Masonry and Compartmentalized Secrecy - Not So Easy To Dismiss

reply to post by NewWorldOver


How do you define "lower level Mason" and "higher level Mason"? That seems to sort of be the crux of your argument, but you didn't explain exactly what you meant by those terms.

And on a side note, welcome back Senrak, good to see you Bro!



[edit on 31-12-2007 by Masonic Light]

Originally posted by Masonic Light
How do you define "lower level Mason" and "higher level Mason"? That seems to sort of be the crux of your argument, but you didn't explain exactly what you meant by those terms.

And on a side note, welcome back Senrak, good to see you Bro!

Thanks ML! Good to be back. I've truly missed participating with you all. I do note with some dismay the apparent absence of MrNecros. I wonder if he traveled to that undiscovered country or perhaps succumbed to his pilfered plumbing or postage. (Oh, never mind!) It is good to be back.

As for your post (above) I fully agree. This worn-out tactic of claiming "high-level" vs. "low-level" members is a favorite among those who likely know better but use it as a tactic against the unassuming.

I do wonder what a "high-level" Mason is. I often think of the first time I met the (then) Sovereign Grand Commander of the AASR, Southern Jurisdiction, Fred Kleinknecht (now retired). My then wife (now, ex-wife) was with me. Here I stand shaking hands with the holder of the highest office in the Mother Supreme Council and he said, "Nice to meet you John. I'm Fred."

Hey, wait! Problem solved. High-ranking Masons are called "Fred!"

Sure glad to be back, but I sure am missing MrNecros!

Originally posted by senrak
Sure glad to be back, but I sure am missing MrNecros!

Don't worry Brother... there are plenty to take his place -- but I will grant you that Necros was one in a million.

Good times.

Originally posted by The Axeman
Don't worry Brother... there are plenty to take his place -- but I will grant you that Necros was one in a million.

That, he was, Brother; that, he was!

The pilfered mail was one thing, the exploding toilet was borderline incredulous, but dog laxatives (!) Genius! Pure genius!

He made "dribbler" look credible. Remember dribbler? He's the one who said I was being "frusty" I sure got a lot of mileage out of that, LONG after he was banned.

Ah, the good ol' days when the ATS trolls had something new to say.

Originally posted by senrak
Here I stand shaking hands with the holder of the highest office in the Mother Supreme Council and he said, "Nice to meet you John. I'm Fred."

OMG! Did you watch his eyes to see if they changed colors. All the high level masons are reptilians, you know. Or so the anti-masons tell me.

Originally posted by NewWorldOver

Originally posted by scientist


OP, you raise good points, and I can't disagree with any of them.

It's not so hard to believe there are smaller cliques within bigger ones. It's just a question of how many steps there are until you get to that last clique, and how many people are in it.

You're right, it really isn't so hard to understand the concept of compartmentalized societies, or 'secret societies'. The hierarchy of occult control is lost to alot of the pseudo-intellectual mentalities you come across in such societies. I won't mention any names, but you can see that many masons throw about word-play as if it's a form of combat. To them, it's not a matter of seeing different perspectives, it's about vanquishing all perspectives outside their constructed notions of reality (i.e. maintaining the status quo, something vital to society and secret societies and their control of subordinates). It is none of their business speaking of secret societies within their organization, it is however their business to rid the society of 'conspiracy theories'. Essentially, they are dead weight in conspiratorial debate because they do not grasp the concept :

No, it is not hard to understand the concept of compartmentalized secret societies. It is the structure of society, the military, and occult organizations - denying it because you are a member of the society, military, etc. is nothing unexpected.

How can you say that Freemasonry is about vanquishing all perspectives outside our own?Freemasonry does not tell a man what to believe or think.I have met brothers with vastly different belief systems than mine, and had no trouble getting along with them.Let's not forget that if you live in the United States, you owe our government in a large part to Freemasons.Revolutionary war strategies were planned in Lodges.So what you are saying to me is that the Masons set up a successful democracy where we are free to say,think,print,record, anything without fear of tyrannical governmental oppression,a very system founded on people's rights to having differing views and perspectives on EVERYTHING from politics,to religion,to social issues....that these same people somehow want you not to be able to have your own opinions?

Go home, troll.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

How do you define "lower level Mason" and "higher level Mason"? That seems to sort of be the crux of your argument, but you didn't explain exactly what you meant by those terms.

How can someone with the name "Masonic Light" not understand the concept of masonic degrees?

