Freemason Charlie Rangel convicted of fraud

I understand where my brothers are coming from in their responses regarding Freemasonry and secrecy. But I disagree slightly. And I suspect those with whom I disagree will be the first to say, "Well, that's his opinion..." That's Freemasonry for you.

Freemasonry presents to its members a system of morality. That system is illustrated by symbols and veiled in allegory. But I think every Mason would agree that the Fraternity places a high value on keeping your word and keeping confidences. Every Mason has to come to his own understanding of the reasons for what happens and what the symbolism of the Fraternity will mean to him in the end. However, to me, it is clear that a part of the goal of Freemasonry to provide the individual with a few good men whom he can trust to come to for advice when the circumstances of his life require it.

Now, consider this. And really think about it. Would you go for advice to a man who you know will gossip about you once he has finished talking with you? The value of secrecy is that my brother can, should he deem me worthy of his confidence, come to me and pour out his heart with assurance that when our conversation is finished it will go no further. I will not let anyone know that he is worried about his ability to pay his mortgage. I won't let anyone know he found out his wife is having an affair. I won't tell others about his terminal cancer before he is ready to tell them himself. I will listen, offer my best advice, and maintain silence afterwards if that is his request.

Freemasonry uses its "formal" secrets, in my opinion (and it is, in the end, just the opinion of one Mason), as a proving ground for keeping the far more important secrets that are entrusted to a man over time through true friendship

That's one reason for the secrecy.

Another reason is that in the end, Freemasonry is a private organization. The Fraternity has always insisted that in a free society, free men should be able to meet freely in private to discuss their private affairs. Indeed, we have insisted upon it. It is, in part, why Hitler, Stalin, the government of Iran, the PR of China, the Argentinian military junta, and other despots and dictators have both hated and feared the fraternity. (And if you should judge an organization by the quality of its enemies, then Freemasonry, I should think, seems to come highly recommended.)

We station a man, armed symbolically with a sword, outside the door of our lodges not to fight off the hordes trying to get in, but, truly, to remind ourselves that we meet as Masons in a Masonic Lodge and that here, in this one place, no outsider has any right to come. We are met as brothers and will insist that we have that right -- much as your family might feel it has a right to have a "family only" meeting.

Secrecy is much babbled about.But, in truth, in Masonic terms, it is about discretion and privacy. It is about respecting tradition, keeping a brother's confidences as your own, and recognizing that some things are not anybody (or everybody) else's business.

Why is that so hard to understand?

If, truly, you want to know... If you want to learn the right way, and you are a good man, believe in God, and are otherwise eligible, come to a lodge. It is true: we look to admit -- not to exclude. We do exclude men... we took ourselves out of the reformation business long ago. If you aren't a moral man, don't bother coming. But we *want* good men to come to the Fraternity and benefit from it.

The secrecy, honestly, isn't about exclusivity or keeping "special knowledge" from the hands of the unworthy. It is simply about being appropriate in sharing private business with those who have no legitimate reason to know.

reply to post by rusethorcain


I hear what you are saying my friend. I was just trying to say that we, as Masons, are not above the law and I would expect any Mason that broke the law to pay the price and do time if the offence warrented such action. Additionally, he should be excluded from his Lodge.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

He certainly did, he knowingly and willifully hid the proceeds on several different ventures that netted him a decent sum of money. The details are in this Wall Street Journal article.

....which mean he is guilty of evading paying tax on that "decent sum of money" and I remember underestimating what I made on that summer job...deliberately. Suppose many of us rightfully should be in jail.
He was wrong, maybe he tried to take short cuts like many people do... but I don't think he is the evil pariah everyone is trying to make him out to be. Let's simplify our tax code or make criminals of ALL the guilty.
Everyone deserves a lawyer. That is our judicial system in a nutshell.

reply to post by TheLoneArcher


You are right. In essence I agree but many people willfully and deliberately underestimate their earnings. People do not volunteer unrecorded income and avoid taxes on it all the time. I don't think it makes everyone a criminal. Sure, Charlie Rangel was wrong, no doubt about it but I think the intent and effect of his crime was forgivable, Yes it was unacceptable and he deserves to be removed from his post.
This a good example why a flat tax would be better. No one who is doing their own taxes can be expected to get it right. Just too complicated I think...and again I am not giving him an excuse, only perhaps a reason.
And I would be giving him this even if he were a Republican!

reply to post by rusethorcain


That is why I am glad I am taxed at source. I then let a proffessional company file my tax return form at the end of each year. I am not smart enough to do it myself. LOL

reply to post by driley


I agree completely. You just went in depth where I skimmed the surface. But integrity amongst friends and brothers is the key. And as you said, those are the kind of men freemasonry is looking for to begin with.

