Would you want to be a Freemason?

reply to post by artistpoet


We don't practice any sacrifices. And I have yet to meet one satanic mason. I won't say they don't exist, but the ideals of that religion don't exactly line up with the tenets of freemasonry.

Actually the only place we catch flak is here at ATS. And that's only for us members who are more open about membership. There are many many masons here that no one even knows are Masons! Lol

There was only one time out in the real world where a group of youngsters was screaming illuminati! at me. That hardly qualifies as flak in my book.

People on ATS that think freemasonry is the bane of human existence are afraid of what they don't understand. Many people have this seemingly irrational fear of freemasons that stems purely from conspiracy theory. All of witch have been proven wrong time and time again.

In terms of the secret societies forum, many people are happy to embrace ignorance, instead of deny it.

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by artistpoet

 

All of witch have been proven wrong time and time again.
.

Your typo witch instead of which - Is that a Freudian slip - only joking
But thanks for your open response

reply to post by artistpoet


I have to be carefull with this iPad keyboard. Autocorrect does things to my text that can cause serious confusion, lol.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Sorry, I do not haul out the jibes unless someone else starts, which in your case, you did. Maybe you need to go back and re-read your comments prior to my repsonses.

Load of crap.. you're just playing victim.
Your first response to my post about Standard Oil working with the Nazi's, was hostile in nature. As though there was no truth to even saying they *committed* treason and worked with the Nazi's. I don't believe you even knew it was obvious that they DID work with the Nazi's.

I never said the word "convicted" in my initial post on this subject. I said they were "charged with treason".
When someone is charged with something, it means they are being brought up on charges... I was simply quoting what somebody else said. I never felt there were discrepancies to hide as you are attached to proving about me.

You chose to take that and run with it... like I have said before in this thread, (arguing over WORD semantics) when the fact remains. You are not arguing that they're innocent... you can clearly see and admit they are actually GUILTY!

Amazing.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
If you actually read your sources you would see that the only one that supports your claims of Prescott Bush being charged with treason is hiddenmysteries.org which is obviously a paragon of factual evidence.

So what? Your claim is that I fabricated this and that the only place it exists is in my mind! On both points you are now proven wrong.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Farish is not Bush. You original assertion was Bush was convicted (and then changed to 'indicted') for treason.

Wrong. My original assertion was that they were "charged".. I didn't say "convicted" before you came at me.
Why don't you just admit THIS? If you want to get into word semantics, be accurate and I'm showing how you still cannot be accurate, even though you seem to value accuracy highly.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Stop digging, you are on your way to China at this rate.

From what I see now, you have dug your own different kind of hole. And someone at hiddenmysteries.org is sitting in the hole you tried to bury me in.

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
These are not qualities of the valiant, honorable people you present yourselves to be.

We're still human and when we've been called liars, evil, ignorant, stupid, etc, one can, understandably, get short. I strive to always better myself, but I do not attempt to try to be cordial with some people as it just falls on deaf ears.

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
This is clearly a gang-mentality operation. Thank you for proving the point that Anti-masons are making.

No, we each initially came here and still come here on our own accord. Their is no joint effort, but great minds do think alike.

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
Or a pack of lions together attempting to take down a gazelle - all starring each others posts every time, driving each others' "W" and "K" scores up and tag teaming (cherry-picking) my quotes in ways that a team of prosecuting attorneys and a DA would if they were trying to convict someone.

I don't mind being compared to a lion. I have thought about being a lawyer, but I'm more of a analyst than an attorney.

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
The point to me here is that the Freemasons are an organization that has been built upon Luciferian ideology.

I disagree. Which rituals are Luciferian or occultic in Freemasonry?

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
KSig, if you beg to differ with the occult connections people try and draw between all occult organizations and your organization, then why do all of you freemasons have links to Occult documentation on your webpages and blogs?

Which blog? Mine? Which documents?

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
I understand that you all really don't like to talk about Horus, Sirius and other off-limits topics that are focal points, which related to and deal with the archetype of Lucifer.

It's not an "off-limit topic". It's just that your interpretation isn't one that is held as accurate or pertinent to Freemasonry for the most part.

