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.
Originally posted by moltquedelo
Not forcebly, when its about to "classify" (as you said) somebody as "good" or "evil" person I think its really about "personal feeling" and "personal experience".
And no I not playing semantics, its just that maybe you are a bit mind #ed with your massonic "knowledge" (trust, morals, etc) that doesn't let you understand simple and logical things like those.
Furthermore there is a rather stupid guy on this very page that is having refrence to nazi #, vril program, massonic being some kind of slave of illuminati and stuff and all you think to do asking me question because I critisized fm and nobody really reacted to his post but to mine. This is kinda funny.
Originally posted by Schrödinger
Should we also have taken the Nazis words for what REALLY went on inside Nazi Germany?
We have to assume that the Masons testifying on their fraternities behalf, is biased, subjective and have an agenda of promoting their fraternity in a good way.
Originally posted by Schrödinger
You are totally avoiding my point.
You need none-masons to speak your case, not masons.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by moltquedelo
Not forcebly, when its about to "classify" (as you said) somebody as "good" or "evil" person I think its really about "personal feeling" and "personal experience".
I did not mention anything about evil. I asked you a rather direct question on what you would call someone who acted the way I described.
And no I not playing semantics, its just that maybe you are a bit mind #ed with your massonic "knowledge" (trust, morals, etc) that doesn't let you understand simple and logical things like those.
Insulting me with vulgarities really goes a long way into displaying your regards to others and their opinions. I am not quite sure how trust and morals causes lapses of logic as well.
Furthermore there is a rather stupid guy on this very page that is having refrence to nazi #, vril program, massonic being some kind of slave of illuminati and stuff and all you think to do asking me question because I critisized fm and nobody really reacted to his post but to mine. This is kinda funny.
Maybe because he was being sarcastic and I recognized it as such.
edit on 23-1-2011 by AugustusMasonicus because: Networkdude has no beer
Originally posted by moltquedelo
Ok.. I would call him a guy "helping the community" then Would you call a doctor a "good person" ? there are doctor doing this job to save people, they are doctor just trying to make as much $ as possible, there are doctor doing both in the same time. Sorry but your question means nothing to me.
Logic may goes far beyond trust and morals and sometimes trust and morals stops were logic starts (think about this one). Trust and morals are fake concepts. Eventualy words like legitimity, honnor, virtue sounds ok to me but trust and moral definitly not.
You're entirely correct. You don't need to be in a group to do great things. But if you are in a group, working together to do great things, there's a higher chance of accomplishing those thing than if you were working alone.
Originally posted by DeadCanadian
Masons may be "good" guys but great guys don't need to waste time with rituals, they are too busy out doing great things for the world. You don't need to be in a secret group to do great or even good things, and being in a secret group doesn't make you better than other people (though no Mason here has claimed to be better than non-Masons).
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by Schrödinger
You are totally avoiding my point.
You need none-masons to speak your case, not masons.
And you totally avoided the first part of my solution, which would provide the pure non-Mason viewpoint, and you also avoided, to a lesser degree, the second part. They were non-Masons with doubts prior to joining. Either you feel they are telling the truth or you feel that they are liars. Your choice.
edit on 23-1-2011 by AugustusMasonicus because: Networkdude has no beer
Originally posted by Schrödinger
No I am not, what I am reffering to "the upper echelon" og a "global conspiracy" cannot be refuted. That is the flaw with the theory. And the reason it will for all I know always be a theory.
You are right, if we are talking simple things that can be confirmed or denied. However that is not what I am talking about.