Originally posted by rusethorcain
....which mean he is guilty of evading paying tax on that "decent sum of money" and I remember underestimating what I made on that summer job...deliberately.

Was this to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars overs the course of decades? The equivalancy is not the same. Also, he is in a position of trust and should know better.

Suppose many of us rightfully should be in jail.

No one mentioned jail here, only that he broke the law. He should have payed his taxes and not tried to cheat the system.

He was wrong, maybe he tried to take short cuts like many people do...

I am not following. If you think everyone is doing this then why have any lawas on the books? He committed several illeagal acts over the course of many years, just because other might be doing this does not justify his or anyone else's actions.

but I don't think he is the evil pariah everyone is trying to make him out to be.

I never siad he was evil or a pariah, only that he broke the law and I would expect him to be removed from his lodge.

Let's simplify our tax code...

I agree. A flat tax would be fantastic.

Everyone deserves a lawyer.

They certainly do, even if they choose not to utilize that option.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by rusethorcain
....which mean he is guilty of evading paying tax on that "decent sum of money" and I remember underestimating what I made on that summer job...deliberately.

Was this to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars overs the course of decades? The equivalancy is not the same. Also, he is in a position of trust and should know better.

Suppose many of us rightfully should be in jail.

No one mentioned jail here, only that he broke the law. He should have payed his taxes and not tried to cheat the system.

He was wrong, maybe he tried to take short cuts like many people do...

I am not following. If you think everyone is doing this then why have any lawas on the books? He committed several illeagal acts over the course of many years, just because other might be doing this does not justify his or anyone else's actions.

but I don't think he is the evil pariah everyone is trying to make him out to be.

I never siad he was evil or a pariah, only that he broke the law and I would expect him to be removed from his lodge.

Let's simplify our tax code...

I agree. A flat tax would be fantastic.

Everyone deserves a lawyer.

They certainly do, even if they choose not to utilize that option.

I don't know how to divide the posts like you do -find it annoying and redundant anyway but since I guess it is important to have every word there in black and white, I will give it a go.

1. A crime is a crime.
2. Nobody said you mentioned jail...a response I write might be just that "a response" and I might even throw in a new thought...each is not an invitation for you to disseminate the thought, though if you must, you must... it is not my interest to stop you from your habits.
3. Sorry you are not following...you would have got lost anyway. I was not trying to justify his crime.
4. I never said "you said" he was a pariah...threads are not only for you and I. Others are treating him so.
That statement was for the benefit of those people reading.
5. This is hard...oh wow, we agree on the flat tax....super...
6. Yes, everyone whether they choose it or not deserves legal representation. Charlie was a fool for thinking people would care that he cannot afford an attorney. Many people cannot.

No I didn't say you said people were fools or Charlie can afford an attorney...just to save you from typing.
You are young?... I take it...

Originally posted by rusethorcain
I don't know how to divide the posts like you do -find it annoying and redundant anyway but since I guess it is important to have every word there in black and white, I will give it a go.

Use the quote function, it is listed along with the other options when you reply to a thread.

Nobody said you mentioned jail...a response I write might be just that "a response" and I might even throw in a new thought...each is not an invitation for you to disseminate the thought, though if you must, you must... it is not my interest to stop you from your habits.

You you reply to my directly then I take it that anything in your post is directed to me, if you are generalizing then you may want to mention that.

You are young?... I take it...

What does this have to do with the topic? If you honestly need to know my age, U2U me and I will give it to you.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

 

The main reason I am creating this thread is to point out that there are members of the Masonic Fraternity who are not happy when other members, such as Congressman Rangel, commit acts that are not only un-Masonic but also very much illegal and will bring this to the public's attention if they did not know infact that the person in question was a Mason.

I would be the first person to ask him to either resign from Masonry or face charges of un-Masonic conduct and subsequent expulsion. His behavior is a negative influence on how Masons are perceived and it is often difficult enough to convince others of our intentions without the misdeeds of someone like the Congressman swaying their opinions to the contrary. I am curious as to how the Prince Hall Grand Lodge of New York handles this very poor lapse of judgement by the Congressman.