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
I never said the word "convicted" in my initial post on this subject. I said they were "charged with treason".

Which Bush was not. Still waiting for your sources.

When someone is charged with something, it means they are being brought up on charges... I was simply quoting what somebody else said.

Do you always quote others without verifying your sources?

You chose to take that and run with it... like I have said before in this thread, (arguing over WORD semantics) when the fact remains. You are not arguing that they're innocent... you can clearly see and admit they are actually GUILTY!

Bush was not convicted (or indicted or charged) with treason and neither am I privy to all of the facts and circumstances pertaining to the situation. Unlike you, when I am in doubt, I do not offer up unsubstantiatable anecdotal evidence.

So what? Your claim is that I fabricated this and that the only place it exists is in my mind! On both points you are now proven wrong.

How so? Because hiddenmysteries.org tells you it is real? Still waiting on a reputable source, say like, the reporter who first broke the story.

Wrong. My original assertion was that they were "charged".. I didn't say "convicted" before you came at me.
Why don't you just admit THIS? If you want to get into word semantics, be accurate and I'm showing how you still cannot be accurate, even though you seem to value accuracy highly.

Here is my orginal exchange regarding your fabrication:

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
I'm sure you do realize how the Rockefellers (Standard Oil) and Prescott Bush (George Sr's Dad) are tied in with the Nazi concentration camps and were all charged with treason after World War II.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Actually, I do not realize that. Where is the evidence of the treason charges you allege?

Regardless, Bush was not 'charged', 'indicted' or convicted of anything. I am still waiting for you to produce evidence to the contrary.

From what I see now, you have dug your own different kind of hole. And someone at hiddenmysteries.org is sitting in the hole you tried to bury me in.

Good to hear. Maybe you can site davidicke.com as supporting evidence. Seriously? Hiddenmysteries.org?

I see you have once agin avoided the question I asked. If you are right and Bush was 'charged' or 'indicted' on treason why did the original source not verify your statement? This was the person who broke the story, why did they miss this crucial piece of evidence that you and hiddenmysteries.org have somehow unearthed in your thorough research? This is a fairly easy question. Why do you keep avoiding it?

Originally posted by KSigMason
We're still human and when we've been called liars, evil, ignorant, stupid, etc, one can, understandably, get short. I strive to always better myself, but I do not attempt to try to be cordial with some people as it just falls on deaf ears.

How would you know that your cordialness would "fall on deaf ears" if you never tried being cordial with me?
You viewed me as a threat and you treated me as such. With guns ablazing from our first interractions. You have a problem with my views and that was your "justification"... it made you "entitled" to mistreat me.

You can see this however you want to, meanwhile back in reality, what went down was me talking about masonic authors and how they seem to like to talk about Lucifer. You and your gaggle of "ancient & accepted" buddies, (you as a "Most Worshipful Master") accused me of fabrication. Like always. Until MasonicLight surfaced, I was given NO slack or validation. I felt validated by his posts, but nobody ever made mention of how he validated my assertions of bringing up Luciferian ideology.

I said, if you are accusing me of fabricating, then maybe you don't know any better. You have deemed that to mean that I am "calling you ignorant or stupid". I am just saying either you know or you don't know. Or you are being dishonest... you deemed that to mean that I am "calling you a liar". I was giving you a choice of how you wanted to be seen.
I know that discussion of politics and religion is off-limits in the lodge so I'm not saying Lucifer is discussed openly... EVER!

However, my mason friend who I spoke previously of, who turned me onto Manly P Hall, was the person who helped me to see how masons and occultists in general view Lucifer. It was from him that I learned about deeper ways of looking at the archetype of the opposer. He was a 3rd generation 32º Scottish Rite. I know that doesn't mean anything to you. Just like my father being a 32º Freemason doesn't mean anything to you. In general you don't seem very friendly, brotherly or forthcoming about these MOST IMPORTANT matters, when it pertains to spirituality.
You are calling ME a liar to say all of what I just said!!! So why do you expect me not to fight back? What is your problem?

Oh and I really like how you guys have painted this whole debate to ONLY be occurring here on ATS. As though all the Freemasonic websites with entire areas devoted to how to destroy Anti-Masons and for how many dozens of decades before ATS ever existed, how there were books written, communities divided, a country and government divided over this issue... of masonry and the endless accusations of conspiracy that it finds itself surrounded with. But you say it's just here on ATS.

