Masonic Inquisition- pass/fail

Neon,

strange picture. I see what you mean!!

A question, do masons really act dead in a cofin then come alive again? (I got no answer last time)

Also as in From Hell do Masons really have blood drawn from them via a sharp object? if so what has that got to do with anything? why do you need to draw blood?

Also the picture of a mason on the other thread with his trouser leg pulled up and noose over his neck and blind fold. What the hell is that for? I have a pretty good sense on me and I sense weirdness when I saw that picture. It made me feel uncomfortable.

Originally posted by 7th_Chakra
Neon,

strange picture. I see what you mean!!

A question, do masons really act dead in a cofin then come alive again? (I got no answer last time)

Also as in From Hell do Masons really have blood drawn from them via a sharp object? if so what has that got to do with anything? why do you need to draw blood?

Also the picture of a mason on the other thread with his trouser leg pulled up and noose over his neck and blind fold. What the hell is that for? I have a pretty good sense on me and I sense weirdness when I saw that picture. It made me feel uncomfortable.

No, Masons do not act dead in a coffin and come alive again. I can't comment more as it would involve discussion of the ritual.

No, we do not have blood drawn... that was a movie, and an exaggeration of a point made in ritual.

The picture is actually a copyright violation, and a discussion of what it represents would be a violation of my obligation.

Sorry about that.

Interesting,

a copyright for who? the picture taker or the poster or both?

So no sword or compass to the heart to draw blood (not the heart directly of course)?. Phew, I was getting worried there because thats just messed up (to me).

I haven't seen the movie you write of, so no guess.
The sword and compass-?

The other stuff- yep. How it is.

My "guess" is there is no copyright. I can't SEE how.

Don't forget, "tongue torn out by its roots"

The picute is scanned from a book, and as such, is a copyright violation of the owner of the image, the person IN the image, the author of the book, and of the publisher...

No sweat. Lawyers have been notified. It was upon this issue FW's chatroom was orinignally closed down... SIX TIMES. In due time, I will notify the mods here that the image is a copyrighted image and that they should cause it to be removed to avoid any problems, since it is not THEY who are responsible.

AS for the rest, since we know that Pubicgadfly is not a mason, his opinion is of no value.

theron dunn how typical you get cornered and start throwing threats about lawyers.
There is a paragraph in the copyright law that states fair use, if there is no income or it has something to do with education we can show pictures of what we want.
You are just unhappy that we are getting information out about you little club.

Geese you never stop to amaze me I will run an tell my mother you have a picture of some 1st degree initiation ritual, GROW UP!

Bilbo

Originally posted by NeonHelmet
There is a paragraph in the copyright law that states fair use, if there is no income or it has something to do with education we can show pictures of what we want.
You are just unhappy that we are getting information out about you little club.

But, aren't you supposed to credit your source...just asking

DTOM yes i am and i have, credited the site i took the picture from, how the F*** should i know which book the picture is from if i have never read it.
So i did my PART i linked to the SITE!

Bilbo

Originally posted by NeonHelmet
theron dunn how typical you get cornered and start throwing threats about lawyers.
There is a paragraph in the copyright law that states fair use, if there is no income or it has something to do with education we can show pictures of what we want.
You are just unhappy that we are getting information out about you little club.

Geese you never stop to amaze me I will run an tell my mother you have a picture of some 1st degree initiation ritual, GROW UP!

Bilbo

TYPICAL? Now THAT is slanderous. I have NEVER tossed around threats. I mentioned that the use of the image, without attribution, published without permission, is NOT in any way shape manner or form considered fair use.

I stated that the use of that image, and others like it, including my own image, was used illegally by FW, and as a result, SIX of their chatrooms were dismantled. I stated that I was going to let the MODS HERE know of the issue, so that they could take appropriate action, and noted that I did not feel they were in any way responsible.

