Why can no one prove a Masonic conspiracy?

I have yet to see one individual prove that there is a ‘Masonic’ conspiracy of any type taking place. There has been a distinct inability by numerous posters to support their assertions that Freemasons and/or Freemasonry are somehow participating in various plots and conspiracies with the intention to perform one or more of the following; world domination by ‘high-level’ Masons, conversion to a one-world religion, the practice of worshipping Satan and/or Lucifer, pedophilia, mind-control and gang-stalking among more notable (notorious?) examples.

I have yet to see anyone, anywhere offer even the faintest glimmer of proof that would help substantiate or corroborate these remarks or beliefs. The typical ‘fact’ presented is the re-hashed opinion of another who has done no research of there own.

What is the underlying cause? Are they self-promoting with the hopes of ‘rising’ to the infamy of people like Icke? Are they just regurgitating theories they have heard in regards Masonry? Or are they- and this is the theory I tend to favor- completely unaware that there is no Masonic conspiracy?

I do not think anyone can prove, with the evidence that has thus far been provided, a conspiracy of Masonic nature, nor will they.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


The problem with that is, These masons are you governors, Presidents, Mayors, Judges, Bank owners and cooperate ceo's. During the dark ages they were forced to go underground because of the catholics. They have mastered the skills of working in the dark.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
During the dark ages they were forced to go underground because of the catholics.

Modern speculative Masonry is typically considered to have arisen after the Dark Ages and is one of the main contributors to the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment.


[edit on 20-5-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


You deliberately couch your apologetics in terms of the present. It may very well be that your entire premise for even posting is to play down the numerous conspiracies of the past, and to sugarcoat the brethren of today.

Correct me if I'm wrong, and please elaborate to the fullest.

reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men


My post is contemporaneous in nature as the majority of conspiracies I read concerning Masonry revolve around the topics I listed in my original post.

In regards the past, other then the Morgan affair, to what specifically are you refering?

reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men

See, that's where you and I have disagreed in other threads. While I do agree that history is important, and should be known, what's happening right now in the world is a heck of a lot more important. It would be easy to say that during WWII and shortly thereafter the number of men who became Masons was at its highest level. And you could (and perhaps you would) leave it there. But it can also be shown that numbers have fallen significantly and steadily since that time.

A lot of people who believe in Masonic conspiracy today do so because they believe that the numbers today are as great or greater than they were, and that's simply not true.

I'll grant that in the past there have been Masonic presidents, governors, congressmen and what-have-you. I'll then turn around and say that if proportions are in any way close to the same, then the number of politicians who are active Masons is likely 1/20th or less of whatever that number was 60+ years ago. And that is significant. People aren't as interested in becoming Masons. Politicians are people. Ergo politicians aren't as interested in becoming Masons. Are there some today? I don't doubt there may be a handful. Are they running the government? No, and I leave it to any theorist here to prove that they are.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


The topics you listed in your original post are poppycock! Ignoramuses post stuff such as that! You don't need to be a supporter of Freemasonry to even debunk such fluff.

Once again it seems calculated to me.

If you want your average ignorant responses then by all means continue on. It seems like you want such responses, otherwise you wouldn't brought up Icke, Satanism, pedophilia, etc. ...

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
The topics you listed in your original post are poppycock! Ignoramuses post stuff such as that!

Why, I do believe we agree. But a quick perusal of Above Top Secret will show that the 'ignoramuses' have been posting for far longer then myself and with much more frequent regularity.

If you want your average ignorant responses then by all means continue on. It seems like you want such responses, otherwise you wouldn't brought up Icke, Satanism, pedophilia, etc. ...

Icke, Satanism and pedophilia are recurring topics and I am not the one who revolves my theories around them. I indicated other theories as well, please feel free to selectively comment on those. Perhaps I will add more outlandish theories (to me at least) as they occur to me, such as the belief that Masons control Above Top Secret.

[edit on 20-5-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Perhaps I will add more outlandish theories

I only ask that you be precise and not generalize. Lumping a bunch of topics together and saying people have called them "masonic conspiracies" doesn't help anyone out.

Where? When? Who? What?

I suspect if you ask the foregoing questions for each case, you'll realize that there's a great deal of exaggeration on your part as well: i.e., you might very well be overplaying the importance that certain theorists have given to your Order. A mere mention of masonic affiliation (whether correct or not - in most cases not) or two in a rant on, say, the conspiracy for domination by the elite, hardly constitutes persecution.

[edit on 20-5-2008 by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men]

Agustus, your bland generalization of Masonry is just that.
What happened to RacerX and I was not a Masonic conspiracy at all, and further more, I never said it was.
What happened is, some stupid men did stupid things in a Mason lodge. Then other stupid men did stupid things in a state Grand Lodge.
Its not a Masonic conspiracy to be stupid.
However, a NON Masonic conspiracy did take place by men acting Non Masonic in a state lodge system that you have no control of.
In no stretch in any teachings of Masonry are Masons to do harm to others.
The incidents that have taken place were by men that would do the same things no matter where they are or what organization they belong to.
Further more, I have been branded unmasonic for bringing this up on ATS. But, all other roads were already traveled. The NON Masonic situation was heading toward violent confrontation.
Me, bringing this matter to this forum, defused the situation and lives were most likely saved.
The "problem lodge" incident has absolutely nothing to with Masonry, it just happened in a Mason lodge, thats all.

Don Dyar

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
I only ask that you be precise and not generalize.

Especially when they are unsubstantiated.

