Originally posted by jaamaan
Sure.

After looking around for a bit i found that the theme "The investigation yielded no prosecutions" came around all/most of the time.
I liked to keep up an honest discussion about this topic so i didnt want to only quote "my" relevant parts of the news.

It isn't a questions of 'yours, mine or the dog's' "relevant parts". It's THE relevant part as what preceeds it is thus rendered pointless except for slander by insinuation.

And again, if Masons are so all-powerful to duck prosecution, why are they not so all-powerful enough to have made this get spiked before even seeing the light of day?

Bit of a disconnect if you ask me.

The freemasons are evil. I have no doubt about it. Don't try to confuse people, who totally understand Jamaan's logical statements.

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
It isn't a questions of 'yours, mine or the dog's' "relevant parts". It's THE relevant part as what preceeds it is thus rendered pointless except for slander by insinuation.

Well it could be slander it could have been real.
It was real enough to investigate on several occasions.

The facts do not matter. It is the seriousness of the accusations that matter. Where have I heard this before ?

Greetings from a board newbie and brother:

Why is the issue of power abuse so important to the antis? It's no fun to admit that Masons are simply mortal beings who should be held to the same laws and statutes as any fellow citizen of their home country. When they do wrong, they should be punished accordingly.

I recall in Boston a longtime Mason who managed an investment company and swindled his clients out of millions to fund his extravagant lifestyle. It beggars imagination to think that someone with power of anykind -- a judge or regulator or worshipful master -- would turn a blind eye to such shenanigans, and they didn't. The ex-brother now sits in jail where he belongs. That's but one example, and it gets to a core belief about Masonry: we are subject to the same laws as everyone else. We are encouraged to help a brother to whatever extent we can without causing injury to ourselves, family, or community. Fixing parking tickets or hiding embezzlement or taking advantage of children lies outside of Masonic tenets, and if they are found guilty, these brothers should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Anyone who chooses to break the law for his fellow brother is himself a fool and not representative or Masonry.

Originally posted by Lewis1733
Greetings from a board newbie and brother:

Why is the issue of power abuse so important to the antis? It's no fun to admit that Masons are simply mortal beings who should be held to the same laws and statutes as any fellow citizen of their home country. When they do wrong, they should be punished accordingly.

Because we control everything and are above the law in their worldview. They can't know that the newest Mason is specifically instructed to humble themselves before the laws of the society they call home. Too convenient to assert our all-encompassing control of the legal system.

Originally posted by Lewis1733
I recall in Boston a longtime Mason who managed an investment company and swindled his clients out of millions to fund his extravagant lifestyle. It beggars imagination to think that someone with power of anykind -- a judge or regulator or worshipful master -- would turn a blind eye to such shenanigans, and they didn't. The ex-brother now sits in jail where he belongs.

And where hopefully he'll stay for a length of time longer than a non-Mason convicted of the same would. We as a group hold ourselves to a higher standard than non-Masons (whether you choose to believe it or not) and a brethren who brings shame on the fraternity is looked upon with especial loathing.

Originally posted by Lewis1733
That's but one example, and it gets to a core belief about Masonry: we are subject to the same laws as everyone else. We are encouraged to help a brother to whatever extent we can without causing injury to ourselves, family, or community. Fixing parking tickets or hiding embezzlement or taking advantage of children lies outside of Masonic tenets, and if they are found guilty, these brothers should be punished to the full extent of the law.

Aye, brother. And well they should. If the community at large is to consider us a benchmark, we need to hold the benchmark that much higher within our own perview.

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
We as a group hold ourselves to a higher standard than non-Masons (whether you choose to believe it or not)

Could you explain what you mean by this ?

Originally posted by RWPBR
The facts do not matter. It is the seriousness of the accusations that matter. Where have I heard this before ?

So far, the facts do matter for me.

No one was convicted in the examples that i could find and i have shown that information to allong with the rest.

"seriousness of the accusations" can often matter quite a lot, doesnt alway's say it means something.

