Freemasons inside our banks? PHOTO EVIDENCE

page: 12
19
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
Please allow me to pose a situation.
If there are a bunch of crimes and missing persons occurring on a street tagged with a gang symbols, should the officials simply assume that the ones placing their symbols upon this area have nothing to do with the crimes or possess no knowledge of the crimes?


If the symbols existed in-place before the street was constructed, does your hypothesis still seem reasonable?

Fitz

And just as an afterthought, for a 'secret society' in the minds of antagonists we're awfully flagrant with spreading symbols hither and nigh. Despite the post somewhat earlier in the thread showing the facade having been kept as a societal historical keepsake, there's this limpet-like grasping at straws asserting this as some sort of flagrant in-your-face depiction of 'Masonic might and control'.
edit on 11-1-2013 by Fitzgibbon because: Adding an additional thought




posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by network dude
 


Please go through every single post I've ever made on a thread about the Masons and locate a post where I state that I hate Masons.
You won't find one.
You're confusing suspicion and wariness with hate.


and please re-read my post and show me where I said you hated anything at all? I was merely making a point. And trying to be polite while doing it.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Stating that you could try to find a reason to HATE me by fantasizing I'm connected to Nazi Germany somehow is not being polite.

Stating that you could find a reason to HATE me is a veiled attempt at accusing me of finding ways to HATE masons.

I DON'T hate masons and I've never said I did. I simply believe that the organization does have ties with the banks and other areas where corruption has been proven to exist. I hate corruption and anyone who tries to cover it up should be brought to justice.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
I hate corruption and anyone who tries to cover it up should be brought to justice.


Yea, so do I. I also believe in a fantastic new concept called Due Process. That way, the innocent will not be slagged and drug though the mud BEFORE the facts are decided.

I can go back through your past posts and show you MANY examples of that.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by network dude
 


I DON'T hate masons and I've never said I did. I simply believe that the organization does have ties with the banks and other areas where corruption has been proven to exist.


Whither comes that belief? How about giving some small bit of specificity to your aforementioned suspicion and wariness? You've been long on assertion and short on backup.

Fitz



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by Afterthought
I hate corruption and anyone who tries to cover it up should be brought to justice.


Yea, so do I. I also believe in a fantastic new concept called Due Process. That way, the innocent will not be slagged and drug though the mud BEFORE the facts are decided.

I can go back through your past posts and show you MANY examples of that.


There's no law against speculating a person or group has any ties to corruption.
If you folks don't want to be tied to banks and other places where corruption runs rampant, the Masons may want to consider distancing themselves from such institutions by removing their symbols from these buildings. Another thing is to do when the Masons sell a building with Masonic symbols is to write in the contract they the buyer is responsible for removing the decorative symbolic fixtures no less than six months after taking possession of said building.
If the Masons accomplished these two simple things, I'm sure people would scrutinize them less and give them more respect.
edit on 11-1-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Fitzgibbon
 

"Whither"? Who uses "whither" anymore? Are you reading Little Women again?

You've been long on assertion and short on backup.

I'll be polite by not stating what you've been long and short on.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
There's no law against speculating a person or group has any ties to corruption.


No one said there was. Legal status doesn't make something intelligent or productive.


If you folks don't want to be tied to banks and other places where corruption runs rampant, the Masons may want to consider distancing themselves from such institutions by removing their symbols from their buildings.


Masonic symbols aren't copyrighted, and we have no authority to just say, "Hey! Take down that thing that either symbolizes that we used to own the area, or looks like something enough that conspiracy theorists would connect you to us!"


Another thing is to do when selling a building with Masonic symbols is to write in the contract they the buyer is responsible for removing the decorative fixtures no less than sic months after taking possession of said building.


I don't know if you've ever worked in real estate, but contractual conditions much smaller than this are what derail real estate deals. (This is presuming that such changes are even possible; with historic edifices, that's a gargantuan presumption.)


If the Masons accomplished these two simple things, I'm sure people would scrutinize them less and give them more respect.


