Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by OneManArmy
Someone took an extra dose of rude today.
How about ask a question that is relevant and actually contributing to the thread?
reply to post by OneManArmy
Nothing in Freemasonry conflicts with our ability to serve in the public sector or as a politician. Nothing. There are not secret meetings conspired by Freemasons to usurp the authority of the People from whom the power is derived.
Corruption is not inherent in Freemasonry nor taught, cultivated, or perpetuated. There have been witch-hunts in England against Freemasonry that has proven no wrong-doing. There is no evidence that one being a Mason will cause them to be a corrupt or poor servant of the people.
Most people like you remind of Senator McCarthy or Attorney General Palmer during the various Red Scares in the 20th Century. Every time I see some anti-Mason say the Federal Reserve or this or the world or whatever is controlled by Freemasons, but then can't prove it, it reminds me of reading about Sen. McCarthy saying he had a list of commies working in the State Department; it turned out he never had any names or that the paper was blank. The ignorant always repeat the same methods throughout the ages...it's pretty funny to see.
Libor scandals, mortgage scandals, justice scandals, police scandals, political scandals its not looking good for "modern freemasonry" when every one of their tentacles of manipulation is involved in scandal after scandal.
Then prove Freemasonry had anything to do with it. All you're doing is just saying it, you're not proving it.
reply to post by frazzle
David Icke is nothing more than a pathetic mouthpiece for "Fear Inc." as I like to call the professional (and conglomerate) amount of CTs who use fear as a tactic to push their agenda.
Say what you will, Icke is swiftly gaining a wider audience and he's scaring the pants off of some creatures who crave secrecy and darkness to hide their evil acts.
There's nothing wrong with secrecy nor do Freemasons hide in darkness.
Weak minded people are the ones who need to belong to a controlling and dominating "matrix"...
Man is a social creature by nature. There's nothing dominating about Freemasonry nor excessively controlling. There are rules of course with any good organization, but they have no overbearing authority or power.
...because without that structure they wouldn't know how to think or what to think or how to act.
This isn't what Freemasonry is about and is just a pathetic attempt to discredit the Fraternity.
Like Icke says, the genie is out of the bottle and can't be stuffed back into it.
Icke has exposed nothing. He's just a tool, a mouthpiece seeking to make a profit off of his books and get his name out there...he's an attention seeker.
...who reject the secrecy surrounding that organization...
I never even mentioned freemasonry, but it is an astounding coincidence, actually, that thirteen of the first sixteen presidents of the US were masons.
George Washington, himself, was pretty much a loser until he joined up and then his star to power and fame began to soar.
But I guess if Icke is just seeking attention, whatever he's doing is working fairly well so far.
Originally posted by LondonerBLV
What a load of rubbish. Get your head out of your arse son.
It has the largest readership in the whole of the UK. Its not a rag either, your probably only saying this because it has center to right political leaning and your idea of a paper is "The Guardian"
An entire party dedicated to hatred and based upon intolerance, ignorance, and fanaticism.
Originally posted by IslandMason
McDonald's sells the most popular hamburger in the world, but that doesn't make it good for you. Similarly, The Sun's popularity doesn't make it a paper with any journalistic integrity.
Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
I have always found conspiracy theorists interaction with the media funny.
on the one hand they tell use that our media is controlled by "TBTB" yet at the same time are all over them when the MSM seems to back their conspiracies. Murdoch's media empire is the best example they (tin foil hat dudes) tell use that the Murdoch is one of the evil "elites" who secretly rule our planet, they were responsible for killing JFK and 9/11. Yet at the same time i always see conspiracy stuff turning up in their papers, the Daily Express and Daily Mail are both very much advocates that Diana was assassinated and I regularly see articles about 9/11 truth in The Sun. In fact i can recall once reading that people who read from the "tabloid" press (including Murdoch's papers) are more likely to believe in conspiracies.
When you think about it, it starts to make conspiracies start to look a little questionable. If you believe that Murdoch and his other media cronies are the same "elites" who secretly run the world then why would they be publishing conspiracies about 9/11 and Builderberg in this case in their own papers. Granted I have seem their awful attempts at debunking a few as well but i think these days the media know that conspiracy like sex sells and they play on it.
they don't care so long as you buy their rubbish.
Originally posted by RMFX1
David Icke is either a complete crackpot or a shameless conman. Either way, he should be disregarded completely.
Such as the writing and signing of the Declaration of Independence...
...the writing and signing of the Constitution...
...such as masonic meetings...
All done in secret.
...David Icke is probably a reincarnation of anti-federalist and non-mason Patrick Henry, lol.
As for who's who on the masonic roll call of dignitaries who write law and set public policy, for anyone who wants to know how many of the people in the groups listed above or in any other group were/are masons, that information is generally available to them with a few key words and the click of a mouse.
It must be annoying.
I did find it amusing, though, that someone even thought to put together a list of famous NON-mason dignitaries involved in creating and directing the US public "mind". Its not as long a list as one might expect. www.masonicinfo.com...
You say I should go back to history class?
It was not “the people” who ratified the founding documents, most of “the people” never even got a chance to read the words before they were signed into law.
White landowners at the pinnacle of power in each of the colonies voted to ratify and more than a few of them had had a hand in writing the words so obviously they would approve.
The latter were neither men, nor equal in their world view. Patrick Henry understood their intentions, as did many of the others who attended those “private” meetings and they sent out strong warnings to the people.
it has been a catastrophic failure from the beginning for the people of the country and of the world, why would the same words work better next time?
Keeping in mind you don’t have to belong to 4-H to know how to raise a cow or to teach others how to do it.
Likewise, you don’t have to be a Mason to know how to build a block wall.
We don’t know YOUR intentions OR Bilderberg's because y’all ain’t sayin’.
There’s probably a reason for that ~ like you know we may not agree with the "privately devised" intentions.