Why are there so many Masons on ATS?

Originally posted by trueforger

I know that.The point was the very obvious similarities and probable cross mutually beneficial relationship between two secretive groups(Masons and Skull&Bones)as evidenced by seeming inability of Masons to say anything against the predations of a Skull&Bones member,and his obvious handler of the last 8 years.

Since in reality Masons speak bad of each other a lot, why wouldn't a Mason speak bad of a Skull and Bones member, when Skull and Bones members aren't even Masons?

Case in point: 2004 Presidential elections. While neither George W. Bush nor John Kerry are Masons, both of them of Skull and Bones alumni. But that certainly didn't stop them from talking a load of trash about each other.

Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by Fitzgibbon

 

You ought to have cared while these guys,cheneY and his busH did their worst to ruin the economy of the US and since we are the largest in the world,effecting you and yours wherever you live.

No worries about your ego there. Nonetheless, as a charter member of the world-wide "I'm not from the States so there's nothing I can do to affect the internal working of the place" club (6.4 Billion members worldwide), I don't have a say. So I'm not going to waste either the time or the energy urinating into the wind. I'll do my best keeping the Bush-like in my country at bay, thank you very much.

Originally posted by trueforger
I was casting about to see IF y'all even could speak up since they weren't commander in chiefs anymore.

In fact, IIRC you seem to want proof that Masons worldwide are joined at the hip with Bush and Company. Can't help you there because:

a) Masons worldwide are as a majority NOT from the States so opinions about the aforementioned Bush are about as meaningful as "nice weather, eh?"

b) Masons in the States are of differing opinions about the man, not in some goosestep in trail of him. This is why politics and religion are not discussed in-Lodge. They have this nasty tendency to promote disharmony. Not something you want to have when you have a disparate group getting together to do good for society.

Originally posted by trueforger
You didn't speak up when you could have to stop this,now it's probably too late,so it was just an excercise.And a weak brew it got,too.

For the LAST time, all Freemasons are NOT from the States. I hope this clears up any misconceptions you might have previously had.

Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by emsed1

 

Relating all to ATS,back on topic,why are there so many Masons here?To deny ignorance?Or speak up?Or hele?Your being able to truthfully speak to these most important topics would prove me wrong to the extent of your speech,woulden't it?

Doing our level-best to "Deny Ignorance" (though Ignorance ofttimes seems to be given the upper hand). Would it be a more worthwhile place were there no Masons about to counter some of the wilder and woolier accusations? I think you'd find it deadly boring in short order. As for having anything to speak up about, it just isn't there. On a certain childish level, there's a part of me that wishes Masonry was the sexy, dangerous and controlling-of-the-world organisation that its naysayers would have you believe. It'd sure make the bills easier to pay.

But the simple fact is that it's all about making good men better. Every Mason I know from this board speaks the truth again and again and again and gets called a paedophile traitor for his trouble by those with an axe to grind.

Why bother? Because left unchallenged, such baseless assertions would become accepted wisdom by certain individuals lacking the skills or the desire to recognise a patent falsehood.

reply to post by Fitzgibbon


I was thinking just today about how all the sensationalism surrounding Masonry has actually been good for us.

Throughout the entire history of Freemasonry we have been accused of all kinds of debauchery and surrounded with intrigue.

Since we don't necessarily promote ourselves publicly, I think interest in the fraternity would have waned a couple hundred years ago if not for the conspiracy crowd drawing attention to us time and again.

So thanks to all the conspiracists out there who keep us in the headlines! :-)

(I actually do mean that with a measure of sincerity. Sometimes, as they say, even bad press is good press.)

reply to post by emsed1

That's definitely a way to look at it.

Slightly off topic...I can tell you of 2 Major banks that have alot of freemason influence.
1. Compass Bank (Symbol is a "C" inside a Square =Compass and Square and the sun symbol inside the C.
Compass Bank Logo

2 Good ole Bank of Americas masonic symbol is 3 sets of 11 or 33 degrees
11+11+11=33. WOW...I can add
BOAs Logo

Crafty huh?

[edit on 1/27/2009 by prometheus1111]

The "G" stands for God, the Grand Architect of the Universe

Kerry,S&B operative #2 just sorta folded and gave up the fight to hand the prize over to S&B operative #1,Jr.A little bit of words to provide a plausable strain is weak.It kinda proves my point.I never accused Masons of paedophilia,just massively unfair insider business practice.And of supporting the unsupportable administration we just endured.With silence...Golden,for you. .PS I think Fitz has a nice smile

[edit on 2-2-2009 by trueforger]

Originally posted by trueforger
Kerry,S&B operative #2 just sorta folded and gave up the fight to hand the prize over to S&B operative #1,Jr.A little bit of words to provide a plausable strain is weak.It kinda proves my point.I never accused Masons of paedophilia,just massively unfair insider business practice.And of supporting the unsupportable administration we just endured.

As previously noted, "the Masons" did not support "the administration we just endured", and you still didn't explain exactly how Masons are involved in "massively unfair business practice", which I really want to hear, seeing as how only a very small percentage of our membership are businessmen in the first place.

reply to post by bushidomason


One of the reasons I joined this form back in 03 was my interest in Freemasonry. Anything critical of the organization was and probably still is jumped on by the many Mason members here on ATS. ( I haven't posted on the Secret Society form in a number of years.)

