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.

 

Why can no one prove a Masonic conspiracy?

page: 26
23
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Capozzelli
 


Oh, I have no idea about that. There wouldn't have been one US "head" - just the grand masters of the U.S. grand lodges. The GL of Massachusetts was formed in 1733, so depending on the politics I guess the UGLE might have cut off mutual recognition for a time (although I don't think they did - does anyone know?) - but that wouldn't matter for those masons moving amongst US grand lodges.




posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
It has been occurring since the 18th century. It was done on purpose to give the impression that Jesuits had infiltrated Freemasonry. Before the ubiquitous Illuminati conspiracy, the Jesuits had long filled the same role. Masons such as Illuminatus Bode and Illuminatus Christoph Friedrich Nicolai, Cercle Social French revolutionary Nicolas de Bonneville, and even Schiller had propagated the theory that the Jesuits had achieved a real influence upon Masonry. In particular, the higher degrees of Scottish "Jacobite Masonry" were the suspected point of infiltration. The Illuminati and the radical, rationalist Freemasons joined forces and created a veritable industry of conspiracy books that sought to prove that high-degree Freemasonry was the invention of the Jesuits.


I don't get it really. The Jesuits obviously wished to hold influence within the courts of Europe and so did the Illuminati, but did the Freemasons? ...Certainly they had influence, but while the others seemed to wish to enact change, while maintaining the status quo, the accusations against the Freemasons seem to imply that they wished to overthrow??? It is very hard to seperate fact from reality. In England, Leicester was the main source of Elizabeth I's fear that the Jesuits were out to get her, he of course had personal motives...but the Jesuits advocation of 'tyrannicide' didn't really do them any favours in that respect. The main problem with the Jesuits was their popularity with the 'working classes' or peasants as some would be better described and the power that it gave them to potentially organise 'socialist' revolts. Much in the same way as the Freemasons were able to do appeal to the 'professional' classes. The Illuminati seems far more interested in establishing themselves inside the existing elites....?


Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
(The old "Jesuit under every bed" canard - Eric Jon Phelps is the modern purveyor of said affliction).


Phelps is a particular bug-bear with me, almost all of the 'rare out-of-print' sources that he cites are anti-Jesuit pamphlets or 'penny dreadfuls' aimed at titilating the pious protestant masses of the 18 and 19th centuries. 'Brother' Phelps definately has his own agenda and it is none too different from those who came before him. The Jesuits belief in 'free will' seems to make them enemies of everyone, especially those that favour predestination.


Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
There's a PhD thesis by Steven Luckert, Jesuits, Freemasons, Illuminati, and Jacobins: Conspiracy theories, secret societies, and politics in late eighteenth-century Germany, that goes into all the details - the pros and cons of all sides. I only mention it - despite how rare it is - because after having read it, I feel it is the definitive history of Jesuit/Illuminati/Freemason interaction during the Enlightenment. I am in the process of scanning it now (all 730 pages of it), because I wish to have a digital copy; but I may just offer it up on the bittorent sites as well. 40 bucks a pop on dissertation sites is a crime imo. Thesis' should be accessible and free to all who wish to consult them.


Sounds fascinating. The Jesuits seemed to get blamed for every sin that the catholics committed, and given Loyola's spanish origins did not benefit much from the stigma of being ethnically identified with the inquisition. Which did not sit well with the merchant Sephardic Jews that had been expelled or had fled from Spain. In some cases the fear of the Jesuits had more to do with a presumption that they represented Catholic Spain (and in England of the Spanish claims to the throne, with the Jesuits seen not as reformers of faith but as agents of the Infantata Isabella) than anything that the Jesuits had or hadn't done themselves.

Nothing to do with the Clermont Chapter though...



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
 

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


I believe Albert Pike said Lucifer is God.



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Phazon
 


Nope - thats a famous line from the Taxil Hoax - for which the hoaxer admitted to an assemblage of media people that he made it up. Some anti-masons continue to use it in their propaganda even though they know its wrong.

[edit on 15-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Phazon
 


For more and better detailed information about Lucifer, check BTS for the thread about him. It's well worht the read.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
reply to post by Capozzelli
 


Oh, I have no idea about that. There wouldn't have been one US "head" - just the grand masters of the U.S. grand lodges. The GL of Massachusetts was formed in 1733, so depending on the politics I guess the UGLE might have cut off mutual recognition for a time (although I don't think they did - does anyone know?) - but that wouldn't matter for those masons moving amongst US grand lodges.


Trinityman would be the best bet, he's our resident UGLE expert.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
 


I was looking up something else and came across this...