The ironic part of this situation is that there is a belief among some that Masons use their positions of power, if they have one, to benefit the Fraternity or its supposed agenda. This is a rather obvious case of the only person's agenda or cause to be benefitted by Congressman Rangel's illegal behavior was the Congressman himself.

He should truly be ashamed of himself, not only as a Mason, but more importantly, as some one whom the American people had placed their trust.

 

edit on 16-11-2010 by AugustusMasonicus because: Networkdude has no beer

A jurisdiction which does not eject masons like this makes a bad name for all of us.

It is shameful really.

Originally posted by HattoriHanzou
A jurisdiction which does not eject masons like this makes a bad name for all of us.

It is shameful really.

I agree, he should be expelled.

Just got this email from our local Tea Party and 9/12 Project. A large portion of the founding members of this local Tea Party are Masons from my lodge.

FLORIDA 9/12 PROJECT

We Surround Them - FLORIDA - You Are Not Alone!


A message to all members of FLORIDA 9/12 PROJECT
Many of you followed the Rangel fiasco and watched how arrogant
this man was about the things he had committed against the people in
America, how he walked out of the room. Now, he wants his constituents
to call the White House and ask that he not be punished. WHAT! Read this
www.rollcall.com...
and call Washington and ask them to treat Charlie Rangel, just as
they would treat any other citizen of the USA. Give him what is coming
to him according to the laws he broke, while holding an office in the
United States Congress.

The Masons are certainly not stepping up to defend this guy or give him any special consideration, and instead we are demanding that he be held accountable for his actions the same way everyone should!

This is an interesting thread, lots of good info, thanks.

A rich man actually got found guilty of wrongdoing? Good! More of that please.

I don't understand the freemason connection though. Agreed that freemasons (as with us all) need to value trust highly, and this guy broke everyone's trust. But what is the relevance of freemasonry? It's not indemnity of any sort, even though the system is sometimes taken advantage of by members. No different to any other organisation. And yes, misconduct of this sort should get immediate life banning from any civilised institution.

Are you suggesting that they could have covered up for him should they have wished?

Originally posted by harryhaller
But what is the relevance of freemasonry?

The relevance is that he is to hold himself to a higher standard and failed to do so and therefore should be expelled from Masonry. It is bad enough having to listen to fictitious accounts of Masonic-misdeeds without having a criminal like Mr. Rangel stain the whole fraternity with his illicit behavior.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Ok, i hear you and agree with that entirely.

Perhaps i'm missing something, from the links posted, there's nothing to suggest he was a mason, or that masonry had any part in the affair. Was he well known as a mason?

thanks

Originally posted by harryhaller
.Perhaps i'm missing something, from the links posted, there's nothing to suggest he was a mason, or that masonry had any part in the affair. Was he well known as a mason?

Yes, Charlie Rangel is a Prince Hall Freemason in the New York jurisdiction.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I've never actually seen Masons publicly defend another Mason found in wrong doing.. we didn't defend Kramer and he was one of the Scottish Rite's poster childs.

I'd even say that when something like this happens, other masons tend to feel personally insulted by their actions, especially as their actions would often reflect on our entire community.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
I've never actually seen Masons publicly defend another Mason found in wrong doing.. we didn't defend Kramer and he was one of the Scottish Rite's poster childs.

I'd even say that when something like this happens, other masons tend to feel personally insulted by their actions, especially as their actions would often reflect on our entire community.

Exactly. I found both instances to be personally repugnant. I heard earlier today that Michael Richards had done that previously as part of his 'act' and this was only brought to everyone's attention due to someone recording him in the midst of his 'performance'.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Thanks. I guess the good life is over for him in many ways.
peace

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by harryhaller
.Perhaps i'm missing something, from the links posted, there's nothing to suggest he was a mason, or that masonry had any part in the affair. Was he well known as a mason?

Yes, Charlie Rangel is a Prince Hall Freemason in the New York jurisdiction.

Hey! In Florida, we don't recognize Prince Hall Masons, so I am not associated with this guy at all!

I just learned this past week when inquiring about the Prince Hall status that it isn't the Free and Accepted Masons that are blocking acceptance of Prince Hall. It is the other way around! I guess the Prince Hall in our state hasn't wanted to negotiate a way to recognize one another. Who would thunk it? All the accusations of racism against us poor F&AM, and all along it has been REVERSE racism that has been the issue.