Freemason False Flag OP!

Nammu

This has now sunk so low that it is actually lending credit to the OPs opinion. I also do not exactly share his opinion but i'm getting it's drift more and more after reading threads like these.

I glad someone is actually seeing the point here. The proof is in the behavior within this thread.
If you look at how people have reacted and behaved towards a theory (and its no more than that!) it shows the pathetic 'dumming down tactics' that are employed far to much within the SS forum.

LOL and then some.

Originally posted by cain-diedhi
It is my opinion that Freemasons are conducting False Flag Operations right here within this ATS forum!

IMO I don't think there is any indication that this is happening.

1. Freemasons on ATS don't need to play 'silly buggers'. We are winning all the arguments by stating facts about the fraternity.

2. If VCR was a mason he must have been acting alone, as there is no co-ordination between freemasons on ATS. Or, if there is, no-one has told me about it Anyway, the mods have stated that he wasn't a mason, although I suspect they mean he wasn't an existing ATS mason.

3. The whole shenanigans has been a complete waste of time for all of us on ATS, particularly the mods who have to deal with this nonsense. There would be no purpose in any freemason taking this tactic as there is a danger that more people would believe the rubbish spouted than saw it as nonsense. On this site you never know!!!

4. There is as much evidence that VCR was a mason, as you are a mason, playing a clever double false flag game with all of us.

I guess we'll never know for sure, but my vote goes to VCR being a common-or-garden nutjob rather than anything more sinister.

Yup, totally agree Trinityman.

If such a thing occured I don't see it benefiting Masons in the slightest. In fact due to the heatedness of the debates on such posts it only benefits anti-masons and posters such as VCR are only here to poke to fun and nothing else. The thing is that everyone gets so angry and riled up that it benefits the anti-masons even more making this board in particular very easy pickings for posters like that. Everyone must stick up for their beliefs, of course, but personally I like to think before I post when dealing with trolls and cretins in case I just give them what they were wanting all along - a big reaction.

I agree with the OP to a certain extent.

I see it like this - The OP created his theory with no emotion involved, he was just putting a theory forward that actually has a reasonably debatable topic.
Within the 1st few replies there were already people/masons coming in & trying to ridicule or demean the OP, his thread obviously brought some sort of emotion for these people to react like that.
It also semi-validates the OP's theory.

Freemasonry is a Secret Society & as such will be open to speculation. It's not as if it's a new thing, Freemason conspiracies go back to the start of civilization.
They have highly decorated members from all aspects of life & they operate in secrecy.
I know many masons, Aberdeen has a long history in masonry & a lot of them are very prominent people in industry & law.
A lot of the lower members of the structure use it as means to do well in life. It's not what you know but who you know, they look at it as good for business.
That side of the masons is very commendable, they look after their members well & all they ask in return is fellow brothership.
But...
The masons have very powerful members of society & they're everywhere, most of our judges/QC's/Police/Politics/Royalty are masons + they always look after the brotherhood first.

Back on topic though, I rarely come into the SS forum nowadays because of the amount of masons who come in defending their case so fervently. I agree a lot of the theories are crazy talk but the brotherhood is evident everywhere in this forum.
Even in this thread there were 2 of them having a wee banter with each other at the expense of the thread & the OP.

I think the OP has a valid theory although I don't believe VCR was part of the conspiracy.

Hi mclarenmp4

Well, I don't agree with some of what you've said but I hope you don't think I'm jumping in where I'm not wanted. I just want to make a couple of observations based on your comments.

Originally posted by mclarenmp4
Freemasonry is a Secret Society & as such will be open to speculation. It's not as if it's a new thing, Freemason conspiracies go back to the start of civilization.

I agree that people speculate about freemasonry endlessly, ad there are some who believe those masonic conspiracies go back many thousands of years. However as to whether it is a secret society or not really depends on your definition of secret. IMO it would be more accurate to describe it as a private society.

They have highly decorated members from all aspects of life...

Aberdeen has a long history in masonry & a lot of them are very prominent people in industry & law...

