explain further what you understand by the 'inner circle of higher ups'? I don't know what this is so perhaps you could explain what level in freemasonry this represents?



posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by tempest_101
as not every Iraqi is a terrorist, or not every priest is child abuser.

Is all this proves is that even in the most elite organizations sometimes scum can slip through, but not that every mason, or for that matter every man is an abuser of any kind.


Yes but there are some important points, as illustrated by your example. Not every preist is a child abuser, BUT the institution of The Church is effectively protecting, enabling, and aiding child abusers. Similarly, the masonic institution does have a responsibility to tend to its members, not to protect them, or even to sit by and say 'its a police matter'. They've got a responsibility as supposedly moral people or as a moral inducing or promoting institution. But, refering back to the church-child abuse issue, that might mean that the church as an insitution is to blame, but it doesn't mean that individual preists necessarily bear the responsibility.


billybob
masons swear to be loyal TO THE DEATH to EACH OTHER.

THis is silly. Masons are required to comply with the law, they are required, specifically, to not cover up even petty crimes, let alone major ones. They take oathes to help each other, but at the same time they take equally important oathes to comply with the law and not cover-up crimes of fellow members.

but are sworn to protect the law of the land(as long as it doesn't conflict with protecting the lodge, a higher order of oath).

In what rite do they swear to this?


i think, like the us government, there is a bad CORE in the otherwise delicious apple.

In that, you may be right, as UGLE doesn't seem to be interested at all in what is going on in the north wales jurisdictions. Though, at the same time, UGLE isn't the crown of all masonry.


trinityman
This is entirely untrue
[on loyalty unto death]
?
I thought that the members were expected to maintain their fraternal bonds throughout their lives?



posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Similarly, the masonic institution does have a responsibility to tend to its members, not to protect them, or even to sit by and say 'its a police matter'.

What do you suggest that masonic institutions should do? In an instance where a man is accused of something but not (yet) convicted where is the guilt? It is only on conviction that the guilt of the man in known. Masonry does not put itself above the law of the land and there doesn't seem to be any point in running a parallel judicial system. Of course crime is a police matter, and judgement is a matter for the courts.



i think, like the us government, there is a bad CORE in the otherwise delicious apple.

In that, you may be right, as UGLE doesn't seem to be interested at all in what is going on in the north wales jurisdictions. Though, at the same time, UGLE isn't the crown of all masonry.

I think you've got a bee in your bonnet over this North Wales business. I'm keeping an eye on it, and I'm sure the local media are keeping an eye on it, but at this stage its all allegation and innuendo.



trinityman
This is entirely untrue
[on loyalty unto death]
?
I thought that the members were expected to maintain their fraternal bonds throughout their lives?

Yes, they are. but they are also expected to do lots of other things too 'until death' so by singling out LOYALTY in this way implies that it somehow supercedes the other obligations/tenets. DEATH in capitals also has a rather creepy connotation. In case it had escaped anyone's attention...

WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE...



posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trinityman
What do you suggest that masonic institutions should do?

Pressure their members to turn this guy over, re-emphasize that he's a heinous criminal who has no place in masonry, issue a statement from UGLE, etc.


Masonry does not put itself above the law of the land and there doesn't seem to be any point in running a parallel judicial system.

I just find it hard to beleive that the organization can't put some internal pressure on this. Obviously they don't have to interview every mason in north wales, but it'd be facile, given the structure, to issue requests for lodge masters to hold meetings about the event or to issue statements noting that cooperation with the police is a masonic requirement. Guilt hasn't been proven, for the mystery mason, but there is one mason who's been arrested as a child-rapist who took up the services of this ring, he stated that there was another mason that he knew from the local lodges that was also engaged in this child rape syndicate. Seems like the benefits of having some sort of internal investigation far outweight the costs.




I think you've got a bee in your bonnet over this North Wales business.

I definitly do. It bothers me that I've allways heard that its relatively easy to confirm of deny if such and such an individual is a mason, that it'd be difficult for hte fraternity and institution to be involved in a conspiracy or a cover up, and that the organization instills and supports ethical behaviour, but then to have this happen. Its to be expected that there are bad people in everygroup, but I'd also expect an ethical organization like masonry to be doing something about it.



