What Pike Meant (even though you won't believe me)

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Pike was partial to the KKK and said that he would like to create a group similar to it. It's been claimed that he was the Grand Dragon of the KKK. Regardless, he was a known racist, and he only fought for the rights of Native Americans so he could steal their rituals.

I would ask you to give some sort of substantiating evidence to back up your statements but I know, as with everything else you post, it is only your warped opinion.

Prove me wrong.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


He will not bring prove just statements of his own.

Even if Pike was partial to the KKK, so what? Look at the time period in which he lived at one time millions of average joes were "partial" or members of the Klan, it was social acceptible.

So I dont see how that constant KKK aligation making any sense. He was a Rebal war General for god sakes.

Anti Masons, always trying to run a mason through the mud.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


My opinion is that you're being a troll

Originally posted by humbleseeker
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

 

Even if Pike was partial to the KKK, so what? Look at the time period in which he lived at one time millions of average joes were "partial" or members of the Klan, it was social acceptible.

So I dont see how that constant KKK aligation making any sense. He was a Rebal war General for god sakes.

So it's "acceptible" to lynch black people?

reply to post by vcwxvwligen


I never said that Pike was associated with the KKK. I think you just like starting trouble and posting things you no are not true.

I just said even if he was associated with the kkk should not discredit him because of the time period he lived in.

Do we discredit becasue the founding fathers of the United States owned slaves.

Know its not ok to lynch anyone, your just trying to get a rise out of people. its funny

Originally posted by humbleseeker
reply to post by vcwxvwligen

 

I never said that Pike was associated with the KKK. I think you just like starting trouble and posting things you no are not true.

I just said even if he was associated with the kkk should not discredit him because of the time period he lived in.

Racism is wrong no matter what time period you live in.

Do we discredit becasue the founding fathers of the United States owned slaves.

Why not? They were terrorists after all, right?

Know its not ok to lynch anyone, your just trying to get a rise out of people. its funny

Joking about racism funny to you, maybe

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
My opinion is that you're being a troll

You mean how I cruise in here every few months, post some ridiculous comments, never bring any facts to the arguement and then run and hide again? You mean that troll-like behavior?

Project much?

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen

Originally posted by humbleseeker
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

 

Even if Pike was partial to the KKK, so what? Look at the time period in which he lived at one time millions of average joes were "partial" or members of the Klan, it was social acceptible.

So I dont see how that constant KKK aligation making any sense. He was a Rebal war General for god sakes.

So it's "acceptible" to lynch black people?

wow, it'a a bit early for the race card isn't it? I have noticed that when someone is loosing or about to loose an argument, the race card is usually played to avoid colossal embarrassment. Richard Pryor didn't like white people. I am OK with that and I still think he was very funny when not on fire. Please get over yourself.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen

My opinion is that you're being a troll

You mean how I cruise in here every few months, post some ridiculous comments, never bring any facts to the arguement and then run and hide again? You mean that troll-like behavior?



Project much?

This is a conspiracy theories forum and I'm post conspiracy theories. Instead of begging for evidence, why don't you take some initiative? I research the conspiracy theories that other people post on here, and you ought to do likewise. You would be a much more useful contributor if you actually provided some facts and insider info in your own right instead of antagonizing other people.



That's not troll-like behavior. Seems like you yourself need to get your facts (and your spelling) straight.

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen

Originally posted by humbleseeker

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

 

Even if Pike was partial to the KKK, so what? Look at the time period in which he lived at one time millions of average joes were "partial" or members of the Klan, it was social acceptible.



So I dont see how that constant KKK aligation making any sense. He was a Rebal war General for god sakes.

So it's "acceptible" to lynch black people?

wow, it'a a bit early for the race card isn't it? I have noticed that when someone is loosing or about to loose an argument, the race card is usually played to avoid colossal embarrassment. Richard Pryor didn't like white people. I am OK with that and I still think he was very funny when not on fire. Please get over yourself.

Exactly what "colossal embarrassment" was I trying to avoid?



Maybe you should listen to your conscience instead of patronizing people whom you perceive to be hateful?

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Instead of begging for evidence, why don't you take some initiative? I research the conspiracy theories that other people post on here, and you ought to do likewise.

This is the lazy-persons approach to debate, "I said it, now you go and find out if it is true or not." I have a better idea, post your sources. Since you have done so much research this should be quote easy.

You would be a much more useful contributor if you actually provided some facts and insider info in your own right instead of antagonizing other people.

What facts are you looking for?

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Why not? They were terrorists after all, right?

No they were not. They were fighting tyranny and endeavoring to establish a free country.

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
This is a conspiracy theories forum and I'm post conspiracy theories. Instead of begging for evidence, why don't you take some initiative? I research the conspiracy theories that other people post on here, and you ought to do likewise. You would be a much more useful contributor if you actually provided some facts and insider info in your own right instead of antagonizing other people.

Yeah, why ask for crazy things like evidence? I mean why question the authenticity, validity, or credibility of your assertions? Are we supposed to just sit here and take it on the chin? You come on here spouting your lies and then get mad when we charge back?