I did NOT issue a threat, not veiled, not implied. For myself, I do not care a whit whether the image is used illegally or not... however, the AUTHOR, the photographer, the publisher, and the model all have legal rights, and THEY may chose to pursue them, not me...

You need to get off your high horse and start actually reading what I post instead of skimming...

The picture is scanned from a book, and as such, is a copyright violation of the owner of the image, the person IN the image, the author of the book, and of the publisher...

I am really not in the mood for arguing, but there are no patent on you little masonry, also all pictures can be used under the �fair use law� you made a threat the second you said you had notified some lawyer.

Lawyers have been notified. It was upon this issue � In due time, I will notify the mods here that the image is a copyrighted image and that they should cause it to be removed to avoid any problems, since it is not THEY who are responsible.

Note: Edited By NH

Second threat I am running to tell the mods because I can�t stand to watch my sick perverted rituals being exposed.

So I see 2 threats the potential lawsuit and you running off to tell the mods.

What was it I didn�t read?

The "fair use" exemption to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. That's important so that copyright law doesn't block your freedom to express your own works -- only the ability to express other peoples. Intent and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to register at the New York Times web site? The first is probably fair use, the others probably aren't.
Fair use is usually a short excerpt and almost always attributed. (One should not use more of the work than is necessary to make the commentary.) It should not harm the commercial value of the work -- in the sense of people no longer needing to buy it (which is another reason why reproduction of the entire work is a problem.)

I need to double quote this!

. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you needed to in order to criticise the quality of the New York Times, or because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to register at the New York Times web site? The first is probably fair use, the others probably aren't.

LINK: www.templetons.com...

We are adding this picture to CRITICE on masonry ergo it is fair use, we didn�t use because we didn�t have time to make up our own little rituals and we didn�t use so that you didn�t have to buy the book.

I am done with you, you are trying to sabotage my thread because we a exposing you little frat club.
You sabotage all threads that have some thing anti Masonic to say, with your gossip and off topic nonsense.

I consider your final post to be a warning that you are reporting my thread so I will counter you actions and take it up with the mods my self.

Bilbo

[edit on 2-9-2004 by NeonHelmet]

Whoa.

I would say take a "chill" pill now and maybe a walk around the block. Seems like a time out is in order.

They wise ZZZ has spoken the truth again; a time out is in order I will take a walk around the block and cool down.

Bilbo

Whenever I'm too high-strung I go out for a drive, or I go have a good workout at the gym.

A little music helps, too.

more secrets?

Originally posted by theron dunn
The picute is scanned from a book, and as such, is a copyright violation of the owner of the image, the person IN the image, the author of the book, and of the publisher...
No sweat. Lawyers have been notified. It was upon this issue FW's chatroom was orinignally closed down... SIX TIMES. In due time, I will notify the mods here that the image is a copyrighted image and that they should cause it to be removed to avoid any problems, since it is not THEY who are responsible.

AS for the rest, since we know that Pubicgadfly is not a mason, his opinion is of no value.

A real �piece of work� thumbs up!

Providing a little legal advice on the side- moonlighting?
�lawyers have been . . . .�
�I do not threaten�

I love stuff like that from bearers of 'light and truth.' This kind of illuminates why rugs have mold under them, don't 'ya think?

theron
� . . . we know that Pubic - - - -

wait a minute here theron you forgot the ����L�� it is pubLic

Good shot- almost missed it- seeing as TOS violation enforcement is not one of my proclivities, it's humorous.

Besides, only the WORSHIPFUL Poo-Pah would know whether I be off or from- be that though? f.w.t.w.

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe

But, aren't you supposed to credit your source...just asking

Yeah, theron needs to be more precise. I too had a hard time with that but felt it wasn't my place to raise the issue- thanks!

theron dunn

TYPICAL? Now THAT is slanderous. I have NEVER tossed around threats. I mentioned that the use of the image, without attribution, published without permission, is NOT in any way shape manner or form considered fair use.

