Why can no one prove a Masonic conspiracy?

Originally posted by network dude
If you join the military, same thing.

But soldiers follow orders that are not always good or just. Does this mean you do the same thing?

Originally posted by capozelli

Originally posted by network dude
If you join the military, same thing.

But soldiers follow orders that are not always good or just. Does this mean you do the same thing?

did your parents always tell you good and just things to do? Mine too. If they told me to steal things when I didn't need them I would have questioned that. I would have used common sense. Even with masonry.

reply to post by capozelli


I do not know about US soldiers, but I as a soldier, only follow LEGAL orders. A soldier is not supposed to follow an UNJUST order, since that would be an ILLEGAL order.
Good and Evil is a question about perspective, and not something a soldier should reflect upon.

Originally posted by Schrödinger
reply to post by capozelli

 

Good and Evil is a question about perspective, and not something a soldier should reflect upon.

Every man has to reflect on that sooner or later, soldiers are no different. Men who do not reflect on that but simply look to "legality", which is alot more like taking a CYA approach to my mind etc.....are the reasons for great atrocities. Many people for instance remember the My Lai massacre where soldiers were killing civilians in Vietnam, but people do not always remember Hugh Thompson who helped save several civilians and used himself and his chopper as a shield, and also persistantly persued justice for what happened. I'm very glad that he used his "perspective" and decided good was worth more then any dangr he might recieve to his life, command, or career.

Good and evil exists. Men in uniforms through history who did not reflect on that have often become monsters, and men in uniform who have reflected on that have often risked their lives and commands to do what is right. War is a horrible dirty buisiness, or as Sherman put it "Hell"....I can't imagine any occupation on earth more in need of considering good and evil then soldiers, unlike most civilians they confront it very personally sometimes daily.

I realize we're far off the original topic but....just a point I wished to make.

reply to post by capozelli

It's easy to pull a line out of context, but in reality, the Lodge doesn't have absolute control over a Brother, particularly outside of the Lodge. As a Past Master I would never have requested blind obedience of one of the members of the Lodge, plus my orders would only be concerned with Lodge operations and the powers of the Worshipful Master, as well as Grand Lodge officers (such Grand Master) are well defined by the Constitution and By-Laws, which amendments are approved by the voting members of that particular body. Freemasonry has many checks and balances.

reply to post by Schrödinger

A soldier should never follow illegal or unjust orders.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

What other fraternal order do you accord them membership with?

Wellz... there are many, many, many groups that an aspiring Earthling can join:

Here's a list example:
List of Fraternal Organizations

Good to know we have all these "special" people in the world.

I am apparently failing (yet again) in explaining what i mean.

I was writing that a soldier has a duty to never follow an illegal/unjust order.
But if he has to reflect on good an evil, it will only complicate matters, and make him hesitate.

It will always be an illegal order to shoot a civilian, always!
Heck, I can't even shoot a soldier or a paramilitary if he drops his weapon!

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy

Sorry I did not see you post earlier, I was busy teaching someone Latin.

Wellz... there are many, many, many groups that an aspiring Earthling can join:

Here's a list example:
List of Fraternal Organizations

I was looking for something a bit more specific. If you had certain suspicions or information other than general tying persons to certain groups or orginizations.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Well perhaps "conspiratorial" isn't the essence of what's really being discussed here...

One function of fraternal organizations is to provide a base where connections and resources ("power") are shared. Perhaps there's also a lot of ritual, dogma, history, pride, ego, etc. involved in this, but that obviously isn't the only point.

Before there was an internet, or even telephones, people had to band together physically to congregate, make plans and express themselves, whether for personal, spiritual or business endeavors.

I think a lot of people shun the secrecy of these groups, perhaps because this new "information age" we find ourselves in demands transparency (while the media gives us illusion, of course) and so people naturally assume that with secrecy comes bad intentions.

I just wonder when/if humanity will evolve enough to include the entire populace in its "club", so that we might help each other without trying to cloak ourselves in egotism, imaginary honors and a colossal sense of personal entitlement over others.

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
One function of fraternal organizations is to provide a base where connections and resources ("power") are shared.

True, but you would be better served joining an orginization that has as its mission statement the attainment of, or at least similar, goals to what you personally are looking to cultivate, i.e. joining a businessmans or chamber of commerce if you are seeking to promote your business, a political club if you are pursuing a political agenda. Masonry, while you can meet people of many occupations and backgrounds, has no mechanism in place to further ones personal amibitions other than the fact that you will be coming into contact with persons you might not have met otherwise.

I can speak from personal experience as I was a business owner prior to becoming a Mason and did not have flocks of Brothers patronizing my establishment once I did join. I would see a few here and there but that was mostly because I had become friends with them outside of the lodge.

I just wonder when/if humanity will evolve enough to include the entire populace in its "club", so that we might help each other without trying to cloak ourselves in egotism, imaginary honors and a colossal sense of personal entitlement over others.