General Ludendorff and his wife next discovered that a large number of Pastors in the Evangelieal Church were Masons; they withdrew from membership. Is there a more deplorable picture than that of innumerable Protestant ministers of German blood wearing the Aaron apron and practicing the ritual of symbolical circumcision!" But the General and his wife found even more deplorable pictures. Melanehthon had been a "Lodge Brother," and a thief Lessing was murdered in Lodge. Mozart was poisoned by Masons. Schiller was murdered by Masons, with the connivance of Goethe, who, as a Mason, was a "mute dog" and "the living corpse of Weimar." Mrs. Ludendorff, become an expert by long tutelage under her husband, linked Jews, Jesuits, and Freemasons together, and explained that they committed crimes because they were "children of the moon."


www.phoenixmasonry.org...

Partially along the lines that we've been discussing but aren't some of those names also Illuminati...? I am sure that these are well touted conspiracy theories but it is more the omission of the Illuminati association that intrigued me. I am sure Ludendorff would have included them had he known of them...??? Is there any reason why Ludendorff would not have mentioned them? ie, Nothing was known of the Illuminati at that time....is it feasible that Ludendorff wouldn't have known of Goethe connection to the Illuminati for example?

Ludendorff's connections are often somewhat sidelined in the construction of looney the conspiracy theorist behind Hitler, but he was a hugely significant figure beyond that and his downfall proves that he was considered a liability despite his views reflecting the party line...I'd be interested in any thoughts you may have?

All the best



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by KilgoreTrout
 


I don't understand what you want me to answer. General Ludendorff sounds like an ignorant bigot to me:



"The secret of Freemasonry is always the Jew." "All Germans who are initiated into Freemasonry are fettered with Jewish bonds and are lost to Germany for ever." The purpose of these Jews is by means of Freemasonry to subjugate Germany, with its holy soil, to "the Jewish Capitalist Priestly World Monarchy" in New York City.


Why does someone like that deserve to be addressed?

As far as Lessing, Schiller, or Mozart - no, they weren't Illuminati.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by KilgoreTrout
 



I don't get it really.


1) the Jesuits were the arch-enemies of the Enlightenment Illuminati and Freemasonry in every conceivabl way; 2) so when the Strict Observance, with their Templar pomp, and the higher degrees that payed lip-service to the Scottish Jacobite-Stuart cause (Catholic cause), came onto the scene - seemingly from nowhere - the radical liberal faction within Masonry (and the Illuminati in particular) naturally sought to explain this suspicious set of circumstances as originating with the Jesuits. They created a veritable industry out of it; but it was only an extension of the already ingrained hatred of the Jesuits (or Catholicism) in protestant Europe.


'Brother' Phelps definitely has his own agenda and it is none too different from those who came before him.


Phelps is an ignoramus: instead of Jews or black people, his intolerance is directed toward the Jesuits and Catholicism in general. His seething hatred of Catholics is disgusting and despicable, and it is shameful of him to call himself a follower of Christ. And shame on his gang of Catholic-haters, whom he mentored and encouraged to go post on the internet when they don't know jack-poop about history - even less than Phelps himself, if that's even possible.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men]



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
reply to post by KilgoreTrout
 


I don't understand what you want me to answer. General Ludendorff sounds like an ignorant bigot to me:



"The secret of Freemasonry is always the Jew." "All Germans who are initiated into Freemasonry are fettered with Jewish bonds and are lost to Germany for ever." The purpose of these Jews is by means of Freemasonry to subjugate Germany, with its holy soil, to "the Jewish Capitalist Priestly World Monarchy" in New York City.


Why does someone like that deserve to be addressed?

As far as Lessing, Schiller, or Mozart - no, they weren't Illuminati.


Why does he deserve not to be addressed? We all have our interests, just because you don't share mine doesn't mean you have to be dismissive. I was merely interested in whether you knew whether there was any reason why the Goethe association to the Illuminati would be something that wasn't widely known, especially by someone who (supposedly) conducted research into these things? I was more interested in what he wasn't saying, than in what he was saying.

But, thanks anyway.

For future reference you can just ignore a question if you don't have any thoughts



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
For future reference you can just ignore a question if you don't have any thoughts


Advice appreciated.

I don't have any meaningful thoughts on what Ludendorff had going on in his head, and especially no opinion on what wasn't going on in his head.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by KilgoreTrout
 



I was merely interested in whether you knew whether there was any reason why the Goethe association to the Illuminati would be something that wasn't widely known, especially by someone who (supposedly) conducted research into these things?


Just to be more helpful and specific - Goethe was "busted" in 1787 when the Bavarian Elector published the confiscated correspondences of the Bavarian Illuminati. So, yes, he was always known to have been a member. For sometime though Goethe's Illuminati activities was always claimed as negligible; however, his rank was that of Regent, so he was given real power, became a censor of a Minerval Academy, and was one of the top assets in Weimar for sure.

A little factoid: Goethe's life is the most documented of anyone in history. His collected works comprise some 133 volumes! (much of it autobiographical), and his superstar status in Europe rivaled that of Voltaire.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Capozzelli


I don't have this book but I think it is posted online somewhere. Can you tell me where in the book I should look or maybe give me the quotes you are talking about? Thanks.


