Why can no one prove a Masonic conspiracy?

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 20 2008 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by lazy1981
 


I agree with everything you just said. Perhaps without exception.

It is almost unfair to lump everyone in with the likes of a "Freight Tomsen," for instance. He's still very much in his credulous stage (as were a lot of us), and is finding his way around the conspiracy territory, if you will.

If you happen to read this Freight, hey I know you're trying. You have certainly read a lot of books - but alas, they are the wrong ones. There's plenty of damning information in real history books on all sorts of subjects. Books that were written by history professors who've dedicated a lifetime to a single subject; or dissertations by PhD candidates. When you start citing scholarly tomes in your research - instead of fantastical amateurish "conspiracy theorists" - then, and only then, will you will start being taken seriously.


[edit on 20-5-2008 by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men]




posted on May, 20 2008 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
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.


Hey dude,

I wouldn't say I'm offended, but definitely curious about your bullying/numbers comments.

What would happen in your perfect world (read: forum)?

Would there be a fairly balanced number of conspiracy theorists* & Masons?

Would the conspiracy theorists present articulate, well-thought-out arguments supported by sources who don't necessarily believe in reptilian aliens?

Coz I'D certainly find that a lot more interesting...

Nevertheless, the fact that there are more Masons replying is certainly not the fault of the Masons. I would think it unreasonable to expect that the Masons on this forum withhold their right of reply just to pander to the conspiracy theorists' flagging numbers.

Wouldn't you agree?




Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
You guys take yourselves way too seriously.


I disagree with this remark, I have to say. I've seen many instances of Masons on this forum poking fun at themselves and their own strange practices.

The fact that we take the DEBATE fairly seriously is, I think, very generous on our part towards those who claim we're chipping children's heads and worshipping Satan...

(* - I use this term specifically to avoid pigeonholing with the term "Anti-Masons". I'm certainly not suggesting that the Masons aren't conspiracy theorists in their own right. They just tend not to theorise about Masonry as a conspiracy... obviously)



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Roark
 


I have no idea what the ideal situation would be. As the CEO has said - and I agree - Masons need to take certain threads with a grain of salt: it's a conspiracy board, after all! Besmirching masonry is NOT akin to calling one's mother a whore.


I would, however, suggest something. Once, just once, it would be nice to see a topic about masonry, and have no masons respond. It is entirely your right to do so ... but humour us.

Those on Rockpuck's list:

Masoniclight
Apak (rarely on)
Mirthful Me (Rarely on)
Bushidomason
Rockpuck (hey thats me!)
Trinityman (moved to another site I think)
Corsig (I know he moved to another site)
Fitzgibbon
Lost in the midwest
AugustusMasononicus
Josh Norton
Choronzon

...and my own that I've sussed out in the last few hours of digging:

  • scientist
  • LightinDarkness
  • RWPBR (Real Men Ride Goats And Wear Aprons)
  • JustMe74
  • Skyfloating
  • The Axeman
  • Beelzebubba
  • Straighten Arrow
  • Roark

    Try it as an experiment. Give the "antis" the total uninhibited freedom to vent for a change. See what happens, just for the hell of it. If it gets out of hand, that's what the moderators are there for. They can ban and/or chastise to their hearts content.

    Just a thought.



  • posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:09 PM
    link   
    Fire, you just posted the junkyard dogs of the Mason posters here,with the exception of josh, who seems to have reason.
    If Masonry takes a good man and make him better "rockpuck" must have been really a challenge and a work still in progress?
    I cant say there is a real conspiracy involved by the bully Mason posters here, just typical forum hogging, same as I have seen in the past on other forums I post on.

    Don Dyar Master Mason, but just 3, degrees.



    posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:13 PM
    link   
    Generally speaking, I would like to add to the "debate" that it's a bit off the mark for anyone to suggest that no Mason ( I don't say Masons because we are talking about individuals) on ATS has a dog in the fight as far as conspiracies are concerned. I've seen quite a few, just none that believe in a Masonic one. But there are a few Freemasons that have thier opinions on other conspiracies. Some even joined the Freemasons in the first place to see if there was some Masonic conspiracy.

