Originally posted by Shadow18433
Why don't you talk about your most interesting imaginary friend, Appak...

Dude, you really gotta let it go. Here's a recent photo of Appak to prove he's not the same guy.


(As you can see, I'm slowly working towards a "Masons of ATS" calendar... If anyone has any requests, let me know...)

[edit on 9/3/2009 by JoshNorton]

Originally posted by Shadow18433
Why don't you talk about your most interesting imaginary friend, Appak...

He could not have been too imaginery since he joined in February of 2006 and I joined much later in 2007. maybe you want to check your facts.

We all know his farewell thread '' A Mason about to expose ALL the secrets '' is a HOAX.

A hoax in what regard? That he really did not contract cancer and die? Dispicable insinuation on your part, your lack of compassion goes a long way to display your moral composition.

you sacrified his account to use him as a martyr for using his last posts as a propaganda strategy to protect freemasonry.

Once again, I am very willing to have the moderators investigate my account to determine if any of the persons you have accused me of being (Appak, MasonicLight, Patricia, JoshNorton, Runespider, Networkdude) has any basis in reality. Please, report me to the moderators with this complaint and we can resolve this quickly. I do not think you will as you know that you are fabricating this to cover your own multiple screen name fiasco.

and...., about your imaginary foes, i don't know if it's a fixation or is it a strategy to derail the attention from AugustusAppak' HOAX...

You would have a better chance of trying to cover yourself on this one if you at least changed your very noticable posting style.

Originally posted by Shadow18433
this post earned almost '' 50 stars ''

Including a star from me. It has however turned into a rather interesting thread and there appears to be a very lively discussion. Is not lively discussion what 'Gentlemen Conspiracy Theoristes' do on a conspiracy site?

Originally posted by Shadow18433
The only reason Masons get away, even if the do not respect the rules here is because they have their brothers moderators to save their ass.

Yes, because some months ago I wasn't reprimanded or anything. When they still did the point system I was reduced big time. All I did too was be rude. So the whole Masons control the forum idea is bull #.

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
They see themselves as some sort of elite family who are putting the world to rights. Any family member would protect their own from outside criticism!

To posture that you know the internal thoughts of anyone else is the hieght of arrogance and pomposity. Show me one quote where any of us tried to place ourselves above any other person solely on our Fraternal membership and I will be the first to denounce this stance.

Originally posted by Shadow18433

I AM ASHAMED OF WHAT ATS AS BECOME...

A MASONIC PROPAGANDA TEMPLE...
TO PROTECT AND RECRUIT FOR FREEMASONRY...!

Just wow. You only came to ATS in 17-7-2009, and you already are this upset? Shouting at us? Please, calm down. That is unless you were someone else before................................hmm

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
They see themselves as some sort of elite family who are putting the world to rights. Any family member would protect their own from outside criticism!

To posture that you know the internal thoughts of anyone else is the hieght of arrogance and pomposity. Show me one quote where any of us tried to place ourselves above any other person solely on our Fraternal membership and I will be the first to denounce this stance.

You do this quite a lot. In fact it's becoming a standard response. . . You put words in peoples mouths! Where did I say that you masons try to place yourselves over others? I quite simply didn't say it. What I did say, to coin a phrase is, "Birds Of A Feather Flock Together". I'm saying you stick together and protect one another. Nothing arrogant or pompous about that is there?

I worry about you sometimes Augustus! Just how many times can you misread or misinterpret someones posting before it seems you're doing it on purpose?

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
They see themselves as some sort of elite family who are putting the world to rights.

These are you words, not anything I put in your mouth and I think it is extremely hard to miconstrue them. I do not see myself, or any other Mason a spart of an elite group or family nor would I ever say that. If you did not mean that then I apologize for misunderstanding you but it sems rather hard to read this any other way then you feel Masons somehow consider themselves 'above' everyone else.

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
...I use the word elite because you masons say you take an ordinary man and make him better.

The initiate is only given the tools and lessons to improve himself, it is incumbant upon him to utilize them and improve himself. He can however count on us for moral support when the need arises.

If the masons are full of men who have been made better than us ordinary non masons then they/you are the elite.

I certainly do not consider myself 'elite' or better then anyone simply because I am a Mason or part of the Fraternity. I am just as flawed as the next person and there is plenty of room for my own self-improvement.