Political philosophy is scattered throughout. The book is indeed available to be read online here.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
the masons are not bad.

they never were.

yes they do things in secret.
people hate them because they want to see everything thats going on.

and the masons hide it.

the masons have never done a bad thing.
they donate to societies.
they indorce the cancer foundation.
and its not just one religion.
anybody can join.

men only though.
but theres a group for women thats acociated with the masons.

notice.

most govoners movie actors and the head of the ceo are masons.

how do you think they got there?
the masons lead them on there way.

our founding fat6hers were masons.
and they founded this country.
its like the boy scouts.
theyre a secret society.
and what are they gonna do?
kill us with popcorn?


come on!! get real and grow up.
masons were just builders.
and they built some pretty cool stuff.

like the egyptians.
there probabally were some masons there/
and look at the pyramids. wow.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ebonflame
 


I like how you wrote that almost like in a poem style writing aspect.

But besides that I agree with what you say on the part about masons just being ordinary people with true intentions. Of course you're not always going to get a perfect group of people, and for the sad part about that, most people judge masonry due to the couple bad apples that we have had through our history.

Masonry is an amplifier for your life not a religion.

Good quote we use in masonry.

"We take good men and make them better"

That’s the best quote that i can think of that sum's up Freemasonry.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Phazon
 


I believe that your assumption is incorrect, Alightindarkness has directed you to where this originated. Please research this topic and return with any facts or information that may repudiate our stance.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Capozzelli
 


I think the revolution had much more then politics as its impetus. Colonists did not have the rights and freedoms which we now enjoy and as such were subject to unwarranted seacrh and seziure among other injustices.

This is a fascinating point in history and it must be studied under a broader guise then any perceived Masonic influence upon the events in question.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bushidomason
...and for the sad part about that, most people judge masonry due to the couple bad apples that we have had through our history.


That and the constantly invented nosense which they think is perpetrated upon them be the all-manipualting Masons.


"We take good men and make them better"

That’s the best quote that i can think of that sum's up Freemasonry.


A close second would have to be, ''Bretheren, please join me downstairs for collation.''



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 09:40 PM
link   
I think after Weishaupt created the Illuminati (well re-established it) he joined freemasonry and then eventually combined the two together. I think that just some lodges are linked to the Illuminati and other organisations, but most lodges wouldn't have any of that stuff. That way they have most masons spreading that there's nothing bad about it at all.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
reply to post by Capozzelli
 

Oh, I have no idea about that. There wouldn't have been one US "head" - just the grand masters of the U.S. grand lodges. The GL of Massachusetts was formed in 1733, so depending on the politics I guess the UGLE might have cut off mutual recognition for a time (although I don't think they did - does anyone know?) - but that wouldn't matter for those masons moving amongst US grand lodges.


Actually its a bit more complex than that. Just as pre-revolutionary USA was part of Great Britain, pre-revolutionary masonry in the US was a part of British masonry, of one sort or another. The Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, for example, started life in 1733 as the Provincial Grand Lodge of New England, the first PGM Henry Price having received a warrant from the Grand Lodge of England (Moderns) in 1733. It wasn't until after the Revolutionary War that freemasonry in the US separated from the British grand lodges and began forming sovereign grand lodges.

I do not know for sure, but I am fairly certain that the formation of independent grand lodges in the US after the Revolution will have been done with the blessing of the founding GLs and even the active assistance of British freemasons. This would be consistent with the development of freemasonry in other post-colonial situations.


Originally posted by Capozzelli
But wasn't the revolution about not liking the politics of the king? I understand what you are telling me but there were masons who agreed with what the king wanted and then changed their minds and helped with the revolution. I'm not the best with history and I might be wrong but didn't they change their minds because of politics?


There were masons on all sides of the Revolutionary War - how many people know that the great British patriot and war hero Benedict Arnold was a freemason? There is a school of thought amongst masonic scholars that many British freemason Officers fighting in the "colonies" had a great deal of sympathy with the American position and didn't try too hard to win the war. I'm not aware of any evidence to support this view but it has a nice ring to it IMO.

You might not be aware that in the 18th Century it was quite common for lodges to be attached to army regiments, operating under "traveling warrants". There is a well known story about the 46th Regiment during the Revolutionary War which highlights how freemasonry transcends the deepest of boundaries:


In the 46th regiment of the British army there was a traveling Lodge, holding its Warrant of Constitution under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Ireland. After an engagement between the American and British forces, in
which the latter were defeated, the private chest of the Lodge, containing its jewels, furniture and implements, fell into the hands of the Americans. The captors reported the circumstances to General Washington, who at once ordered the chest to be returned to the Lodge and the regiment, under a guard of honor.

www.phoenixmasonry.org...


Whilst it is highly speculative (to say the least!) that freemasonry molded the events of the Revolutionary War, there is no doubt that many freemasons from both sides of the conflict not only served with honor, but materially affected the outcome of the war. As soldiers though, rather than masons



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join