You masons crack me up sometimes, I swear.

By the way, I find it sweet how you masons gather in 'anti-mason' threads and start small-talking like this is a chat room. Give me a break. Next to the never-ending sarcastic and pseudo-intellectual garbage - that is definitely the most annoying thing I notice about mason-get-togethers on ATS. Take it somewhere else, guys.

[edit on 31-12-2007 by NewWorldOver]

reply to post by NewWorldOver


And it is this kind of reply that shows that you have absolutely no evidence for anything you say. Masonic Light's question is in fact completely legitimate. All of masonry and every piece of evidence available for you to find (if you wanted to find the truth) shows that the highest level of mason is the 3rd degree. Lower level masons are 1st degree and 2nd degree - but that is temporary unless the person drops out or does not meet the requirements for advancement. There is a reason why we "meet on the level."

Yet you have told us that we have no idea what we are talking about. That we don't know our own organizations. That there are high degree masons that are "kept secret" from us. So we ask you exactly how you define these higher level masons, since we know of nothing like that - nor will you find evidence for it anywhere.

But either way...since you obviously know something we don't why don't you answer the question? Because you can't. Because this entire theory is one big house of cards.

Originally posted by LightinDarkness
OMG! Did you watch his eyes to see if they changed colors. All the high level masons are reptilians, you know. Or so the anti-masons tell me.

Uh huh. Carry on with the never ending straw-man debates and sarcastic comments. It does wonders.

I'm onto your tactics. The lot of you. Thanks for dropping by.

Originally posted by LightinDarkness
Masonic Light's question is in fact completely legitimate. All of masonry and every piece of evidence available for you to find (if you wanted to find the truth) shows that the highest level of mason is the 3rd degree.

No. The question was ridiculous. The idea of masonic degrees is fundamental. This is the 'higher and lower level' he was asking about.

You claim that the highest degree is 3 yet the 33rd degree of scottish masonry is well known.

Once again: I'm onto your tactics. Strawman debates infinitum. Take it somewhere else.

Originally posted by LightinDarkness


Yet you have told us that we have no idea what we are talking about.

I said nothing of the sort. Once again : strawman victimization tactic.

"Oh this guy says we're too stupid to know what's going on!"

I already addressed this.

Stop running in circles LightinDarkness... you should know by now I'm not going to chase you.

And for the love of God, claiming that the 3rd degree is the highest I might have to take it back and say that yes, YOU have no idea what you're talking about. Either that or you do an excellent job feigning ignorance.

Your motives are too transparent for me to even gain anything from your posts anymore. Carry on with your never-ending crusade on a conspiracy forum to save the reputation of your lil club. I'm done with you and your 'house of cards' nonsense.

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
By the way, I find it sweet how you masons gather in 'anti-mason' threads and start small-talking like this is a chat room.

Give me a break. Next to the never-ending sarcastic and pseudo-intellectual garbage - that is definitely the most annoying thing I notice about mason-get-togethers on ATS. Take it somewhere else, guys.

Awwww NWO,

Sounds like you might be jealous that you're not allowed in our club-house.

Sorry 'bout that!

As for the "degree" thing. It's been said here ad nauseum, but there truly is no "higher" degree than Master Mason (3rd Degree) there are MORE degrees, BEYOND it, but one is never MORE OF A MASON than when he becomes a Master Mason.

What he decides to DO with this knowledge (or as some might mistakenly say "power") is entirely up to him.

While it might sound exciting to make up claims of "higher" and "controlling" degrees and point out so-called "obvious conspiracy", those who participate in our fine fraternal society know that the truth is much more mundane.

Happy New Year!

reply to post by NewWorldOver


You indeed have no idea what you are talking about if you do not understand that the third degree is the highest degree in masonry. Ask any 33rd degree mason - we have one (or two?) on this board - degrees above the third mean nothing. I am a 32nd degree mason. And while the philosophies and lessons of the Scottish Rite are indeed interesting and excellent lessons for all who choose to take them, they do not indicate hierarchy. You've failed - again.

I find it interesting that you keep telling us we have no idea what we're talking about, yet completely fail to enlighten us about these "higher degrees." Do tell.

I applaud you for attempting to learn about rhetoric and logical fallacies. Unfortunately, the irony fails no one as almost every single post you make on this subject in fact involves a logical fallacy, while you incorrectly accuse others of fallacies but can't even name a correct one (straw man is a fallacy, but it's not what is occurring in this thread when you use it). As someone who has had to teach undergraduates about logical fallacies, I'm sorry to say you have no grasp on the terminology you are using.