I've sense then moved away from this form and done much of my own research outside of this form. If it is in fact a organization which many conspiracy theorists claim it is then firstly the vast majority of Masons wouldn't be in the know, or secondly wouldn't admit to it on a public forum.

To this day I'm still on the side lines keeping an open mind the subject. I sincerely doubt you'll gain balanced information on this forum and encourage anyone who is curious to do your own research.

Originally posted by LowLevelMason
reply to post by Razimus

 

Ah but you see what you are reading has a fundamental misunderstanding of freemasonry. There are no "high level masons" and what one mason knows all of us do - which you are quite correct, really isn't a big deal. This whole "levels" thing is a conspiracy theory construct that doesn't exist in real life.

The best parallel example is taking a college philosophy class, but dressing people up and telling allegorical stories to give the lessons that a professor would normally lecture on.

Then why have different degrees if the knowledge is shared evenly? Why progress to the next level, what's the incentive? I don't doubt your sincerity but I do believe your speaking out of ignorance.

Here I got again, being sucked into the Secret Societies forum again.

Originally posted by emsed1
reply to post by Fitzgibbon

 

I was thinking just today about how all the sensationalism surrounding Masonry has actually been good for us.

Throughout the entire history of Freemasonry we have been accused of all kinds of debauchery and surrounded with intrigue.

Since we don't necessarily promote ourselves publicly, I think interest in the fraternity would have waned a couple hundred years ago if not for the conspiracy crowd drawing attention to us time and again.

So thanks to all the conspiracists out there who keep us in the headlines! :-)

(I actually do mean that with a measure of sincerity. Sometimes, as they say, even bad press is good press.)

There was and still is a form of private promotion, I know this being that my grandfather was a Mason and asked if I wanted to join. The fact of the matter is a not so secret society, in the sense that it's existence isn't very secret but still has many layers of secrets will naturally attract the masses.

I do agree that all the conspiracy nuts only helped your cause.


[edit on 4-2-2009 by oconnection]

Originally posted by oconnection



Then why have different degrees if the knowledge is shared evenly? Why progress to the next level, what's the incentive? I don't doubt your sincerity but I do believe your speaking out of ignorance.

I'm not sure he's speaking out of ignorance; instead, he's just repeating what he's been told by other Masons, which is the popular "modern" line.

Of course, it cannot be completely true. You are absolutely right that there has to be a division of knowledge in any degree system, be it academic, Masonic, or otherwise. For example, in Freemasonry, one who is a Master Mason only does not know what happens in a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons or a Consistory of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Should a Master Mason desire that knowledge, he must request admission into those bodies, and apply for those degrees.

Then why have different degrees if the knowledge is shared evenly? Why progress to the next level, what's the incentive? I don't doubt your sincerity but I do believe your speaking out of ignorance.

Here I got again, being sucked into the Secret Societies forum again.

HaHa! Welcome back!

You have to admit we have been fairly tame lately.

I was thinking about this very question last night in a lodge meeting during a particularly rousing discussion about whether the motion to donate $200 to a local event was a motion unto itself or whether it was an amendment to the original motion to donate $100, notwithstanding the second of the second motion without discussion on the first motion.

Wherewith the party of the first part, rather then withdrawing his original motion declared a point of order that the second motion was an amendment, rather than a wholly independent issue, therefore we should vote to approve the second motion as an amendment first and then discuss and vote on the original motion if amended to include the increased amount from the second motion.................

Seriously. 20 minutes.

Unfortunately our newest brother, who was raised just this last Saturday, sat in bewilderment, confused as to how this prolonged reparte' was allegorical or symbolical of the most impressive and solemn knowledge which had only recently been revealed to him.

Meanwhile our chaplain had once again drifted off into slumber, which was particularly worrisome to me since I am a paramedic in real life and up until only recently said chaplain had been transporting a portable oxygen container which was mysteriously absent this particular meeting.

I believe he awoke when the Senior Steward, having only recently been raised himself, conducted a rather lengthy Q&A about whether the funds would be contributed directly to the sponsoring organization or whether they would be used for pizza and cups.

After the requisite hubbub, dress code and parking for the event were discussed ad infinitum with a mildly passive-aggressive parry between the tyler and the Worshipful Master about whether a logo-emblazoned polo shirt constituted 'business casual' dress.

Wait....

What was the question?



[edit on 2/4/09 by emsed1]

Originally posted by emsed1


I was thinking about this very question last night in a lodge meeting during a particularly rousing discussion about whether the motion to donate $200 to a local event was a motion unto itself or whether it was an amendment to the original motion to donate $100, notwithstanding the second of the second motion without discussion on the first motion.

Wherewith the party of the first part, rather then withdrawing his original motion declared a point of order that the second motion was an amendment, rather than a wholly independent issue, therefore we should vote to approve the second motion as an amendment first and then discuss and vote on the original motion if amended to include the increased amount from the second motion.................

Robert's Rules of Order....gotta love 'em!

This sort of stuff is exactly why the newer "Traditional Observance Lodges" don't even discuss business at their regular communications. Instead, the focus on esoteric Masonic education, and business is taken care of by the elected officers at a different meeting.

reply to post by Masonic Light


Good to still see your still around ML! I remember when I was a baby member here at ATS and would post some silly things about Masonry. Instead of blast me into the ground you were objective and shared information, so I thank you for that.

I've sense then moved to a private study of the subject like I said earlier. Take care!