How disingenuous and misleading!

This forum is NOT the epicenter of worldwide anti-masonry. HAHA. the fact that any of you even thought to say that is completely laughable. You are cover-up artists. You do it OK, but the problem is: people like me exist.
I'm not like the average gazelle who goes down to a pack of foamy-mouthed lions who wish to bury the Conspiracy-laden history of their order and attack any nay-sayer. You should be used to it by now.

You guys have also all said that "time and time again these conspiracies are proven false".
This is also a lie. So yeah, if you want to say lies, then expect to be called a liar.

When I see how many people in government are freemasons and how big of a deal they make out of their dedication ceremonies and mason status, and these are the people who lead us down the road to a non-nation status in the world of governments, then I have NO IDEA how you can expect me, an honest and intelligent person not to draw a connection between a corrupt government and a government full of Freemasons.

Your organization stems from government and military. The Knights Templar were a form of both.

But what else were they? Our modern era's first Bankers.
And they have passed that magick wand down through the bloodline.

I don't really care to continue discussing the esoteric spirituality of masonry. With MasonicLight it is easier to have that conversation because he is more forthcoming with information.

reply to post by LeonoraTenen


I'll correct myself, here.

Websites like ATS. Conspiracy sites in general. And then you have the out right anti Masonic sites which are really good at spinning lies to make some money off of the evil Freemasons.

And actually, if you take the time to read what almost every mason in the SS forum has posted in regards to Masonic conspiracies, you may find that freemasonry is pretty mundane and benevolent. It's always more fun to believe in conspiracies, but they aren't all true. Definitely not the Masonic ones.

Believe what you will, though. Your entitled to do so.

reply to post by LeonoraTenen


I'd also like to point out that there has never been one shred of concrete evidence that we have anything to do with the Templars, aside from it being a title in a Masonic apendant rite. The true origins of our Order can be traced to stone masons guilds in Europe and particularly Scotland and England.

Freemasonry certainly did not come from the military.

And we're not the illuminati.... In case you were gonna try that one next.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Do you always quote others without verifying your sources?

So first it's that I'm saying the wrong word... then it's that I'm fabricating. Now that you've been proven wrong on both of those (due to the fact that it was "hiddenmysteries.org" who said the "wrong word" and "are fabricating") and now you cannot pin those accusations on me. Which means you are wrong.. now you need to change your charge against me to being "quoting others without verifying sources".

Haha... if you were trying to bring me up on charges in a court, it would've been thrown out by now and the judge would've said "get your charges straight and figure out what this person did wrong and stop wasting my damn time!! Case DISMISSED!!". That's how it would go down.

You crash and burn. You are grasping at straws. Get your charge against me straight.. or do I have to get the charge against Prescott Bush just perfect and you can continue to not admit your false accusations of me.

BTW it is true that Farish was charged and fined for treason.
And it is true that Bush was General Manager of Harriman's Nazi bank and the US siezed their funds.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Unlike you, when I am in doubt, I do not offer up unsubstantiatable anecdotal evidence.

Oh, like you didn't propose that I am inventing and fabricating things when you were wrong and had no evidence to say such a thing. You should have been in doubt, but you took it and ran.. but no, you didn't do that.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Still waiting on a reputable source, say like, the reporter who first broke the story.

That's like people who want evidence from physicians for what a disease truly is.
Why do people trust reporters "who break stories", like they are doctors of the truth? That is a sick view of the world.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
I see you have once agin avoided the question I asked. If you are right and Bush was 'charged' or 'indicted' on treason why did the original source not verify your statement? This was the person who broke the story, why did they miss this crucial piece of evidence that you and hiddenmysteries.org have somehow unearthed in your thorough research? This is a fairly easy question. Why do you keep avoiding it?

I'm not avoiding it, I literally have no idea why you keep asking me to admit to something I didn't make up and you seem to be really attached to getting something you're not going to get from me.

You will just keep bringing up new charges upon me as I shake off the old ones. I'm growing tired of responding to your obsessively fixative diatribes. Let it go.