In this very thread, we've seen accusations that Canada is controlled by Masons because a hexagram fits over the maple leaf on the Canadian flag. In other threads, we've seen accusations that the Great Seal is Masonic because one can draw a (geometrically unsound) pentagram connecting the letters M-A-S-O-N (out of order) in a way that lines up with the image (poorly). People scrutinize Freemasonry for their own reasons, and the truth has very little to do with it.

Keep in mind, a link to the IRS form to get any lodge or Grand Lodge's tax returns--any one in America--has been completely ignored. People who "scrutinize" Freemasonry very often don't actually care to find the truth; I doubt removing the "evidence" will make a bit of difference.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
There's no law against speculating a person or group has any ties to corruption.


No law at all (though don't be upset if others consider idle, unfounded speculation ignorant). And don't be surprised if members of that group respond in a negative manner to such idle, unfounded speculation. And it's always nice to know off the top that it's speculation and not something with some actual background. It's always nice to know ahead of time that I'm being jerked around for the lulz



Originally posted by Afterthought
If you folks don't want to be tied to banks and other places where corruption runs rampant, the Masons may want to consider distancing themselves from such institutions by removing their symbols from these buildings.


Uh....ya know....as has been pointed out (whether you care to read it/accept it or not), that facade has a historic designation on it; I'm sure the bank would've preferred the additional space for something that could be used to generate income instead of an old facade.


Originally posted by Afterthought
Another thing is to do when the Masons sell a building with Masonic symbols is to write in the contract they the buyer is responsible for removing the decorative symbolic fixtures no less than six months after taking possession of said building.


Sorry but did you not read or just not comprehend the previous post of mine where I pointed out that that facade has a historic designation and such removal wasn't within the purview of either party?



Originally posted by Afterthought
If the Masons accomplished these two simple things, I'm sure people would scrutinize them less and give them more respect.


Oddly enough, people with agendas can find the most ridiculous excuses to suspect/be wary of/dislike/hate another individual or group; we humans are quite odd that way. You're doing a fine job of demonstrating my point and for that I thank you

Fitz



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Fitzgibbon
 

"Whither"? Who uses "whither" anymore? Are you reading Little Women again?

You've been long on assertion and short on backup.

I'll be polite by not stating what you've been long and short on.


Well, thanks for demonstrating the value of your observations/criticisms/etc. In a thousand years, their worth will be worth every centime that they are today

Fitz



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
If a Masonic lodge is closely associated with an institution and wants their symbols everywhere, I'm forced to believe that they are communicating their deep involvement and knowledge of the activities of the institution.


Three problems. The lodge in the Original Post is not associated with the bank as the bank was built over the unused temple. Secondly, we do not have a trademark on our symbolism and anyone can use it for whatever purpose they desire. Third, most people do not even now what actual Masonic symbols are.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought

There's no law against speculating a person or group has any ties to corruption.

You are absolutely correct. But think about this for one minute. Your name is Sue Manson. (for the sake of argument) A mad man in England goes on a shooting spree with a shotgun he stole from a neighbor. First reports are that this man's name is Bob Lee Manson. It is also rumored that he has an equally crazy sister named Sue. Would it offend you if I came to your town and started spreading rumors that you are the crazy sister without actually finding out an facts? It might make you angry. You might want to try to stop me from spreading false information. Now I know you will somehow take offence to this and claim I am being mean, but I am again, trying to make a point.



If you folks don't want to be tied to banks and other places where corruption runs rampant, the Masons may want to consider distancing themselves from such institutions by removing their symbols from these buildings. Another thing is to do when the Masons sell a building with Masonic symbols is to write in the contract they the buyer is responsible for removing the decorative symbolic fixtures no less than six months after taking possession of said building.
If the Masons accomplished these two simple things, I'm sure people would scrutinize them less and give them more respect.
edit on 11-1-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)


We are proud of our symbols. Old architecture weather masonic or not is something I believe should be preserved. Apparently some other folks thought the same way. I am glad to see historic structures preserved. Just like I like to see perfectly good puppies saved instead of killed in a gas chamber.





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in

join