I stated that the use of that image, and others like it, including my own image, was used illegally by FW, and as a result, SIX of their chatrooms were dismantled. I stated that I was going to let the MODS HERE know of the issue, so that they could take appropriate action, and noted that I did not feel they were in any way responsible.

I did NOT issue a threat, not veiled, not implied. For myself, I do not care a whit whether the image is used illegally or not... however, the AUTHOR, the photographer, the publisher, and the model all have legal rights, and THEY may chose to pursue them, not me...

ALRIGHT theron! I am beginning to grasp more of the masonry stuff now. I thank you for being so clear and open. Sharing information such as this is helping DENY IGNORANCE for me.

Btw- what is the URL for the mentioned FW? I would also appreciate viewing the demise of such scandalous activities.

As a self-proclaimed mason and one of the many bearesr of torch of knowledge could you share with me why you don't hold the MODS HERE responsible?

PS- what picture? The one with the masons dancing around?

Sorry Z, didn't see the request- no problem.

Ah, the author of the book in question HAS been notified, though not by myself. If you carefully review, you will see that I never made a claim that I was taking any action other than informing a mod of the copyright violation.

Bilbo/Neonhelmet: Uh, under US copyright laws, if I take a picture, I own it. If I take a picture of someone in a non-public venue (and sometimes IN a public venue) I need a model release to sell or commercially use an image, though I still own the image. If I publish an image, of lease/sell the rights to an image for publication, I still own the image (depending on the rights that I sold to the use of the image) or the author owns it, or the publisher owns it (the rights to reuse), and all of some of these people have the right to legal recourse when the image is used without permission.

Fair use applies to just that, fair usage, for quoting (a SHORT segment) in another publication or, in this case, forum. Using an image without permission is not fair use. A parody of the image would be fair use, be republication (whichis what the law considers the internet, digital publishing) is not fair use. See the Millenium Digital Copyright Act and the United States copyright act, along with the EU's copyright protection acts, and those of the UK, where the book in question was originally published.

I noted that lawyers and the author have been notified, and that is true, just not by me. I understand that legal action is being contemplated, but have no direct responsbility or connection with that contemplated action.

Now, as to FW... their discussion board used to be hosted at EZ board. That forum is populated by about four posters, one of whom in particular has about fifty sock puppets he uses to debate himself. Most normal forums don't allow this type of behavior, but FW is far from a normal forum.

My image was illegally used by this... cretin, as was the image of Stephen Dafoe and others, both in scatalogical contexts, and in attempts to impersonate people and put words in their mouths. Along with illegal attribution of stories to the Press Enterprise, and other less savory tactics by these folks, complaints were made to the owners of EZ Board. They started by eliminating the sock puppets and the images, but the person doing it just created more and repeated his offenses, so ez board simply closed the forum.

Five others were started up by the same group, and were shut down within days due to the same actions. I understand that they have antoher chat forum, but this one does not allow images to be posted, so they are safe, and I do not visit it at all.

The site itself was hosted by a woman outside of Dallas Texas, and when I was able to discover her name, address and phone number through Internic.org, I posted the information, and she was inundated with calls from around the world. She did not want to be exposed for being associated with that hate site, (who would??) and closed it down by refusing to host it any longer.

It has since been moved to its own server, "hidden" behind a service group that registered the site and a hosting service that has been contracted by the service group. The names of the real owner, along with his address and phone number have been obtained, but since the site is really a harmless group of losers that actually are responsbile for a large number of men JOINING masonry, no legal action against them is contemplated.

They are using an HTML "Hit generator" to artificially pump up the numbers of hits to their site, along with starting it off at an artifically high number, so that they can claim millions of visits... its really funny, in a pathetic kind of way. Today, when you put freemasonry into a search engine like google, you no longer start out with the "I hate masonry" sites, but get OUR sites, blaring the truth.