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
When I see how many people in government are freemasons...

Such as? Try to be specific.

Greetings...
Tis I Pinocchio:
I have granted Spooky Pal Leonora a Star for her works. Shun me if you must. BUT!
Lets spend an entire week... posting EVERYTHING that the Freemasons are accused of and get it all out there.
Then when the week is over we spend a week reviewing the charges and then... after that week, we can begin to dismiss the charges according to their merit(s). 1 thread to rule them all!
For example: Freemason wanted to initiate me.
Guilty!
But I declined as their is no merit in me to accept. Plus I like to use their secrets (cowan's perspective) and divulge them on ATS. Yay Me...

When the two weeks are over, we can all get together.... yes... TOGETHER!... and solve the riddles.
Anti-Masons... Non-Masons... Free-Masons... And The-Masons...

reply to post by Pinocchio


There's an existing thread in rats that I started to effectively be that thread.

Feel free to take the discussion there, or start your own mason super thread.

I think it's good idea.

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen
So first it's that I'm saying the wrong word... then it's that I'm fabricating. Now that you've been proven wrong on both of those (due to the fact that it was "hiddenmysteries.org" who said the "wrong word" and "are fabricating") and now you cannot pin those accusations on me. Which means you are wrong.. now you need to change your charge against me to being "quoting others without verifying sources".

I showed you the first repsonse to your 'charged' statement which you parroted from another site which is unverifyable as evidenced by the fact that the original reporter did not even make such statements (only that they 'should' have been charged with treason). I retract the 'convicted' portion, however, the fact remains, you claimed Bush was first 'charged', then 'idicted' for treason, which there is no historical evidence to support. Just because a website, such as hiddenmysteries.org, claims to be true does not make it so. Where is the evidence.

Haha... if you were trying to bring me up on charges in a court, it would've been thrown out by now and the judge would've said "get your charges straight and figure out what this person did wrong and stop wasting my damn time!! Case DISMISSED!!". That's how it would go down.

Oohhh....is that how it would work Melvin Belli? Well, how would it work when you failed to produce evidence to support your treason 'charges' or 'indictments'?

You crash and burn. You are grasping at straws. Get your charge against me straight.. or do I have to get the charge against Prescott Bush just perfect and you can continue to not admit your false accusations of me.

That is the point, there was no charge against him as you claim. As a matter of fact, the main reporter who broke the story even explained that there were no charges filed.

BTW it is true that Farish was charged and fined for treason.
And it is true that Bush was General Manager of Harriman's Nazi bank and the US siezed their funds.

I am not disputing those points only your fabricated treason charges aspect of Bush.

Oh, like you didn't propose that I am inventing and fabricating things when you were wrong and had no evidence to say such a thing. You should have been in doubt, but you took it and ran.. but no, you didn't do that.

Huh? I am not the one that needs the evidence. You made the claims therefore you need to supply the proof.

That's like people who want evidence from physicians for what a disease truly is.
Why do people trust reporters "who break stories", like they are doctors of the truth? That is a sick view of the world.

Right. So we will trust that LenoraTenen, ace reporter, is on the case and supplying us with all the fabrictaed anecdotes they have. Mostly from memory (faulty as it may be) and occasionally from poorly sourced websites that do not have a link to where they happen to 'find' their 'evidence'.

I'm not avoiding it, I literally have no idea why you keep asking me to admit to something I didn't make up and you seem to be really attached to getting something you're not going to get from me.

If you are not avoiding the question than answer it, it had nothing to do with you anyway and everything to do with the invesitagtive reporter who broke the story. Why did he not include the treason charges that you seem to be the only who knows about?

Let it go.

Sure, as soon as you act like an adult and answer the question.

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by LeonoraTenen

 

I'll correct myself, here.

Websites like ATS. Conspiracy sites in general. And then you have the out right anti Masonic sites which are really good at spinning lies to make some money off of the evil Freemasons.

You seem like a really nice person and you are being cordial. So please don't take offense to this honest response. I will try to be as nice as I can while still saying what I need to say.

This just sounds like you're backpedalling and saying it only happens on the internet, instead of before when you said it only happens on ATS.