This is surely something to be proud of...

The masons have very powerful members of society & they're everywhere, most of our judges/QC's/Police/Politics/Royalty are masons + they always look after the brotherhood first.

I'm not sure the evidence bears out this 'urban myth'. To quote from the Home Affairs Committee (3rd Report) 'Freemasonry in the Police and the Judiciary':

We have come to the following preliminary conclusions about the nature of freemasonry:

The Committee conclude that, when the oaths are read in context, there is nothing in them that would appear sinister, and nothing in the evidence that we have heard that would show a conflict between the oath taken by a judge or policeman and that taken by a freemason.

We do not believe that there is anything sinister about freemasonry, properly observed, and are confident that freemasonry itself does not encourage malpractice.

... most or all of the evidence alleging masonic corruption in the field of policing is largely circumstantial, in the sense that it involves assuming that steps taken by individuals who were freemasons, in respect of others who were also freemasons, were taken because both individuals were freemasons rather than because the individuals knew each other or for some other reason;

... some of the extreme criticisms of widespread abuse we received are manifestly unfounded and the others can not be said to have been substantiated to us on the balance of probability let alone beyond reasonable doubt...

I am aware of only one freemason in the House of Commons, and the only members of the Royal Family who are freemasons are the Duke of Kent and Prince Michael. It is possible that the Duke of Edinburgh was made a freemason many years ago but he is entirely inactive.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a group looking after their own interests first. The problem comes when that is as the expense of someone else. From UGLE's website:

A Freemason must not use his membership to promote his own or anyone else's business, professional or personal interests. This is made clear directly or by inference several times during a Freemason's early career so that no Freemason can pretend to be ignorant of it. A Freemason who transgresses this rule may be suspended from Masonic activities or even expelled.

A Freemason's duty as a citizen must always prevail over any obligation to other Freemasons, and any attempt to shield a Freemason who as acted dishonourably or unlawfully, or to confer an unfair advantage on another Freemason is contrary to this prime duty.

It is made very clear to joining freemasons that the network is not to be used for business or personal advantage. I don't doubt, however, that there are some people who chose to ignore this.

Contrast this with the $60 million that has been given to non-masonic charities by English freemasons over the last 25 years. And all of this money collected out of the pockets of the members, not street-collected from non-masons.

Back on topic though, I rarely come into the SS forum nowadays because of the amount of masons who come in defending their case so fervently. I agree a lot of the theories are crazy talk but the brotherhood is evident everywhere in this forum.

I understand what you are saying and I hope I haven't outstayed my welcome with you.

Originally posted by Trinityman

I agree that people speculate about freemasonry endlessly, ad there are some who believe those masonic conspiracies go back many thousands of years. However as to whether it is a secret society or not really depends on your definition of secret. IMO it would be more accurate to describe it as a private society.

Same difference IMO.
The nature of the organization is based on a tier system, each degree takes a certain amount of knowledge & study in to the craft to achieve elevation in the system.

Originally posted by mclarenmp4
They have highly decorated members from all aspects of life...

Aberdeen has a long history in masonry & a lot of them are very prominent people in industry & law.

Originally posted by Trinityman
This is surely something to be proud of.../

Yes I agree but there is more to the masons than meets the eye.

Originally posted by mclarenmp4The masons have very powerful members of society & they're everywhere, most of our judges/QC's/Police/Politics/Royalty are masons + they always look after the brotherhood first.

Originally posted by Trinityman I'm not sure the evidence bears out this 'urban myth'. To quote from the Home Affairs Committee (3rd Report) 'Freemasonry in the Police and the Judiciary':

Yes but you fail to realize that all this rhetoric about urban myths doesn't really hold water with me.
I live in an old city with a lot of masonic links, we are the granite city, the stonemasons of Aberdeen worked all over the world & it has an active role in today's society.
As an example of "perks" of being a mason, my friend & I were stopped by the police for him driving well over the national speed limit, he was exceeding the speed limit by over 50MPH.
This would result in at least a speeding ticket but at worst a date in court. He went with the police into the car & he was an active mason at the time, he walked out of the car with nothing but a telling off. He wouldn't tell me what happened but gave a knowing wink as to why he got off with it.
He openly talked about the brotherhood & the good that can come from it.