    Yet somehow I think that if they actually found there to be a "Masonic conspiracy" they wouldn't be Freemasons much longer. I happen to be of the opinion that most Freemasons joined because they thought it would be a good way to inject some good into this world, not covertly control or destroy it. I don't know call me crazy but that's the way I see it.

    [edit on 20-5-2008 by lazy1981]

    [edit on 20-5-2008 by lazy1981]



    posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:36 PM
    link   
    Why?

    Why no one can prove a Masonic conspiracy?

    That's easy enough... Because you can't prove anything by copy and paste posts and poor quality YouTube video links.

    There.

    I said it.

    That's all that has ever been posted here regarding Freemasonry and it's supposed stranglehold on humanity... Nothing of substance, nothing investigative, nothing but hearsay and innuendo; and that is typically delivered in the most sophomoric of terms.

    Masonic Monkeys, not just for "MM" anymore...



    posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:55 PM
    link   
    Mirth, the Monkey business has nothing to do with Masonry these people would act the same anywhere, if it was in a bar or in a church.
    They were just caught in a lodge. Its sad but things happen everywhere.

    Don Dyar Master Mason



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:02 AM
    link   
    I'd be happy to see this non-Mason thread experiment take place. The original post would have to be well-worded to keep out all the Brothers who feel that their opinions are still valid in this place, though.

    I have to say, though, I honestly still don't see how Masonic responses constitute bullying.

    Some people seem oblivious to the fact that we've been accused of everything from child molestation to Satanic worship, and equally oblivious to the natural human reaction that these kind of accusasions might evoke.

    That’s not bullying?

    The fact that (much of the time) the authors of the accusations are pitifully inarticulate suckers DOESN’T immediately qualify them as victims of bullying. Yeah, so many of the Masonic members are older and more experienced. Does that mean we should coddle the kid who's just graduated high school and thinks that David Icke is a bastion of Truth?

    Masons on this forum are (variously) patient, informative, angry, kind, and passionate in their responses - just like everyone else on this forum. So how are our responses bullying? Just coz we're consistent and tend to agree with each other? Meh.

    I think some people need to grow a thicker skin and, if Masonic responses don’t breach the forum’s terms and conditions, they should stop crying like bedwetting Mama’s boys and let their accusations stand up against critique (and maybe actually RESPOND to the critiques for once).

    If Masonic responses DO breach the terms and conditions, hell, they should be reported.

    Just my thoughts.

    :-)



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:15 AM
    link   
    A point is, Masonry is not the same in every state. This has become very clear to me here.
    In this state, there is not the separation of the Masonic bodies as it appears other areas have.
    They are all tied together by a state Masonic Alliance, yet another body.
    I dont think that is a good thing. So, Masons cant make blanket statements regarding those issues.



    Don Dyar Master Mason

    [edit on 21-5-2008 by HDFACTORYCERTIF]



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:35 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by Roark
    I have to say, though, I honestly still don't see how Masonic responses constitute bullying.

    Some people seem oblivious to the fact that we've been accused of everything from child molestation to Satanic worship, and equally oblivious to the natural human reaction that these kind of accusasions might evoke.

    That’s not bullying?



    Perhaps not in such extreme terms. I just think the Masonic posters at ATS are rather overzealous. I have been doggedly harking on it only because it is ALL masons who are responding: claim, refute; same claim, refute; same claim, refute. Rinse, repeat. Rinse, repeat. (I'm stubborn too.)

    Masons may very well come here individually, but once they find out who's who, the fellow "joiners" congregate into a posse.

    If they were not overzealous, the CEO of the site would not have deemed it necessary to address the subject. Right? Masonic hegemony must have been brewing for a while, and it must have come to a head. What was accomplished by that post anyway? Did anything change because of it?

    Roark said: "...everything from child molestation to Satanic worship." No problem. Debunk away. Coordinate if you have to. I'd expect nothing less.

