"Terrified of Freemasons" - bizzare claims in Sydney Water legal case

"Terrified of Freemasons" - bizzare claims in Sydney Water legal case

www.smh. com.au

THE entrepreneur who plans to bottle and market Sydney water internationally attempted yesterday to have a Supreme Court trial judge disqualified, on the grounds the judge refused to say if he was Jewish or a Freemason.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I thought this would be of interest to ATSers who think Jews and Freemasons rule the world. While I dont share that belief there are plenty who do and apparently its even relevant for Judges in a court of law!

www.smh. com.au

reply to post by Skyfloating


he is obviously afraid of everyone finding out he is also a shapeshifting reptilian from center earth. Those guys have gotten themselves into some pretty high up spots. Why, you have Obama, Bush, and all the other world leaders who are jewish freemason reptilians. Not surprising at all.

He also said the NSW Treasurer, Eric Roozendaal, one of the two shareholding ministers in Sydney Water, had used masonic code in a picture published in the Herald in January because his ''eyes were looking up - that's an imitation of Jesus - it's a masonic code''.

now that is a new one on me. all who look up are sending secret masonic code.

Originally posted by network dude
now that is a new one on me. all who look up are sending secret masonic code.

Big Al says dogs can't look up, and they are man's best friend.

Ergo; reptilians are the real enemies of dogs and the whole cats/Egypt thing is a ruse.

-m0r

reply to post by m0r1arty


you may have figured this whole thing out.

amazing! Dogs will fight the final battle against the reptilians after we are all vaporized by chemtrails. These conspiracies are starting to fall into place now.

This shows us how mainstream ATS-Topics have become.

Oh come on how could anyone miss this quote!

''I'm terrified of the Freemasons'' because ''they must conceal the crimes of their brother masons'', Mr Makucha said.

Jews, Freemasons, are a very shifty bunch. Now Jewish Freemasons are a whole different ballpark.

OMG, what the hell is the legal system coming to when stuff like this is taken seriously . America can you please hurry up an collapse before we get infected with more of your dumb ass BS.

Originally posted by kwakakev
OMG, what the hell is the legal system coming to when stuff like this is taken seriously

. America can you please hurry up an collapse before we get infected with more of your dumb ass BS.

um......

Sydney Water Corporation

I don't want to bring up things like ......facts.....but this happened in another country. I am not sure where. Some far off place called Sydney. Ever heard of it?

This guy's definetly a member of ATS. Where else would he get his information from? I wouldn't be suprised. I'm not trying to say that we're all nutcases but I've seen more than a few around here who would side with this guy.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Actually, I see no problem with him asking. An elected or appointed public official should have to reveal their affiliations. It could become significant later in the proceedings, so why not get it out of the way upfront?

I don't know any Masons that won't admit to the fact? I am proud of my affiliations, and they do serve to define me in certain aspects.

reply to post by getreadyalready


Since he is appearing as a judge, his judge-credentials are relevant, not his private hobbies.

Of course, if it were a trial against Freemasonry, then it would actually become relevant, wouldnt it...

reply to post by getreadyalready


What does being Jewish have to do with any affiliation and being tried fairly? I can see the request being made for Masons (for whatever reason) but asking if someone if they're Jewish has nothing to do with anything. That's like saying you can't be tried by a Christian because you are or are not Christian, or you can't be tried by a white guy because you are or are not white.

Can you imagine if every person in the world had the chance to pick their own judge?

It makes no sense, the guy's just a nutcase and it has nothing to do with being tried fairly.

reply to post by Skyfloating


reply to post by Portugoal



What if the guy on trial is an anti-Semite? Can the judge really be impartial? What if the guy on trial is going to use Masonic conspiracy stuff as part of his defense? Can the judge really be impartial? Even with his inside knowledge?

What if the guy is just crazy and doesn't trust a judge that is any particular type. He is guaranteed a fair and unbiased trial, so if he doesn't believe he can get one, then he should seek legal recourse for acquiring a new judge.

I am a Mason, and I still think it is a relavent question. I think we should know as much as possible about somebody that is going to sit on a bench and decide our fate! I mean really, the judge could be making life and death decisions regarding this man! His religion and his political affiliations and his private clubs and hobbies should be relavent.

If the tables were turned, the Judge might want to know the suspects affiliations. There is a thread up right now where a judge ordered a hysterectomy for a woman, despite her objections, and he found her incompetent due to her fanatical religious beliefs. It happens all the time when Jehovah's Witnesses won't accept blood transfusions.

Actually, Paul Makucha is right on the mark. What use is Freemasonry (Judaism) without the accompanying politics? Otherwise, no one would want to convert. Paul has a right to weed out special interest groups who may be closed minded due to local political agendas.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
What if the guy on trial is an anti-Semite? Can the judge really be impartial? What if the guy on trial is going to use Masonic conspiracy stuff as part of his defense? Can the judge really be impartial? Even with his inside knowledge?

I guess everyone that stands in front of a judge asks himself: "What if the judge is biased". We can only hope that judges are trained to be unbiased...especially SUPREME COURT judges. However, my understanding is that this trial has something to do with Sydney Water and not with Jews in Freemasons.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Oh sure it is entirely irrelavent, and the financier is completely irrational in his fear of Freemasons, but the motion was because the Judge refused to answer the question. I think that motion has some merit. How can a Judge be impartial, and refuse to answer such a question? What is he hiding?

If the Judge had said, "Yes, I am a Jewish Freemason, but that is irrelavent to this case," then I would be on the Judge's side, LOL! I just have an issue with an elected or appointed official not being honest and open about their affiliations.

As a matter of fact, I am really considering a local political run in 2012, and my association as a Freemason will be a key aspect of my platform, LOL! We haven't had a "Masonic" candidate in a long time.

reply to post by getreadyalready


A bit off topic but just curious... So you plan to run under a "Masonic Party" rather than as a Dem or Rep.?

reply to post by Portugoal


No, but it has been done before. It has crossed my mind though. Instead, I will probably run as Independent with Tea Party and Masonic support. If I run at all. It is quite a commitment and risk, and my wife is not on board with it yet.

To keep us on topic, most Judges are non-politically affiliated. They typically are "conservative' or "liberal" in their rulings, and even that is controversial. If a Judge were a Freemason, depending on my crime, as a Freemason myself, I may or may not want to go in front of such a Judge. Sometimes we are harder on ourselves than we would be an outsider.

If I was guilty of the crime and I knew the evidence would support it, I probably would not want a Masonic judge. If I was innocent and/or the evidence was shaky, I might want a Masonic judge on the off-chance that he would keep the prosecution to very strict interpretations and limit their ability to speculate or storytell.

I don't think a Masonic Judge would ever be partial, but those gray areas can be tricky and just a little nudge toward a broad or a strict interpretation of the law could really make or break a case!