I have many little stories of the benefits of being a mason & most of them involve "perks"mostly although some of them are very good natured.

I am aware of only one Freemason in the House of Commons, and the only members of the Royal Family who are Freemasons are the Duke of Kent and Prince Michael. It is possible that the Duke of Edinburgh was made a Freemason many years ago but he is entirely inactive.

OK I'll give you that one, that was speculation on my part about royals & politicians.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a group looking after their own interests first. The problem comes when that is as the expense of someone else. From UGLE's website:

A Freemason must not use his membership to promote his own or anyone else's business, professional or personal interests. This is made clear directly or by inference several times during a Freemason's early career so that no Freemason can pretend to be ignorant of it. A Freemason who transgresses this rule may be suspended from Masonic activities or even expelled.

A Freemason's duty as a citizen must always prevail over any obligation to other Freemasons, and any attempt to shield a Freemason who as acted dishonorably or unlawfully, or to confer an unfair advantage on another Freemason is contrary to this prime duty.
It is made very clear to joining Freemasons that the network is not to be used for business or personal advantage. I don't doubt, however, that there are some people who chose to ignore this.

That's maybe how the public facing side wants to be perceived but in reality it is all about networking with prominent people, it's a club.

Contrast this with the $60 million that has been given to non-masonic charities by English Freemasons over the last 25 years. And all of this money collected out of the pockets of the members, not street-collected from non-masons.

I'm not attacking masons & their traditions in general but it is a club that looks after each other, whether it's law breaking or not.

I understand what you are saying and I hope I haven't outstayed my welcome with you.

No not at all, I think we should let this thread remain on topic though.


[edit on 1-3-2007 by mclarenmp4]

Originally posted by mclarenmp4
I think we should let this thread remain on topic though.

Fair enough, although my experiences are different to yours.

Originally posted by Trinityman

Originally posted by mclarenmp4
I think we should let this thread remain on topic though.

Fair enough, although my experiences are different to yours.

Agreed. I don't discount your experiences, thanks for the discussion.

AMAZING how it is only non-masons who have done mere online website surfing on the topic that are claiming there is more then meets the eye. Sure there is, but you wouldn't know as your not a Mason, and anything not seen would most likely be boring to you, as you seem to be the more romantic type - "Masons will take over the world!" .. great for movies, the cheap websites you visit, but not reality.

Why are there no Masons coming forward here and saying Masonry is plotting all kinds of nastiness for the world? --- I sense copy and paste from cheap websites coming on!

My post from the first page was one of those held up as an example of "ridiculing", but the fact of the matter is that certain people around here need thicker skin. There was no abuse, no name-calling (apart from calling US thugs), no twisting of words or misrepresentation.

Those of you who identify yourselves as anti-Mason can't cry foul just because someone disagrees with you...

Originally posted by spines
And because I am curious: How do you know that he is not a Mason?

No, its not because of the posters actions.

C-D
The proof is in the behavior within this thread

Indeed. You make a baseless accusation that is completely wrong, people point it out, and you claim that the thread's been derailed.

Showing that someone's ideas are baseless specualation, or even showing that they're actually wrong, is not derailing a thread.

it shows the pathetic 'dumming down tactics'

I'm sorry but it doesn't get much dummer than saying for no reason at all that a person that was attacking masons was in fact part of a gigatic and senseless masonic conspiracy, with no evidence and with no information.

Trinityman
Anyway, the mods have stated that he wasn't a mason, although I suspect they mean he wasn't an existing ATS mason.

VCR wasn't any ATS mason, AND VCR wasn't a mason. I suppose its possible that VCR used to be a mason, got disgruntled, left, and is no longer one. Either way, VCR isn't a mason.

mclarenmp4
The OP created his theory with no emotion involved, he was just putting a theory forward that actually has a reasonably debatable topic.