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Maybe you should listen to your conscience instead of patronizing people whom you perceive to be hateful?

so I should hate Richard Pryor becuase he is black? That seems a bit stupid doesn't it? You seem to have a screwed up way of looking at the world. But I guess when all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. Racist people are stupid people. Don't be that guy.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Instead of begging for evidence, why don't you take some initiative? I research the conspiracy theories that other people post on here, and you ought to do likewise.

This is the lazy-persons approach to debate, "I said it, now you go and find out if it is true or not." I have a better idea, post your sources. Since you have done so much research this should be quote easy.

I don't go on the Internet looking to engage in debates. I'm sure you've heard the old adage about arguing over the Internet.

No, the "lazy-persons" approach to debate is using improper grammar.

You would be a much more useful contributor if you actually provided some facts and insider info in your own right instead of antagonizing other people.

What facts are you looking for?

Facts about whatever gives you the impulse to ask other people for sources.

Originally posted by KSigMason

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Why not? They were terrorists after all, right?

No they were not. They were fighting tyranny and endeavoring to establish a free country.

Um, yes, they persecuted the Loyalists. The Freemasons like to delude themselves into believing that revolutions are always open-and-shut cases.

... free for slave-owning "gentlemen."

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
This is a conspiracy theories forum and I'm post conspiracy theories. Instead of begging for evidence, why don't you take some initiative? I research the conspiracy theories that other people post on here, and you ought to do likewise. You would be a much more useful contributor if you actually provided some facts and insider info in your own right instead of antagonizing other people.

Yeah, why ask for crazy things like evidence? I mean why question the authenticity, validity, or credibility of your assertions? Are we supposed to just sit here and take it on the chin? You come on here spouting your lies and then get mad when we charge back?

Exactly, why question it being that you haven't researched it yourself?

Take what on the chin? The Freemasons should stop playing the victim, and stop digging themselves into a hole.

Who's getting mad?

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
Maybe you should listen to your conscience instead of patronizing people whom you perceive to be hateful?

so I should hate Richard Pryor becuase he is black? That seems a bit stupid doesn't it? You seem to have a screwed up way of looking at the world. But I guess when all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. Racist people are stupid people. Don't be that guy.

Typical of a Freemason to take the other extreme.

So, then, not patronizing somebody means expressing hatred.

And thanks for the personal attacks, and for calling me a racist.

reply to post by vcwxvwligen

I have researched much and my very membership gives me a upper hand in the studies of Freemasonry. How are we digging a hole? We've disproved most every lie there has been posted about it.

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
I don't go on the Internet looking to engage in debates.

We all ready know that. You modus operandi is to offer inane comments without substantiation and then complain that everyone is somehow trolling you. Your rhetorical and hyperbolic reply only furthers the point that you have no evidence to support your comments.

No, the "lazy-persons" approach to debate is using improper grammar.

Wow. This is the extent of your ability to rebut an arguement? No wonder why you constantly avoid posting sources.

Facts about whatever gives you the impulse to ask other people for sources.

The fact is that this is a discussion board where other posters will frequently ask for sources and evidence to make an educated observation regarding another's opinion and not just swallow someone else's pap verbatim. If you can not handle this aspect then maybe you should find something less mentally challenging then having others question your opinion.

Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by vcwxvwligen

 

I have researched much and my very membership gives me a upper hand in the studies of Freemasonry. How are we digging a hole?

Good, then let's see some of your vast insider info.

The Freemasons engage in evil activities and then lie about it. They lie about being a Christian organization, when even the Freemasons on ATS are open anti-Christianity.

We've disproved most every lie there has been posted about it.

No you haven't.

What about King Solomon falling out of favor with God?

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
I don't go on the Internet looking to engage in debates.

We all ready know that. You modus operandi is to offer inane comments without substantiation and then complain that everyone is somehow trolling you. Your rhetorical and hyperbolic reply only furthers the point that you have no evidence to support your comments.

No, the "lazy-persons" approach to debate is using improper grammar.

Wow. This is the extent of your ability to rebut an arguement? No wonder why you constantly avoid posting sources.

More personal attacks. This is what I mean by Freemasons digging themselves into a hole.

Facts about whatever gives you the impulse to ask other people for sources.

The fact is that this is a discussion board where other posters will frequently ask for sources and evidence to make an educated observation regarding another's opinion and not just swallow someone else's pap verbatim. If you can not handle this aspect then maybe you should find something less mentally challenging then having others question your opinion.

Other posters shouldn't have to ask for sources when texts are out there. That's laziness as well as appealing to ignorance (crossing your fingers hoping that the person being challenged doesn't really have sources). Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. In a debate, both sides must provide evidence, not just somebody being challenged by some denier running at the mouth claiming that there's no proof.

A while back I quoted directly from ritual, which sent shockwaves, so it's obvious that the Freemasons rely quite a bit on people's ignorance. Yes, the ritual for the 32 degrees of the Scottish Rite are available to non-Masons, but nobody dares to actually spell them out.