Freemasons Behind Universal Public Medicare?

Alright I will admit I know nothing about secret societies.... and perhaps this has been posted before... but I am going to post it anyways.

First of all I tried to research it on ATS a little bit. This thread is related:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


This thread is mainly going to focus on Tommy Douglas. Who is that?

en.wikipedia.org...

Thomas Clement Douglas, PC, CC, SOM, MA, LL.D (hc) (October 20, 1904 – February 24, 1986) was a Scottish-born Baptist minister who became a prominent Canadian social democratic politician. As leader of the Saskatchewan Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) from 1942 and the seventh Premier of Saskatchewan from 1944 to 1961, he led the first socialist government in North America and introduced universal public medicare to Canada. When the CCF united with the Canadian Labour Congress to form the New Democratic Party, he was elected as its first federal leader and served in that post from 1961 to 1971.

Yes he was behind universal public medicare for Canada.... So what?

Well he was a freemason.

en.wikipedia.org...
Weyburn Lodge No. 20 GRS, Weyburn, SK

Masons in Saskatchewan:
www.masons.sk.ca...
Current Lodge ? www.masons.sk.ca...


It is hard to find backing to the story but I guess it is still interesting to a conspiracy forum.

The R.C.M.P. even spied on Tommy Douglas.
www.cbc.ca...

RCMP spies shadowed Prairie politician Tommy Douglas for more than three decades, according to documents obtained by the Canadian Press.

A newly declassified file on Douglas shows the Mounties attended his speeches, dissected his published articles and, during one Parliament Hill demonstration, eavesdropped on a private conversation.

CTV Source
More Information On Tommy Douglas
More Info

However you take it... I guess it makes for some interesting thoughts. I just thought I would share it.

well, here's the problem with the healthcare system in the US....

you have alot of hard working americans paying taxes who can't afford the insurance premiums, and even if they can afford that, well, maybe they can't afford to shell out a few hundred bucks for perscriptions every month..

and you got a mish mash of people out there, some are handicapped, some just can't work for reasons they have no control over, others though, are alchoholics, drug addicts, or whatever, but they could work, if they would just get their lives in some order...
the taxpayers I mentioned above are paying money to help this second group of people have all that nice healthcare that they are forced to go without.....sound fair to you?

so, you have children going without needed medical treatment for problems that might affect their performance in school, might affect their developement and growth, and well.....just might end up being one of the future handicapped all because they didn't get the treatment they needed now...
because mommy and daddy couldn't afford it, although mommy and daddy definately could afford the help pay for their friends treatment down the street!!

ya know, I don't mind helping the poor, but in many ways, it's more like they've decided that they didn't like who the poor was, and just shifted that condition onto the another class...
this seems to be a bit unconstitutional to me.

so what is your solution? can we just quite giving government assistance to the poor, that would solve the problem...maybe, then again, all these poor people will still be going to the emergency rooms for treatment, it just won't be paid for. hey, I know, they almost got away with refusing me treatment when I broke my leg, we can just cut the assistance and allow the medical establishments to not treat them!! ya....but then, well, we will probably have a surplus of healthcare workers to deal with then, won't we...

so, what's your solution, because I don't buy the status quo for one second!

Dulcimer,

You mention one well-known Canadian Freemason. Trouble is, your thread's entitled "Freemasons Behind Universal Public Medicare?". Freemasons. Plural.

Wanna enlighten us as to who else you think was involved? As for the RCMP looking into Douglas, given the time and the general mindset, might it not be just the teensiest, tinesiest bit more likely that it was because Douglas was "a trailblazing socialist committed to social reform" who "drew the interest of RCMP security officers through his longstanding links with left-wing causes, the burgeoning peace movement and assorted Communist Party members" rather than anything to do with Masonry?

As for Dawnstar's reply, you seem to characterise those without health care in the States as slackers and other ne'er-do-wells. I think you'd find the reality to be somewhat different. Healthcare in Canada isn't a panaecea but it's national value far exceeds the cost. The chief downside to it is that some people aren't using common sense as far as going to see a GP for their minor ailments and then waiting until said ailment becomes a problem and tying up the emerg at their local hospital for what should've been dealt with a month ago with a shot or prescription. Either that or they go immediately for something that should be dealt with by a GP and then get all #ty because they're forced to wait a couple of hours while people with broken bones or some other real trauma are dealt with ahead of them.

In any case, the per capita cost of universal health care in Canada is lower for 100% coverage than it is in the States for somewhat less coverage.

I did not make a statement saying freemasons are behind it... I asked it as a question... wondering if his involvement with a widespread group could possibly allow his ideas to grow.

The organization at large can't (and wouldn't) take a stance on something like that. Even if it tried to, there would be enough dissenting opinions that it would get nowhere.

reread, my post, because I know I didn't say that the slackers were going without the healthcare....they were part of that other group that get the assistance. the ones going without the healthcare, are the ones who aren't eligiable for that assistance...meaning they are the ones who are paying taxes...so the slackers....along with alot of others...can have it.

first, the governemt decided that they should help some gain medical care, so they set up the assistance programs....I ain't knocking that idea.

second, they have acknowledge that they are aware that there are still many who can't gain access to this care....and they know that these people AREN'T the slackers by the long shot...they are the hardworking taxpayers!!

so, the question is...

do they have the constitutional right to provide this aide to the first group, knowing full well that the second group is helping to foot this bill, while not providing a solution or some sort of assistance to that second group? and well, maybe universal healthcare is the only way to make sure that that second group of people are included.

but, what do we have here....
an attempt to demonize the idea as a part of some demonic scheme cooked up by the illuminati?

so, fine....I want to hear what their idea solution is!

because, sooner or later what I am writing here is going to hit the right ears, they're brains are going to start working, and well, they are going to be talking to some lawyers...and well, with some good lawyers....they are gonna win!! it is unconstitutional.

You could have 10 Freemasons that support Universal Public Medicare and I could show you another 10 who don't. Masons have views on Universal Public Medicare that vary as widely as non-masons. My own opinion is that the primary beneficiary of Universal Public Medicare is pharmaceutical companies that own the patents on all the drugs, treatments and tests that people pay for without knowing it. Isn't it funny how the pharmaceutical company that holds the patent on a particular vaccine is the same entity that lobbies to make it legally mandatory. And then you have the major news networks who quake in their boots at the thought offending their most lucrative advertising customers. The news is not there to bring you information, it is there to make advertising money.
So it is not masons behind Universal Healthcare, it is money.

Originally posted by RedPill
You could have 10 Freemasons that support Universal Public Medicare and I could show you another 10 who don't.

I don't know much about the Canadian medicare system, but if provides needed medical coverage to people who couldn't otherwise afford it, I'm for it 100%, regardless if any Masons were involved in the legislation.