Alas, it's time to put you in your place:

You have used the following fallacies in this thread alone -

1) Argumentum ad hominem - everyone who disagrees with you is insulted. That you must try to defame the character of people who disagree with you supports the idea that you have invalid conclusions.

2) Argumentum ad antiquitatem - this idea for higher level compartments, of which you admit has no evidence, comes has "always existed in secret societies." Assuming this premise is true (unlikely), you appeal to this notion of something that has "always been." This is invalid. Even if something like this has always occurred, it does not mean it still occurs.

3) Circulus in demonstrando - the entire construction of this theory is circular in nature.

4) Dicto simpliciter - You assume other secret societies have this structure - and then assuming that masonry is a secret society, your proceed to make astonishing generalizations without fact or proof.

5) Petitio principii - As previously mentioned, this is also one giant thread of you defending your irrational theories by using a begging the question fallacy.

I could go on, and on, and on.

[edit on 31-12-2007 by LightinDarkness]

Originally posted by senrak


Awwww NWO,

Sounds like you might be jealous that you're not allowed in our club-house.

Sorry 'bout that!

Very mature.

As for the "degree" thing. It's been said here ad nauseum, but there truly is no "higher" degree than Master Mason (3rd Degree) there are MORE degrees, BEYOND it.

Uh, yes. There are degrees beyond the 3rd. Common knowledge which masons on ATS attempt to deny over and over.

I like how you cleverly word it 'Beyond' the 3rd degree. Do you say 'beyond' because you're afraid to admit that you're at the bottom of the totem pole? Don't worry: you're still special.

While it might sound exciting to make up claims of "higher" and "controlling" degrees and point out so-called "obvious conspiracy", those who participate in our fine fraternal society know that the truth is much more mundane.

Ah yes. Mhmm... I am making up claims of 'higher' degrees despite the fact that you just admitted there are degrees beyond the 3rd. Splendid. As I said before, you Masons are a whacky lot.

'The truth is much more mundane.'

I'm sure being a 1st degree mason is VERY mundane. Thanks for sharing. Now as to those 'higher' degrees who you claim don't exist... yet admit are real ... if only I could find one of THEM on ATS.

reply to post by NewWorldOver


I am really beginning to think this is one anti-mason who is literally upset that he can't get in. Did you get blackballed or something? Probably did, I'm sure you'd never admit it.

I am sorry you do not understand concepts of hierarchy versus numbering. Because a number is larger than the other does not - and never has - indicated hierarchy. In anything - not just masonry. This is true of masonry. 33rd degree is the highest numerical degree available. But it carries no hierarchy. Neither do any the others, except the 3rd. But the 3rd is not at the top of the hierarchy because of its number, it is at the top because that is the "final" degree of the blue lodge.

Your argument has been so badly slammed now your resorting to arguing semantics. It is becoming sad.

Originally posted by LightinDarkness
I am really beginning to think this is one anti-mason who is literally upset that he can't get in. Did you get blackballed or something? Probably did, I'm sure you'd never admit it.

Don't sweat it LightinDarkness. I've been on this forum a long time (admittedly only back for a couple of days) and have seen/heard it all.

NWO is spewing the same old thing "they" all do. He/she knows more that us, and we're Masons so we're obviously liars. It's a no win situation and a waste of time and effort.

I'll have to say I really didn't think I'd put anyone on "ignore" so quickly though.

Don't be discouraged, Brother, there are some on this forum who actually ARE interested in facts.

Happy New Year!

now where's the champagne? ? ?

reply to post by senrak


So true. HAPPY NEW YEAR! May this year bring a year of reason, logic, and facts to the anti-masons of this forum. I doubt such would happen, but I can dream

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Now as to those 'higher' degrees who you claim don't exist... yet admit are real ... if only I could find one of THEM on ATS.

Dude, you were just talking to several.

I'm not even going to bother trying to argue with you but Senrak is a VERY experienced Mason - If I recall he is a Knight Commander of the Court of Honor, which is basically the "waiting list" for the 33°.

Perhaps you should ask more questions and make less accusations?

reply to post by The Axeman



It would be nice if he answered more questions and made less accusations. I have posted several and none of them have yet received a response.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Par for the course, I'm afraid.

Most posts to folks like that go unanswered. Whole threads, even... it's comical.