All Masons are charged to help both Masons and non-Masons equally. Charity is not a gift that is bestowed only to the membership. On the contrary, it would appear that the majority of the 'good deeds' go to persons who are not nor will ever be Masons.

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
Before there was an internet, or even telephones, people had to band together physically to congregate, make plans and express themselves, whether for personal, spiritual or business endeavors.

I think a lot of people shun the secrecy of these groups, perhaps because this new "information age" we find ourselves in demands transparency (while the media gives us illusion, of course) and so people naturally assume that with secrecy comes bad intentions.

I just wonder when/if humanity will evolve enough to include the entire populace in its "club", so that we might help each other without trying to cloak ourselves in egotism, imaginary honors and a colossal sense of personal entitlement over others.

I would argue that the opposite is happening—in this information age when more of our social connections are with people we've never seen in the flesh, there's a backlash of people who want that personal connection and will join groups that meet in person simply to get away from the virtual world and the so-called transparency of main stream media. Such people might rather trust someone they actually know than a talking head on Fox News…

reply to post by JoshNorton

there's a backlash of people who want that personal connection and will join groups that meet in person simply to get away from the virtual world

And thanks to the phone & internet, such meetings are WAY easier to organize. ;-)

I would think that by now the number of telephone calls, texts, chat rooms and emails far outweigh similar specially-purposed physical congregations.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

True, but you would be better served joining an orginization that has as its mission statement the attainment of, or at least similar, goals to what you personally are looking to cultivate

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

 

I'd probably be better off starting one, but I'd probably end up with the same member I started with. ;-)

All Masons are charged to help both Masons and non-Masons equally.

And the President is charged with upholding Constitutional values, but it doesn't always work out that way. =)

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
All Masons are charged to help both Masons and non-Masons equally.

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
And the President is charged with upholding Constitutional values, but it doesn't always work out that way. =)

You are quite correct - as AugustusMasonicus has already mentioned, Non-masons usually get better help, due to all the Masons working together as a team to help those non-masons that are needy.

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
reply to post by JoshNorton

 

there's a backlash of people who want that personal connection and will join groups that meet in person simply to get away from the virtual world

And thanks to the phone & internet, such meetings are WAY easier to organize. ;-)

I would think that by now the number of telephone calls, texts, chat rooms and emails far outweigh similar specially-purposed physical congregations.

They do, which is my point! There's a social need for "similar specially-purposed physical congregations." Masonry fits that need for some people.

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
And the President is charged with upholding Constitutional values, but it doesn't always work out that way. =)

The President is only one person and not a fraternal orginization with millions of member. Granted, there are the occasional bad apples in the group but the fact that more good comes from it can be judged by the works of the membership.

Which brings me back to the Original Post, if there were a systemic conspiracy for personal or ill gains by a concerted block of the membership than there would be some evidence of this or proof forthcoming. I have not seen any so I continue to stand by my opinion that there is no Masonic conspiracy.

Back in 2008 when I started this thread I posted this comment:

There has been a distinct inability by numerous posters to support their assertions that Freemasons and/or Freemasonry are somehow participating in various plots and conspiracies with the intention to perform one or more of the following; world domination by ‘high-level’ Masons, conversion to a one-world religion, the practice of worshipping Satan and/or Lucifer, pedophilia, mind-control and gang-stalking among more notable (notorious?) examples.

An incredulous fire-in-the-minds-of-men (author of Perfectiblists, Terry Melanson) responded with this:

The topics you listed in your original post are poppycock! Ignoramuses post stuff such as that! You don't need to be a supporter of Freemasonry to even debunk such fluff.

Now I am very much aware that Terry felt that these were not worthy subjects to debunk as they were, well, bunk to start with. My point to him was that Masons get blamed for some of the most absurdly ridiculous premises that defy all attempts at logic.

I wish he was still here to see this one, Freemasons pulled off 911, Occult Practices, Rituals, and Death Sacrifice on Red Ice.

I think this one may take the proverbial cake unless someone else comes up with a 'Masons are controlling Nibiru along with the Galactic Federation of Light' thread.

The problem is, is that, all of you guys are posting in a very obvious fashion; only the 'accepted regulars' that post and have a nominal amount of time in circulation. Everyone else gets sequestered. So an observer can clearly delineate between the subsets of users and their sock puppets.

P.S. When a user is the last person to post on a topic, it is very visible; by having a certain person(s) being in that subset of data... well, it makes things obvious.

And by having, certain, obvious topics not showing up in the search function...

Originally posted by SymbolicLogic
The problem is, is that, all of you guys are posting in a very obvious fashion; only the 'accepted regulars' that post and have a nominal amount of time in circulation. Everyone else gets sequestered. So an observer can clearly delineate between the subsets of users and their sock puppets.

P.S. When a user is the last person to post on a topic, it is very visible; by having a certain person(s) being in that subset of data... well, it makes things obvious.

And by having, certain, obvious topics not showing up in the search function...

I am really not understaning what you are trying to communicate. Can you explain that a bit differently and maybe use more detail or examples?

Would you like me to make you a graph of trends as well?