Originally posted by jaamaan

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon
We as a group hold ourselves to a higher standard than non-Masons (whether you choose to believe it or not)

Could you explain what you mean by this ?

Quite simply, Masonry is supposed to take "Good men and make them better". That said, a higher standard of behaviour is expected of you as a Mason than one would expect of a non-Mason simply by virtue of your being a Mason. That said, failing in such a singular fashion as was cited is considered that much more agregious having been the fault of a Mason as opposed to a non-Mason.

HTH
Fitz

No, of course one need not be a Mason to be a good person. Hopefully each of us is holding him or herself to higher standards of ethics and integrity simply for the sake of being a better human being, and not for mercenary purposes or to exercise our hubris.

All one has to do is look to Albany, NY, and see the damage one man's hubris can do.

And of course, not all Masons follow our own creed: we are human, and susceptible to human failings like everyone else. But if we are true and faithful to Masonic teachings, we will exercise our character and sociability to improve ourselves and extend those particular benefits into our communities.

Just be a good person and follow a moral code. You need not be a Mason to do that.

Bro. Fitzgibbon, many thanks for your post.

I find it interesting that many feel that the Freemasons and other types of clubs, organizations secret or otherwise would not be involved in such activities. One thing to note was no one stated what level these Jesters or Freemasons were? LIke most organizations, to make it past various levels of initiation you must be loyal and trusted. They do not bring in to the upper ranks and to the inner workings just any old Mason, Freemason, Scottishrite, Jester or so on. There is always those for public show and then there are those who know.

My grandfather was a part of two of these organizatons and he did not make it to any secret level. He actually dropped away from being active while I was still young. And later in life, he was asked to attend a meeting and all I know is that when he came back from the meeting he indicated that he was done for good. What he learned and heard just disgusted him and he no longer wanted anything to do with it. He still kept it secret whatever they said or did, but he never returned or talked about it again.

Originally posted by Jonar
I find it interesting that many feel that the Freemasons and other types of clubs, organizations secret or otherwise would not be involved in such activities.

I'd like you to cite who said "would not". I think the general concensus is 'would expect not' but examples of Masons and other identifiable civic-minded groups of men not living up to their and our expectations have been cited without dispute. We expect better of the membership, that's all.

Originally posted by Jonar
One thing to note was no one stated what level these Jesters or Freemasons were? LIke most organizations, to make it past various levels of initiation you must be loyal and trusted. They do not bring in to the upper ranks and to the inner workings just any old Mason, Freemason, Scottishrite, Jester or so on. There is always those for public show and then there are those who know.

Is this personal knowledge or personal conjecture? Big difference. If the former, care to enlighten? If the latter, care to acknowledge?

Originally posted by Jonar
My grandfather was a part of two of these organizatons and he did not make it to any secret level. He actually dropped away from being active while I was still young.

And have you (or did you if he's passed to the Grand Lodge above) actually ask anything meaningful of him on the matter or are your junior year suppositions supposed to hold sway?

Originally posted by Jonar
And later in life, he was asked to attend a meeting and all I know is that when he came back from the meeting he indicated that he was done for good.

See my question above. Your example's a little lacking in the meat department.

Originally posted by Jonar
What he learned and heard just disgusted him and he no longer wanted anything to do with it. He still kept it secret whatever they said or did, but he never returned or talked about it again.

And again. Lacking in substance. Ask your grandmother for more details (if this is a possibility). Maybe she could enlighten.

Originally posted by Jonar
One thing to note was no one stated what level these Jesters or Freemasons were? LIke most organizations, to make it past various levels of initiation you must be loyal and trusted. They do not bring in to the upper ranks and to the inner workings just any old Mason, Freemason, Scottishrite, Jester or so on. There is always those for public show and then there are those who know.

Sigh.

There is no need to say what level these jesters were, because we all know. 3rd degree master masons - the last and highest level of masonry. Same as I and all of the other brethren here.