    Some posts are considerably less offensive, however. I'm referring to the innocuous Interesting Place to Find a Masonic Obelisk. The responses, to me, are particularly overbearing - to say the least.

    [edit on 21-5-2008 by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men]



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:53 AM
    link   
    Are we looking at the same thread, duder?

    You're talking about the obelisk one where the O.P. (Twitchy) basically acknowledged that the purpose (or at least a pleasant side effect) of his posts was to anger Masons?

    The one where he was almost instantly berated by a moderator for doing so?

    Your point is not well-served by page 1 of the thread, but I'll keep going. (I'm a slow reader...)



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:08 AM
    link   
    OK, I've read a couple more pages and, I'm not buying your point that their behaviour was in any way inappropriate to the forum, man.

    The Masons in that thread are (at their best) extremely informative about the Craft and pretty damn patient with the O.P (especially Trinityman). At worst, they are a bit snippy about Twitchy's refusal to actually make a Masonic link, which was kinda the entire point of the thread.

    It was a pretty crap Original Post, and nothing he said subsequently actually backed up his assertation.

    Which reminds me once again of why I find many of the anti-Masons so frustrating. I may have mentioned it already...




    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:21 AM
    link   
    Fire_In _The_Minds_Of_Men

    Magazines about cycling are usually read by cyclists.
    To claim that the overwhelming response to letters in cycling magazines by cyclists, rather than non-cyclists, is 'over-zealous' or 'taken too seriously' would be absurd.

    Similarly, forum threads about Freemasonry are usually read by Freemasons...



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:35 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by Saurus
    Fire_In _The_Minds_Of_Men

    Magazines about cycling are usually read by cyclists.
    To claim that the overwhelming response to letters in cycling magazines by cyclists, rather than non-cyclists, is 'over-zealous' or 'taken too seriously' would be absurd.

    Similarly, forum threads about Freemasonry are usually read by Freemasons...


    OK, then. CEO is absurd. Go tell him.



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:44 AM
    link   
    reply to post by Roark
     


    Since we're critiquing the responses, I have a few favorites:

    Here:
    www.abovetopsecret.com...

    and here:
    www.abovetopsecret.com...
    and here:
    www.abovetopsecret.com...

    I find the entire thread fascinating.



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:51 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by Saurus
    Magazines about cycling are usually read by cyclists.


    Your right though. I do see your point.



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:53 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
    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.


    Perfectly said, I couldnt agree with you more.



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 05:45 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
    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.


    The numbers of non-Masons far outstrip those who are mebers of the Fraternity. Perhaps if the content of some threads was more substantial it would attract more conspiracy theorists to participate.


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


    I have no wish to control Above Top Secret, I have my own wants and desires and the managing of this website is not one of them, please do not over generalize.


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


    No, I actually have a sense of humor regarding myself and Masonry, sometimes need one to particpate in the antics that occur on this site.



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 05:49 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
    Some posts are considerably less offensive, however. I'm referring to the innocuous Interesting Place to Find a Masonic Obelisk. The responses, to me, are particularly overbearing - to say the least.


    The repsonses by Twitchy were particularly obtuse and lacking in substance. My post, the first response on the thread, went unanswered for the entire thread. It was a fairly staright-forward question as well, what made hime think that the obelisk was Masonic. I was disappointed at the closure of that thread as I felt, that possibly by page 60 or so, I might have received an answer.



    posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:37 AM
    link   

    Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men


    Try it as an experiment. Give the "antis" the total uninhibited freedom to vent for a change. See what happens, just for the hell of it. If it gets out of hand, that's what the moderators are there for. They can ban and/or chastise to their hearts content.

    Just a thought.


    If they want to start a new "No Mason" thread, I will humor them and not post there.

    But...

    We have to remember that the motto of ATS is "Deny Ignorance". If we let lies go unchallenged, aren't we aiding and abetting ignorance?





    new topics

    top topics



     
    16
    << 1    3  4  5 >>

    log in

    join