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.

 

Is the Statue of Liberty Masonic?

page: 8
8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78


what secret societies? You keep bringing up the masons here and using that link to justify your paranoid delusions, and then you make statements like this claiming to know all about some deeply ingrained symbol for freedom? Really? And as for your evidence, it is opinion only. The only thing it can be used as evidence of, is that you need help.


The statue of liberty is masonic, masons built another version called "the statue of freedom" it's the same figure, same lady liberty.

Your quotes...


how is it possible that a statue commissioned in 1855 was made to challenge a statue that wasn't thought of until 1865?


What do you mean how is it possible ? Because it was a commun concept among masonry that is how it is possible, as evidence "the statue of freedom" was built before and same figure as "statue of liberty"

The statue of freedom was made also by a mason.

Does this answer your question ?
edit on 18-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)


OK, granted I have only been a mason for 5 years, and I am sure I don't understand all of the symbology and teachings of the craft, but I am quite sure I would know about they "symbol for freedom" of there was such a thing in masonry. A statue of a women is referred to, but in a completely different context, and with a completely different meaning. You could learn a lot from Socrates.




posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   


OK, granted I have only been a mason for 5 years, and I am sure I don't understand all of the symbology and teachings of the craft, but I am quite sure I would know about they "symbol for freedom" of there was such a thing in masonry. A statue of a women is referred to, but in a completely different context, and with a completely different meaning. You could learn a lot from Socrates.


There is nothing to understand in a complicated way, it's simple. The two statues are the representation of the same roman goddess. Bolth statues designed by masons. It shows that it was a popular figure among masonry.

So you are forgeting one element, it was not an idea of who it would be as in what goddess, but rather how should she be dresed, depicted and what elements she should have on her. The notion of Libertas came from masonry, the notion of how she is depicted came from individual masons thinking.



A statue of a women is referred to, but in a completely different context, and with a completely different meaning. You could learn a lot from Socrates.

She is made in another posture, then yes that is true, but she is the same identical Libertas.

Initialy they wanted to make the statue of liberty with a cup in her hand, a cup of wine, but then they thought of enlightment and made her a torch. This are postures and representations of what she stood for, it does not change who she is.




edit on 18-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Now as I was saying before

The lady that sits at the top of the capitol building.


Lady Liberty, she wears the ring of 12 stars on her head as seen in the above picture. In other words this:


perdurabo10.tripod.com...
She is a beautiful motherly figure, with golden hair and wearing a crown of 12 stars.



Now here is the EU flag, 12 stars ring just like lady liberty is wearing.


It is clear that people in the background are running everything, for the union, for the collective, the New world order. It is organisations such as freemasonry and others that are pulling the strings behind the curtain.
Of course everything for a New World Order.

edit on 18-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

It is clear that people in the background are running everything, for the union, for the collective, the New world order. It is organisations such as freemasonry and others that are pulling the strings behind the curtain.
Of course everything for a New World Order.


Pepsi has a lot of caffeine. Too much of it can make you hyper and impose the false belief that building statues based on spiritual principles equals wanting to tyrannize the world.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 12:18 PM
link   


Pepsi has a lot of caffeine. Too much of it can make you hyper and impose the false belief that building statues based on spiritual principles equals wanting to tyrannize the world.

I don't drink coffee, I haven't for a very long time, now about statues, that is the EU flag is it not ?

edit on 18-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

I don't drink coffee, I haven't for a very long time, now about statues, that is the EU flag is it not ?


I did not mention coffee. I mentioned pepsi. You do drink pepsi, dont you? Diet or Pure? Caffeine-Free or Real?

As for the 12-stars: You might be right. I dont know, I havent examined the topic. I can however assure you that being interested in eso-mytho-philosophical symbolism does not imply tyrannical tendencies.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 09:58 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Pepsi, please read:


Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow"), in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.[1] In a non sequitur, the conclusion can be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All formal fallacies are special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition. Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many different types of logical fallacies.

The term is often used in everyday speech and reasoning to describe a statement in which premise and conclusion are totally unrelated but which is used as if they were. An example might be: "If I buy this cell phone, all people will love me." However, there is no direct relation between buying a cell phone and the love of all people. This kind of reasoning is often used in advertising to trigger an emotional purchase.

Two examples include:

-"If you do not buy this type of pet food, you are neglecting your dog." (Premise and conclusion are once again unrelated; this is also an example of an appeal to emotion.)
-"I hear the rain falling outside my window; therefore, the sun is not shining." (The conclusion is a non-sequitur because the sun can shine while it is raining.)

The fallacy of the undistributed middle is a logical fallacy that is committed when the middle term in a categorical syllogism is not distributed. It is thus a syllogistic fallacy. More specifically it is also a form of non sequitur.

The fallacy of the undistributed middle takes the following form:

All Zs are Bs.
Y is a B.
Therefore, Y is a Z.

It may or may not be the case that "all Zs are Bs," but in either case it is irrelevant to the conclusion. What is relevant to the conclusion is whether it is true that "all Bs are Zs," which is ignored in the argument.

Note that if the terms were swapped around in the first co-premise or if the first premise was rewritten to "Only Zs can be Bs" then it would no longer be a fallacy, although it could still be unsound. This also holds for the following two logical fallacies which are similar in nature to the fallacy of the undistributed middle and also non sequiturs.