What about all the anti-masonic books that have been written over the past couple hundred years?
Do those not exist separately from the internet and "conspiracy sites"?

What about Anti-masonry in government?
So in your assessment, nobody in our government has ever expressed their opposition to it?
What about the fact that the oaths overlap, which represents a conflict of interests with a governmental oath to uphold the Constitution?
What about the fact that Freemasons have to follow what the rest of the hive does?
What if that conflicts with their oath to uphold the constitution? Like voting a certain way on a certain bill?
But you say that has never happened right? Is that right?

There is anti-masonry and fears of a corrupt secret-society-run gov't conspiracy throughout entertainment, culture and society in general. Plenty of people who I encounter in the world, are aware of the whole debate and feel the same way about it, or at least have their questions and concerns. The DaVinci Code is partly to blame for that.

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
And actually, if you take the time to read what almost every mason in the SS forum has posted in regards to Masonic conspiracies, you may find that freemasonry is pretty mundane and benevolent. It's always more fun to believe in conspiracies, but they aren't all true. Definitely not the Masonic ones.

This sounds to me like "Nothing to see here folks... go home".

Why do you think how you just put this would convince anyone who wasn't already on your side?
You just essentially said that "when masons talk in an open online forum about masonic conspiracies, they deny there is a conspiracy and present it instead to be very normal and positive."

That is like saying the suspect pleaded "innocent" so everyone should conclude that they are innocent.

And you are a little late in saying that I shouldn't bring up the Illuminati. That happened about 10 pages ago.

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by Pinocchio

 

I think it's good idea....

Swwwweeeeeeet!
Only I am not the clever one who can devise such atrocities and exact the machinations which are at wits ends to compose the balad of Anti-Mason. I am Pro-Free-Mason. All The Way!
Seeing that most just account for one's wits moreso than their burden of proof, I find that I can contribute to such a thread but not devise one. Hence only the idea.

Also: Pinocchio The Thread Coming Soon!

Originally posted by LeonoraTenen

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by LeonoraTenen

 

I'll correct myself, here.

Websites like ATS. Conspiracy sites in general. And then you have the out right anti Masonic sites which are really good at spinning lies to make some money off of the evil Freemasons.

You seem like a really nice person and you are being cordial. So please don't take offense to this honest response. I will try to be as nice as I can while still saying what I need to say.

This just sounds like you're backpedalling and saying it only happens on the internet, instead of before when you said it only happens on ATS.

What about all the anti-masonic books that have been written over the past couple hundred years?
Do those not exist separately from the internet and "conspiracy sites"?

What about Anti-masonry in government?
So in your assessment, nobody in our government has ever expressed their opposition to it?
What about the fact that the oaths overlap, which represents a conflict of interests with a governmental oath to uphold the Constitution?
What about the fact that Freemasons have to follow what the rest of the hive does?
What if that conflicts with their oath to uphold the constitution? Like voting a certain way on a certain bill?
But you say that has never happened right? Is that right?

I'd say that there have been tons of anti Masonic books written that are full of speculations and not facts. While that's all well and good as the authors opinions are concerned, they aren't accurate sources of truth if that's what your digging for.

It's funny you should bring up anti masonry in government because there are still several governments around the world that will go as far as to kill a Freemason should they not sever their associations. And there of course there was the government under Hitler... The nazis were adamant about dismantling masonry in nazi Germany. There were many non Jews who went to concentration camps. Freemasons were among those other unlucky souls.

You allege that there are many masons in government. That is not true... I can only think of a handful off the top of my head, and they arent even in seats of real influence!.

I can assure you that no Masonic oath would ever conflict with any other oath. We're charged to be good members of society, to help our neighbors, and our country if we are able to do so. I can't see any conflicts between the two as they are not related to one another.

What hive do you speak of? Masons can and often do not follow the hive. Many of us are quite outspoken. And all of us have our own opinions on politics. Freemasonry is entirely apolitical and wouldn't influence a vote one way or the other in the least.

There is anti-masonry and fears of a corrupt secret-society-run gov't conspiracy throughout entertainment, culture and society in general. Plenty of people who I encounter in the world, are aware of the whole debate and feel the same way about it, or at least have their questions and concerns. The DaVinci Code is partly to blame for that.