As for your name PublicGadfly... I mistyped, sorry. I am not given to such subtlety. If I think something, I will tell you... I think you are an intelligent, misguided person, but its really ok with me that you are... I do not seek to reform you or convert you. I post simply to get the truth out, so that the misguided, misinformed, hatemongers of the world aren't the only voice heard or seen, but rather, so that the truth about masonry gets out.

And, by the way, I really want to thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Originally posted by theron dunn

Today, when you put freemasonry into a search engine like google, you no longer start out with the "I hate masonry" sites, but get OUR sites, blaring the truth.

This is the message?
Paragraph upon paragraph of veiled threat- postures of legal action and this is really it isn't it?

cover by intimidation

What is �masonic truth?� Thread upon thread claiming masonic secrecy is bad or deviltry by intimidation and yet we are given, yet once more, further 'proof' that the claims are what? TRUE!


Give me THE URL theron- I WILL post it to a web site- no ATS because I don't want to cause this fine board any grief but I have another place �the image� will fit very well.

As for your name PublicGadfly... I mistyped, sorry. I am not given to such subtlety. If I think something, I will tell you... I think you are an intelligent, misguided person, but its really ok with me that you are... I do not seek to reform you or convert you. I post simply to get the truth out, so that the misguided, misinformed, hatemongers of the world aren't the only voice heard or seen, but rather, so that the truth about masonry gets out.

Whatever- Freud:�there is no such thing as a mistake between humans, there is merely convenience� (or something like that.

No bother to me- as I said- �humorous�
I do believe you are not given to such subtlety- there was no 'a lawyer said . . ' stuff in it anywhere, right?

Back to where we started before the masonic side-trips.

Masonry has historically been accused of intimidation and actions against 'the common weil..' Masonry still stands so accused.

Mystery society, secret society, society within a society- all similar and not enough difference to matter much. A dearth of personal responsibility seems the most evident common thread.

At this stage I surmise that the individual mason cares not two wits what the 'organization' does or accomplishes no matter how hurtful to his larger society (nation-state) just so he can be included in the fine fellowship of other jewelry bedecked kindred souls.

I further surmise that those that have posted pro-mason generally don't give masonry much thought other than as a club. The veiled part of masonry, the part of questions and discord for non-masons is a much a mystery to then as to the rest.

Surmise away, though you are incorrect.

When you say or do something publically that injures or defames someone, the injured party has a right to redress... if you slander me, my solution is NOT to punch you in the nose, no matter how justified I may feel in such a childish riposte... it is to seek LEGAL solutions... to stop you from further doing such, or to obtain a legal injunction forcing you to stop.

If you use my intellectual property illegally, should I just sit back, laugh and say, oh well? Or should I seek to stop you from illegally and immorrally using my property? Would you feel differently if I was stealing your car to take road trips? Theft is theft, whether of intellectual property or of my physical property. The music industry is amply demonstrating this principle right now.

As for the rest... balderdash. If you injure me, I will seek to stop you from injuring me. That is my right. It is not something nefarious, but plain human rights... only a... no, I won't go there...

Yo demand the right to scream and shout and publish lies and slanders by spinning the honest answers you have been given into something else, but you stand convicted by your own actions,,, I am satisfied with that...

as for the rest... pfffffbbtttthhh.... I refute you thus.

Originally posted by theron dunn

Yo demand the right to scream and shout and publish lies and slanders by spinning the honest answers you have been given into something else, but you stand convicted by your own actions,,, I am satisfied with that...

as for the rest... pfffffbbtttthhh.... I refute you thus.

Pretty hard to scream on the Internet, but here goes v~^ did you hear that? It was the sound of me screaming to this post.

I wondered how to spell that.

Thanks.

Btw what color of troops did Bro. Pike command? He was a general, right?

Color? You seem to worry overly much about race, but since you ask, I believe the troops that he commanded were NATIVE INDIANS. I have no idea, nor do I care, how you would classify their "color".

Thanks for playing.

Oh, and by the way, is your name by chance Mike Gentry?