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.

 

Ron Paul and Freemasonry

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
That article ChadAndrewATS is nothing but hateful homophobic drivel. Do you honestly believe that homosexuality is a culture of "abnormality" and "impotency with women"? The only a "pro-homosexual agenda" is the protection of human rights!

"Homosexuals clearly have little use for the opposite sex, generally speaking." That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard! As if human relationships are only meaningful if sexual attraction is involved. You must be lonely!

Even the insinuations about homosexuality in Freemasonry were true, that article would still be a crock of close-minded bull****.

Masonry is a social club with an affinity for charitable events, for crying out loud! They hold no significant power in the modern world, and most of the anti-Masonic sources I've read here are just grasping at straws. This hate-mongering is ridiculous.

[edit on 27-4-2008 by bled_eidol]




posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   
ChadAndrews, I'm surprised you haven't gotten a warning yet. Hate speech is not supposed to be allowed on ATS.

The fact that you have already made up your mind, without doing any REAL research, speaks volumes. You have heard the truth from many actual Masons on this thread, they give you information, yet you still refuse to hear it. What does that say about YOUR agenda? To me, it looks like your agenda is one of hate and to denigrate the Masons. You're not interested in the Truth, you just want to blabber on about your paranoid theories, based on nothing, and continue with your hate-driven agenda.

Homosexuality, pedophilia? FBI, CIA infiltration? Provide PROOF, man, quit insulting our intelligence with all this drivel. You have been misled, my friend, and you want to continue to spread your ignorance and hate to others, but we're not buying it.

How dare you insult an entire group of people without even knowing them AT ALL? And charge them with pedophilia? That right there demonstrates your level of ignorance. Sad, really. You must live in a very fearful, hateful, paranoid world. I feel sorry for you.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by christiansoldier
 


Very well said sir
i couldn't have said it any better. Most of the time i just ignore it and carry out on my own business but sometimes its just to hard not to respond to such ignorance or false accusations that i do not find very nice or hurtful to others.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 06:34 PM
link   
While I find Chad's thread over the top, he HAS done quite a bit of research on the matter. Sadly, rather than counterbalance the biased nature of the result of that research with evidence or information, those defending the other position instead prefer to engage in very tiresome self-congratulatory non-debate techniques. Perhaps rather than decry how 'bad' his words are, you should actually contribute by providing content to refute his position. Unless of course, it's not worth the effort. Just a thought.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
MM, I would be happy to provide proof. But how does one provide proof that something like pedophilia didn't happen? That is why I provided no proof. What I objected to was OP's lack of proof and how rudely he has accused Masons of pedophilia, with no intention of ever listening to the other side, as demonstrated by what he's saying.
I don't like to see someone's name dragged through the mud needlessly and I will always stand up and express my thoughts on the matter to defend the slandered person, until I learn otherwise.

Perhaps, you can tell me, then, how does one debate with one who refuses to hear what you are saying to them?

(Edited for clarity. CS)

[edit on 27-4-2008 by christiansoldier]



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by christiansoldier
 


I try not to waste my time with the people who decide to become close-minded and not want to listen to the words of others and let them do their own bidding on their mental process as they please. I know i will not be able to change their mind or what they think that is not why i joined the ATS boards. i came to give insight and my own account and on my views.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by christiansoldier
 


I can't agree more, as I have suffered under the same 'deafness.' I suppose the weak nature of the accusation is enough to warrant dismissal of the claim. I definitely know of the impossibility of proving a negative - nasty business being in that position.

I have heard of a video documentary entitled "Conspiracy of Silence"



which also attributes very shocking pedophilia activities connected to the Bush name, however, this focus primarily on a 'Republican' orchestrated cover-up - I don't recall any mention of Freemasonry. Perhaps this accusation stems from there and the Freemasonic connection is a contrivance (a sort of smear tactic drive by shooting if you will).

In either case, thanks for not assuming that I was some anti-Freemason nut - I usually have to brace myself for a severe lambasting whenever I get pulled into one of these threads.



posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Hi Maxmars:
Agreed, agreed and thank you!

And I do know what you mean about having to dodge bullets sometimes on these kind of topics.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 12:20 AM
link   
I doubt Ron paul was a freemason. Hillary clinton and Obama or Mcamnesty are the ones who should be accused of such. I mean Hillary is Bilderberg, thats pretty much worse than any Freemasonic sect I know of.

Another reason why I dont think Ron paul is a Freemason is because hes never being aired on the Western Media. Bilderbergs like Hillary are or Obama, ones with more sinister thoughts and goals for this country.

The media alone and the way it portrays things alone backs up the fact that they dont want Ron paul getting any leverage. I personally think the media only supports those who are connected with these secret groups.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
If Ron Paul were a Freemason, the Freemason should be ashamed at their tacit acceptance of the disservice being done to him. They count themselves among those willing to openly support honor and justice..., Where is their voice, now? Or have they some contrived excuse for watching this nation, they so quickly claim to have love for, simply drop into this quagmire of deceit! Perhaps corporate America has infiltrated the Freemasons too? Who among the Freemason's would claim responsibility for allowing THAT to happen?



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Im sorry i thought all presdential candidates had to be freemasons to even run.

so why is this surprise and i knew he wa sa freemason long ago.



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 10:35 AM
link   
who cares about george washington he wasnt even the first president. and he was evil.

He was the first american president. yes but there was british presidents before him.

i forget there names should be on wiki.

the american presidents sold us out long ago. including george washington.

and as far as signing the constitution its gonna be gone once the NAU adopts the new tri country constitution for canada us and mexico.

ya were all free cept for jews blacks women and um everyone but the white man.

the constitution is full of lies same as today lies lies and more lies.

nothing is real.

youve been lied to for a long time.

go ahead try claim anything supposdly your protected for in the constitution in court you will be pummeled and beaten.

like many others who tried to claim there rights as well.

i hate to say it but GWB is right its just a g-d damn piece of paper

[edit on 28-4-2008 by NWOmaskedman]

[edit on 28-4-2008 by NWOmaskedman]



posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by NWOmaskedman
 


No, there were no British presidents in the U.S. before George Washington. There were governors, perhaps that is what you're thinking of?

Here, from your own recommended source, Wikipedia:

en.wikipedia.org...

"George Washington (February 22, 1732[1][2][3] – December 14, 1799) was the first President of the United States, (1789–1797),[4] after leading the Continental Army to victory over the Kingdom of Great Britain in the American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)."



posted on May, 5 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by NWOmaskedman
 

You're right about those freemasons. I don't know of any British freemason-presidents though. Please tell us more about what you know about them.



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Photo Evidence of Ron Paul shilling for his freemason/luciferian brothers:

Ron Paul and Freemasonry


Ron Paul and Freemasonry (aftermathnews.wordpress.com)

Ron Paul speaking at Georgetown Jesuit University, alma mater of Carroll Quigley and Bill Clinton. Note the Freemasonic symbols on the wall behind him.


[edit on 10-5-2008 by ChadAndrewATS]



posted on May, 11 2008 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Good post there! Very interesting movie indeed. Spread the word, theres no way somebody like Ron paul could be tied to the scums of Freemasonry lol.

[edit on 11-5-2008 by topsecretombomb]



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join