There are no levels in freemasonry, beyond the first three degrees. It is hard to get into the upper ranks when the upper ranks do not exist. Why is it that some people have this desperate need to make these claims, and yet they conveniently never have any evidence?

Its always someone's dad, or someone's friend's dad, and yet for all of these ominous meetings where people leave "disgusted", we never see anything substantiated. I wonder why?

I can tell you what probably happened in this case. My lodge has lots of members who never show up because they hold personal grudges against whoever is in the officer line. Every now and then they show up hoping to make a statement, which often fails, and then they leave and never return again. They are "disgusted" with how the lodge is being ran. I bet you that is exactly what happened in this case - and yet, because that isn't sexy, you have to A S S U M E that something nefarious is going on.

Originally posted by pacificwind
I can tell you what probably happened in this case. My lodge has lots of members who never show up because they hold personal grudges against whoever is in the officer line. Every now and then they show up hoping to make a statement, which often fails, and then they leave and never return again. They are "disgusted" with how the lodge is being ran. I bet you that is exactly what happened in this case - and yet, because that isn't sexy, you have to A S S U M E that something nefarious is going on.

Lets leave that up to your man's grand father.
It seems that he stated these things for his own reasons.

We just dont know why he said it.
Pro or Con.

Originally posted by yankeerose
John Wayne's Character in "The Shootist" was a Mason?

Are you sure?

Doesn't mattrer, in the end, since the person who compiled the sentence probably wasn't. The screenwriter had few credits of any particular merit while the novel was written by someone who seems something of a hack. It's quite possible that Don Siegel is actually responsible for this line; in his autobiography, he makes frequent mention of the hurt and indignation he felt at the McCarthy "trials", not knowing who, if anyone, was saying bad things about him - who of his friends and colleagues could he now no longer trust.

And probably not a Mason, either.

Of course, in the end, regardless of any of this, regardless of the Duke's own right-wing leanings, the words are completely valid and should probably be attended to even had they issued from the life of the late, great Saddam Hussein himself (may he rest in peace).

[edit on 13/3/08 by hidatsa]

I had no intention of joining this debate until I realized how strongly the sentiments ran in one direction:

Every post which questions the Mason - Shriner members integrity is met with "mason-hater' retorts.

This does not bode well. Primarily because defending the Masons is like defending the Republicans, Democrats, Catholics, Jews, et. al.

There are bad people everywhere in every 'group' regardless of how you categorize that group. So to assign special significance to these incidents based on generalizations of groups is probably incorrect.

HOWEVER - The argument regarding the observations about those organizations is still correct! Fraternal Orders can't have it both ways, they tout their existence in terms of honor, loyalty, and good-natured genuine brotherhood. THAT IS A MISCONCEPTION OF THE HIGHEST ORDER. Freemasons, etc, are no better than anyone else. They suffer the same frailties as any other group of humans, and they are OBVIOUSLY not genuinely pursuing the 'quality of character' their PR seems to tout.

Insofar as the writings in the handbook - yeah - it was written a long time ago so its not relevant - like the Bible - Koran - Baghavadgitta - Magna Carta - Constitution too - right?

That the feebees (FBI) are not interested in Masons or any other group in general also is incorrect. Their records overflow with targeted organizations and groups and nazi-like tactics of engaging in smear / infiltration / and other such activities. This is a well documented fact.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was ALL untrue, because frankly I think the accusers are unreliable - (the Fed's not the kids). The focus should be about the epidemic infecting even the most well known organizations which have traditionally stood for anything but abuse and excess. I refer to the epidemic which takes the form of - an orgasm is more important than the values I have chosen to represent, that drunken revelry is to be pursued as a matter of reward. That's the crime here.

Please dont say things like there are only so many levels in this and that organization unless you are willing to admit the addition "that I know of' because frankly, few are so naive as to accept what 'secret' organizations expose of themselves as 'the whole story.'

Sorry for the rant.