[
How can it be reasonably debated? The theory was irrational on its own, it was made without reason, without supporting evidence, without inside knowledge, without anything. We can run around saying anything is really a masonic false flag operation, that doesn't make it a reasonable theory.
As far as him having created it without emotion, I think it extremely unlikely that someone would make up a wild and baseless theory that the masons went through all this without having some emotional commitment, one way or the other.

most of our judges/QC's/Police/Politics/Royalty are masons

THeer aren't even enough masons to make that possible.

I rarely come into the SS forum nowadays because of the amount of masons who come in defending their case so fervently. I agree a lot of the theories are crazy talk but the brotherhood is evident everywhere in this forum.

Good for them, they are particpating in the discussion. If a theory is weak, that will only show up when it is examined and discussed. There's no reason for a person to not pariticpate here merely because they are a mason.

This thread was created as an invitation to discuss My theory about some Freemasons who I believe could be purposefully abusing threads and the people who post them here on ats.
My soap opera theory was created from the soap opera that took place over the whole VCR situation. Nobody agrees with my theory but what some do agree with is what the whole theory stands for.

The likes of Nygdan, intrepid and some of the Freemason community should try moderation over domination when dealing with threads that they do not agree with.

If a thread is posted but breaks no ats rules and you feel it has no valid grounds, then don't enter the thread. Exercise your right to use the "Ignore this user" function provide by ats and enjoy your stay with the people you wish to have conversation and debate with.

Nygdan & intrepid I apologise if you feel my comments question your ability to MOD, but if I had to draw up a list of usual suspect then I'm afraid you would both be on it in my opinion.
Stand down.

Originally posted by cain-diedhi


The likes of Nygdan, intrepid and some of the Freemason community should try moderation over domination when dealing with threads that they do not agree with.

Don't you think it's a little hypocritical to whine about the Masons lacking moderation toward a thread in which you claim we were trying the derail the whole damn website?

Originally posted by cain-diedhi
Nobody agrees with my theory but what some do agree with is what the whole theory stands for.

Which, of course, is silly. VCR wasn't a freemasonic operative, almost everyone agrees that VCR wasn't, and yet, your theory is stil somehow 'valid'? Its bunk. You allege that the masons here are in a conspiracy to 'derail' discussions, but then you cite them disagreeing with you as being evidence of derailment. Sorry, but this is an open discusison board, you're bound to have people that disagree with you here, thats not derailment.

The likes of Nygdan, intrepid and some of the Freemason community should try moderation over domination when dealing with threads that they do not agree with.

THis is pretty childish. You made a baseless accustation, a bunch of us pointed out that you don't have the sligthest scrap of evidence, and that your claim that VCR was a freemason were actually wrong. Thats not 'domination', thats called discussion.

If a thread is posted but breaks no ats rules and you feel it has no valid grounds, then don't enter the thread. Exercise your right to use the "Ignore this user" function provide by ats and enjoy your stay with the people you wish to have conversation and debate with.

Nygdan & intrepid I apologise if you feel my comments question your ability to MOD, but if I had to draw up a list of usual suspect then I'm afraid you would both be on it in my opinion.

And so after saying that the mods were somehow in on it, and then pretending that you werent' claiming that, now you once again say that we're in on it. I can tell you flat out, you're absolutely wrong. I am not a mason. Intrepid is not a mason.

Stand down.

What? No. I'm not going to be silenced because someone's ideas got properly shredded and now they are hurt over it.

Now who was it who said that the "Freemasons are not involved in any conspiracy"?
Oh Yeah, The Freemasons.

Yep, you better move this one, Don't want to talk about your evil work!

Hey my man, I was just wondering...
Have you burned any witches lately?
Cast any "first stones"?

Ridiculous!

To generalize and say that all masons are involved in some sinister plot against you, ATS, the government, the world...etc is just ridiculous!

Those who generalize on massive scales, often have an extremely narrow and limited scope of vision.
(um...I guess that includes myself after that last statement lol )