This sounds to me like "Nothing to see here folks... go home".

Why do you think how you just put this would convince anyone who wasn't already on your side?
You just essentially said that "when masons talk in an open online forum about masonic conspiracies, they deny there is a conspiracy and present it instead to be very normal and positive."

That is like saying the suspect pleaded "innocent" so everyone should conclude that they are innocent.

And you are a little late in saying that I shouldn't bring up the Illuminati. That happened about 10 pages ago.

edit on 15-4-2012 by LeonoraTenen because: (no reason given)

Well there isn't really anything to see. No mason here will deny the conspiracies about our Order. What we do very often is post links to the truth of any given situation, and that information is usually ignored or scantly paid any attention. Hence the reason there is a frustration spread amongst nearly all of the masons who do post in the SS forum.

And I'm hardly trying to get any one to take sides. In all honestly I doubt highly our collective ability to change any of the misinformation about the fraternity.

Well, in your last post, you did a pretty good job of explaining it and I think the way you are approaching it does a really good job of making people more comfortable with the oaths not overlapping etc... I know masons have taken way too much heat from everyone. I agree with that. They're like the boogie-man who get blamed for everything.. certified scapegoat.

My earlier comment about Lady Gaga growing up in a masonic building, was in reference to the Pythian building, in which her parents owned a condiminium. It is the meeting place of the Knights of Pythias. And Lady Gaga has said her symbols and themes have been inspired by Sir Francis Bacon amongst others. Many of her performances have encoded symbols of occult, (if not masonic) rituals. We are free to interpret that as we each choose to.

I can site specific examples if needed and we can go from there.. if it interests anyone. I'm not saying I have any intention of taking that conversation any further. I just wanted to clarify what I meant in earlier posts.

reply to post by LeonoraTenen

From the beginning, I had no reason to give you any civil discussion or cordiality. You jumped into this thread claiming we have "Google Alerts" set up so we can be notified if we're being talked about. In the same post you said, we were spin doctors and nefarious. You came into this discussion slinging the mud and when we called you out, you're upset? Did you expect us to just take it on the chin?

The few Masonic authors that have talked about Lucifer are being taken out of context. Various ATS Masons, particularly those more knowledgeable on the Scottish Rite than me, have spoken on this in length over the years. My area of interest is aimed particularly at the bodies commonly referred to as the York Rite, an often under appreciated and overlooked body with quite a fascinating history and structure. I'm not the Most Worshipful Master (sic), just Worshipful Master. I did indeed say you fabricated something and until you can corroborate it with evidence, it stands as such.

Masonic Light did not validate your claims of your claims of Luciferian ideology in Freemasonry as he said on page 7:

I'm not sure how you're coming up with all these connections. "Lucifer" is not a part of Freemasonry, nor the GD, BOTA, EGC, or the OTO anyway.

On page 8 he said:

Lucifer isn't mentioned in OTO either. Originally, OTO was a Gnostic Christian organization. After Crowley, it became Thelemic and neo-pagan.

---

In the Vulgate version of the Bible, the term "Lucifer" is used as a title for Jesus Christ, and is still used in that context in the Easter Missal for Latin Rite Catholics and Anglicans. The Theosophists, on the other hand, use the term in a more ancient context, to denote the planet Venus and the archetype of Apollo. So it goes back to what you were saying about the problem with semantics: there's nothing inherently wrong with the word "lucifer".

I could go on, but I hope you get the idea.

Or you are being dishonest... you deemed that to mean that I am "calling you a liar".

So when you inferred that I was being dishonest you weren't calling me a liar? So one can be dishonest and not a liar?

I'm a very friendly person.

I never said anything was unique to the ATS website. You are now putting words in my mouth. I'm familiar with other conspiracy theory websites and on a few Masonic websites we sometimes discuss common anti-Masonic theories about us.

Do you actually know who is a Mason in the government or are you just speaking in general vagueness again? Name 20 if you can. Even there are, who cares? That should have no bearing on their job performance. If anything, any politician I knew to be a Mason I'd hold them to a higher standard. Many of us on this forum condemned the corrupt activities of Charlie Rengel (a Mason).