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I don't believe these claims but it would be nice to hear masons stand up and argue the point instead of replying that the accusation is to silly and ridiculous to be given a answer.

Why argue a point that doesn't bear scrutiny? All that does is lend undeserved credence to the person making the initial unfounded assertion while putting Masons in the position of being viewed by others as 'the laddie doth protest too much'.

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I don't believe these claims but it would be nice to hear masons stand up and argue the point instead of replying that the accusation is to silly and ridiculous to be given a answer.

Why argue a point that doesn't bear scrutiny? All that does is lend undeserved credence to the person making the initial unfounded assertion while putting Masons in the position of being viewed by others as 'the laddie doth protest too much'.

I would say the opposite. You either stand up for the fraternity and argue with those who wish to blacken it's name, no matter what the subject is, or you ignore all accusations. I don't think you should pick and choose what to defend against! Once you start that game you leave yourself open to all manner of accusations especially if you go silent on accusations of child abuse. Like I said earlier, I think the masons have their priorities wrong. If someone accused me of being in league with the devil I would shrug my shoulders and say think what you want, but if someone dared accuse me of having anything to do with child abuse I would go crazy and make sure that no one made that particular accusation again. Maybe it's something to do with the whole masonic ethos. . ? Maybe being a mason and taking the degrees removes the ability to get angry and fight back? Maybe it just makes you more even tempered and laid back? If this is the case then it is just another reason to be suspicious of it. . .

You are contradicitng yourself.

First:

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
You either stand up for the fraternity and argue with those who wish to blacken it's name, no matter what the subject is...

Then:

If someone accused me of being in league with the devil I would shrug my shoulders and say think what you want, but if someone dared accuse me of having anything to do with child abuse I would go crazy and make sure that no one made that particular accusation again.

(bold is mine)

Are you going to argue every point or are you going to let the obviously ridiculous wash off your back?

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I would say the opposite. You either stand up for the fraternity and argue with those who wish to blacken it's name, no matter what the subject is, or you ignore all accusations. I don't think you should pick and choose what to defend against!

Do you honestly know ANYONE who's that polarized? That black and white with no give inbetween?

Once you start that game you leave yourself open to all manner of accusations especially if you go silent on accusations of child abuse. Like I said earlier, I think the masons have their priorities wrong. If someone accused me of being in league with the devil I would shrug my shoulders and say think what you want, but if someone dared accuse me of having anything to do with child abuse I would go crazy and make sure that no one made that particular accusation again. Maybe it's something to do with the whole masonic ethos. . ? Maybe being a mason and taking the degrees removes the ability to get angry and fight back? Maybe it just makes you more even tempered and laid back? If this is the case then it is just another reason to be suspicious of it. . .

How about this? If someone accuses me of being in league with the devil I can laugh it off for any number of reasons. Perhaps I don't believe in a devil? Perhaps since the devil is a non-corporial, nebulous concept it doesn't matter to me. Perhaps because there are no laws against devil worship, even if they were right I've done no wrong. Taking that position, allowing us to stretch our argument muscles a bit, we lose nothing. If an individual Mason unsuccessfully makes his argument that Masons don't worship the devil, what has he really lost?

On the other hand accusations of child abuse bring up all sorts of legal definitions. There are laws against child abuse. There are specific actions that when reviewed by a court of law would be labeled child abuse. It's not so nebulous. Nobody denies the existence of child abuse in the world. It's a very real thing, and thus that much more dangerous to argue. On the one hand, the accuser has to bear much more weight, and I think that's where it falls apart on ATS. If someone were to make blanket statements about Masons abusing children, they're more easily dismissed because we all know in a court of law someone making such a charge would have to have proof. And nobody posting on ATS has proof of anything. (Ah, the joys of a conspiracy site.) It's really easy for me to blow off someone making accusations of child abuse because we know what that is, we know that it can and should be tried in a court of law, and if it hasn't been, then we can assume the accuser didn't meet their burden of proof. What's there for us to argue? How can you prove a negative? How could you, Mintwithahole, prove to anyone on ATS that you don't abuse children at your neighborhood park? You can't. So why would you try?

[edit on 9/5/2009 by JoshNorton]