An example can be given as follows:

Men are human.
Mary is human.
Therefore, Mary is a man.

This is what you are doing constantly.



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLordVeack
post removed by staff


Here's what actually happens.


post removed by staff


I've seen "Masons are controlling the world", "Masons are Satanists", "Masons are child molesters", the list goes on and on, from members in good standing on this board, posts still in pristine condition.

I've also seen members who seem to drop off the face of the earth, leaving nothing behind but their names attached to multiple posts replaced by Extreme T&C Violation, Off-Topic Post and Manners & Decorum around here. I think they may have you looking at the wrong relationship.


post removed by staff


To paraphrase KSigMason: why are Masons the only moderators not allowed to have opinions?

Moderators are members just like any other; in fact, their belief in the ATS system is why they sign up for such a job. In the interest of fairness, they do not moderate threads in which they participate, recusing themselves from the powers of their position while representing their opinions. That's site policy, and Sky has followed it to the letter. Seems like you're trying to exploit his position to either begrudge him his opinion or bolster a conspiracy theory.


post removed by staff


Why don't you check for their names, and see how they conducted themselves as members? The answer to that probably has some sway in the matter too.
edit on Sun Jun 19 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLordVeack
 

You should be ashamed of slandering the professionalism of the moderators on this site. They have done nothing to take on such an attack. Percentage wise, the amount of Moderators who are Masons is small.

Of course though, being a Moderator doesn't stop them from posting their opinions on a certain thread. Most moderators however do say they will not moderate a thread they are posting in. That seems pretty fair to me. I have yet to see a post of yours deleted. I've had posts deleted and I've been reprimanded for breaking the rules. I'm guessing those who were banned that bitched about the mods didn't mention the rulest hey broke, but rather tip-toed around that issue and minimized their infraction to make them sound like a victim.

I do notice that you are still here as well as Pepsi and several others who slander my Fraternity. It seems your theory doesn't hold up.

YouTube? That is your evidence? HA!!!! Any idiot with a webcam can make a video and post it on there. YouTube is not evidence. Do you actually have any evidence that Moderators come in and clean house?



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLordVeack
 

Well the Mods are entitled to their opinions, but you were not reprimanded for having such an opposing view.

I have been banned from ClubConspiracy several times by one of their super mods that only bans me because she can. The only time I've seen someone banned or reprimanded on this site is for breaking the rules and not heeding warnings to stop breaking the rules. I haven't been here as long as some, but I've been here a while.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by KSigMason
 

I'm a newbie who hasn't been on here for as long as your good self but believe me when I say that I have some genuine questions and concerns about freemasonry and find these threads made by masons extremely interesting. I think we can both agree that sometimes its hard to criticise a stance without ridiculing those making that stance, no matter who is making it or what they represent. Would you agree?
I question freemasonry because I dont understand the mind set of those who are members or why they find it so important, I hope not to fall into the trap of making it a personal slanging match. Ksigmason, I'm sure, is a honourable pleasant person- I just dont agree with his/yours views on the fraternity but then I wouldn't as I'm outside looking in wondering what its all about! . I'm not out to make enemies of the masons on this site just to try and get some inkling on what its all about. And when trying to figure that out I may poke fun or be sarcastic at times but its just my way of trying to get my point across. I hope you get where I'm coming from? If not then it would be easier if I just apologised for ruffling your feathers and moved on.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLordVeack
 

I was listening to a History Channel special and someone mentioned something very similar to what you said about being on the outside looking in. From an outsiders perspective I'm sure our system looks extremely weird. I won't lie, when I first joined there were some parts of the ceremony that I thought were goofy.

I don't mind the questions being asked at all. I encourage the questions, just not anything I might perceive as a unnecessary attack on something I am a part of. I have soldiers always asking me questions about it, some think it is weird/strange, some think nothing of it, and a few have made it known that I am a bad person for being a Mason. Ironically the latter soldier also has accused me of nepotism and favoritism in my instruction, yet I have never failed him (even before he knew I was a Mason). Although he hates Freemasonry based off religious prejudice.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Proving if it was built,designed,thought of, stolen, painted,funded etc by the Masons far from 'Proves' it's a 'Masonic Symbol'

there is nothing 'On' the statue that is 'Masonic', i know the 'Corner Stone' was dedicated from the Masons who had a ceremony but on the statue itself

i'm sure the Masons built quite a many Buildings/Statues

that doesn't mean 'Masons' are the Globalist Elite, nor does it mean that 'Masons' are the 'Illuminati/NWO'

now those people may be 'Masons' but chances are they are 'Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, Skull N Crossbones' Likewise,



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by KSigMason
 

I am sorry that this is all you got to add, thank you for your enlighting non founded facts.



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 

Lady Liberty was popular among masons, of course she is a masonic icon, it's why the masons ivested in the statue. She was an adopted icon long before they built any statues at all. This can be concluded by the masonic art work done along the time line before anything like the statue of liberty came to be.
It's why they built two statues that resemble the same figure.

edit on 19-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2011 @ 07:49 AM
link   


Image from the french revolution.
La Liberté ou la Mort, meaning Liberty(lady liberty as depicted in the picture) or father Saturn (death)

Here she, lady liberty depicted in a masonic art work, she is holding a masonic plumbline and in the other hand
the cap of liberty among father time Saturn.



edit on 19-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join