I'm keeping an eye on it, and I'm sure the local media are keeping an eye on it, but at this stage its all allegation and innuendo.

A ring of child-rapists has been broken up, and one of them, a mason, says he engaged in this activities alongside a fellow lodge member. This other guy is out there in the lodges, somewhere. Who cares, at this point, if they have all been sentenced, the allegation is horrid enough to warrant internal action, especially given that its enough to warrant police action.


death' so by singling out LOYALTY in this way implies that it somehow supercedes the other obligations/tenets.

Ah, I see.


DEATH in capitals also has a rather creepy connotation. In case it had escaped anyone's attention...
WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE...




posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 04:13 AM
link   
Well that will teach me to go from memory and not go back and look at the original posts. I had forgotten that one of the men had already been charged.

As a punishment I went back and reread the entire thread and visited some of the links.Here's where we are.


icNorthWales - Evil sex beast may never be let out on the streets again
(Apr 7 2006) (snips)

EVIL child abuser Fred Lawlor was locked up last night for at least 15 years.

Lawlor's married neighbour, Gary Owen, 55, was the only one to pay for sex with the girl. He had a previous conviction for sex offences against a girl of 12, for which he was jailed for six years.

Former Birmingham police officer Raymond Ketland, 66, of Nant y Coed, Glan Conwy, became involved with the girl after noticing sexual activity on Llanddulas beach.He admitted two charges of sexual activity with a minor, taking indecent photographs of a child and facilitating a child sex offence, and was jailed for two and a half years. Ketland had become involved partly through a fellow Mason.

Gary McIlroy, 50, of Weatherby Way, Little Sutton, Ellesmere Port, became involved with the group while travelling North Wales as a pub and club entertainer.


Ketland, the one named as a mason, is now in jail. He will have been expelled from freemasonry.

I shall make some further enquiries.


Originally posted by Nygdan
Pressure their members to turn this guy over, re-emphasize that he's a heinous criminal who has no place in masonry, issue a statement from UGLE, etc.

The guy convicted will be out, for sure. And he won't be coming back. If you are interested in this kind of thing there is a report from Grand Lodge about current discussions to changes to the way masonic discipline is managed in the latest MQ magazine here. It's spread over several pages, and is of course just what you would expect to see from a secret society



Seems like the benefits of having some sort of internal investigation far outweight the costs.

No doubt the provincial office will be looking into it, but if Ketland refuses to name the person to them as well there's not a lot they can do about it. Let's not assume they were in the same lodge, even if we are going to assume that we're talking about freemasons here (as the media have a track record of getting very confused with this sort of thing as everyone turns out to be a mason 'cos it makes a better story)



It bothers me that I've allways heard that its relatively easy to confirm of deny if such and such an individual is a mason, that it'd be difficult for hte fraternity and institution to be involved in a conspiracy or a cover up, and that the organization instills and supports ethical behaviour, but then to have this happen. Its to be expected that there are bad people in everygroup, but I'd also expect an ethical organization like masonry to be doing something about it.

UGLE is a private organization, and is under no obligation to publish lists of members. No other organization does this. It does however, have internal lists, like Rotary, which members use, and these are in the public domain. In this case you need to get a hold of a recent yearbook for the Province of North Wales - the best place is eBay. But no organization is going to send out lists of its members to someone who's motives they may not understand. Believe it or not there are people out there who mean the organization harm and would love that sort of info.

Freemasonry is a framework for personal development, but there are no absolutes. If you don't want to be a better person then don't, there are no exams or judgements of any kind. It's an opportunity. Grand Lodge only gets involved when it absolutely has to, because the whole nature of the opportunity is an internalized one, not an externally imposed one.


A ring of child-rapists has been broken up, and one of them, a mason, says he engaged in this activities alongside a fellow lodge member. This other guy is out there in the lodges, somewhere. Who cares, at this point, if they have all been sentenced, the allegation is horrid enough to warrant internal action, especially given that its enough to warrant police action..

The internal action is explulsion. And it's alleged mason at this stage, or do you always believe everything you read in the newspapers?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join