Where? When? Who? What?

I could spend an inordinate amount of time listing threads that have these general premisis' as their reason for existence.

A mere mention of masonic affiliation (whether correct or not - in most cases not) or two in a rant on, say, the conspiracy for domination by the elite, hardly constitutes persecution.

While I agree that many are indeed laughable to you, and as well as to me, there are many more that others wholeheartedly believe. Please feel free to addresses the ones that you care to, instead of minimizing the entire post because you feel others theories that I included do not mesh with your own sentiments.

Furthermore, I never insinutated presecution, only a severe lack of evidence.

Originally posted by HDFACTORYCERTIF
What happened to RacerX and I was not a Masonic conspiracy at all, and further more, I never said it was.

You flatter yourself, you and your alleged occurences were assuredly the farthest things from my mind when I created this thread.

Me, bringing this matter to this forum, defused the situation and lives were most likely saved.

Suuuuure, and I bet you saved lives by telling the modified story on the biker forum as well. Perhaps you should be more concerned with saving something else like your dignity.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


You started the thread ... where's the beef? It seems, yes, you do need to spend an inordinate amount of time compiling what it is you are haphazardly referring to.

Start with one exact example. ...We can go from there.

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
It seems, yes, you do need to spend an inordinate amount of time compiling what it is you are haphazardly referring to.

Start with one exact example. ...We can go from there.

You do see the 'Search' button on the top of the screen, do you not? I will, to appease you, give you some examples:

Anything authored by stompk/cutbothways. Insults, inuendo and unsubstantiation are the rule of thumb.

Please read the 'Interesting place to find a Masonic obelisk' thread. 20 pages of not providing any proof but quite an amount of unsupported opinion.

Anything by Freight Tomsen. An unabashed self-promoter whose inability to debate but desire for notoriety got him banned.

Several posts by ChadAndrewsATS. This hate spewing individual likened Masons to all forms of nefarious schemes, plots and acts all without providing any proof, unless you call linking Youtube videos proof.

All of these posters were present on Above Top Secret in the past month, a further examination of these forums past posts and threads will unearth more of the same. Do these examples satisfy your parameters as to no longer refer to the aforementioned topics as 'haphazardly' compiled?

You may also address a topic that you yourself seem to favor, that Above Top Secret is somehow controlled/run by Masons.

[edit on 20-5-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]

[edit on 20-5-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Do these examples satisfy your parameters as to no longer refer to the aforementioned topics as 'haphazard' compiled?

You may also address a topic that you yourself seem to favor, that Above Top Secret is somehow controlled/run by Masons.

[edit on 20-5-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]

I'll get back to you on those posters you mentioned.

Regarding myself: no, I did not say ATS was "somehow controlled/run by Masons." I mentioned that indeed the perception of control was out there; I myself did not say as much. I merely concurred that the damn place is infested with 'em!

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
I'll get back to you on those posters you mentioned.

Please do, it is however, a substantial amount of reading.

Regarding myself: no, I did not say ATS was "somehow controlled/run by Masons." I mentioned that indeed the perception of control was out there; I myself did not say as much.

Indeed, can you elaborate on these then?

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
The other side has way too much representation for it to be a coincidence.

or

The CEO's thread on this very board attests to the fact that there's a "problem" with masonic posters taking things way too seriously. What he doesn't elaborate upon, however, is why there are so many of them in the first place.

Did I somehow misconstrue your comments? They seem rather straight forward to me.

I merely concurred that the damn place is infested with 'em!

Infested.....interesting, is that a purposeful negative connotation or are you being jocular?

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Infested.....interesting, is that a purposeful negative connotation or are you being jocular?

Both.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
The other side has way too much representation for it to be a coincidence.

or

The CEO's thread on this very board attests to the fact that there's a "problem" with masonic posters taking things way too seriously. What he doesn't elaborate upon, however, is why there are so many of them in the first place.

Did I somehow misconstrue your comments? They seem rather straight forward to me.

Yes you did. It's your penchant for exaggeration and aggrandizement at play again. The comments are indeed straightforward, but for the most part I choose my words carefully.

I did not say that I thought you guys controlled ATS; its more of a "throwing your weight around" situation. And since you have the numbers it is akin to a bullying faction.

You haven't control of ATS yet, IMO, but you certainly desire to attain such a position.

And I have no doubt that the brethren will be well offended by said remarks. You guys take yourselves way too seriously.

...I hear the rushing and roar toward the thread as we speak!

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


IMO, they can not prove any Masonic cospiracy because no general "Masonic conspiray" exists. You may be able to find the occasional thing like the P2 Lodge or something but it would be the most fantastic idea that millions of people around the world were all able to keep a plot under raps.

As far as the posters with the absurd theories, I feel that they are the same sort of people that would run for cover if you told them the sky was falling! I don't think that any of them really think that they will gain a sense of notoriety by posting anything on ATS. It is a good site but it isn't the path to superstardom. Those are the people that believe everything that they read in the morning paper, evening news, and politicians speaches (unless they are suspected Masons). And one day they watched an Icke or Jones documentary and took the bait if you will. Hook, line, and sinker. And no matter how much you try to show them that they are believeing without evidence they will never let it go.

Just for future knowlege I do favor the Jones documentaries as far as the NWO idea goes. I just don't buy the whole "Masonic evil doer" thing anymore. I grew up and learned to reason for myself.

[edit on 20-5-2008 by lazy1981]

What would you consider proof?

Please enlighten me.