It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by DeltaT
He was a scapegoat for all the people in 'high position'. He diverted attention. It was the lone nut tactic all over again. Yes, he was sick, but he worked for even sicker ones. I guess you're one of those who don't 'believe' in paedophilic networks.
Originally posted by newinitiation
I mean seriously there is so much evidence, cases based on actual testimony from victims, reports, testimony from the people who directly work with the victims and so forth to not dismiss their claims as obsurd.
In all honesty the book of law and the thelemic scriptures condones and even promotes a lifestyle of human depravity designed to live one's life based on murder, torture, degradation, hate, domination of the weak, exploitation of people for one's own end, human sacrifice, etc etc.
What is the fundamental reason for joining such organisation in the first place then for one to follows its doctrines and scriptures to one's own life. Isn't this what the appeal is?
If they have been given unalienable right as individuals, then likewise others would also be given the same in equal measures.
Just as well you'd see OTO and freemasonry as the victims of false accusation without considering for a minute that vile elements within these ranks are responsible for some of the worse crimes against humanity and that of the poor victimized childrens which is in the end the heart of the matter. And on what proof you continue to ferverently ask? Read.
Originally posted by newinitiation
'The book of law' and among it, the passage 'do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law' followed by 'Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights' augmented by this saying 'love is the law; love under will'.
Originally posted by newinitiation
CUG I think I know enough to make my judgements as the facts are, on the 6th of November 1941 issue of Liber OZ or The book of strength they otherwise call it where what Crowley calls'The right of man' contain 4 short excerpts from 'The book of law' and among it, the passage 'do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law' followed by 'Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights' augmented by this saying 'love is the law; love under will'.
Wouldn't logic dictate to you that he was a hypocrite, not to mention of him admitting that he didn't understand all that he has written in 'the book of the law'.
If you read Crowley's lapdog Neuburgs records, it reflects an abundance of sado masochistic elements. Does gorse and nettles ring a bell to you?
Now this is just a tip of the ice berg of Crowley's lifestyle as you know but how can rational people find anything appealing about such ideals of life other than Crowley's intellectualism and his fortitude in re-establishing or rather expressing what no other mortals even dare to suggest.
I see a day when people will wake up and sense the unrighteous path they have tread for too long to suddenly and even violently shudder at the realization that they had been ignoring the truth all these years.
Originally posted by DeltaT
I'm seeing a LOT of 'liberty' and hardly any responsibility in masonic actions and current politics in general. They're limited to total selfishness -- which is not what 'liberty' means.
Originally posted by DeltaT
I'm seeing a LOT of 'liberty' and hardly any responsibility in masonic actions and current politics in general. They're limited to total selfishness -- which is not what 'liberty' means.
Originally posted by Cug
Originally posted by DeltaT
I'm seeing a LOT of 'liberty' and hardly any responsibility in masonic actions and current politics in general. They're limited to total selfishness -- which is not what 'liberty' means.
First of all who is talking about the Masons?
Originally posted by Dock6
.
The Masons USED to enjoy public esteem...Masons no longer enjoy public respect or esteem. Just the opposite.
Dock6 wrote:
It's clear the OTO used every card in the pack to try to discredit, i.e., 'silence' Gaiaguys.
Originally posted by Roark
Your understanding of Freemasonry seems to be based on some kind of vast pyramidic tentacular structure. As has been pointed out many times already, this is not the case.
Originally posted by DeltaT
Enlighten us then: would you distance yourself and freemasonry in general from the likes of Alceister Crowley? Or would you call him a brother?
These independent masonic rites no doubt seemed perfectly suited to the purposes of the O.T.O.'s founders, but their continued existence was only due to the tremendous energy, endurance and influence of John Yarker, who battled with established masonry through most of his career. While alive, he managed to hold the interest of a small group of enthusiasts around the world-tiny by comparison to regular rites of masonry-but on his death his rites soon fell into terminal decline.
Coincidentally with Yarker's death theGrand Lodge of England (which governs I°-III°Craft masonry) seems to have adopted a more stringent policy concerning masonic regularity. The letters published here refer to an Grand Lodgecircular letter terming Co-masonry irregular or clandestine, both technical masonic terms that have serious implications formasons, as fraternal dealings with irregular or clandestine lodges can result in disfellowship. Crowley tried to interpret this as applying only to the Theosophical Co-masonry,[1] but this is unlikely, since Crowley and Reuss also admitted women, and derived their authority from the same source as the Theosophists.
Crowley quickly realized that the post-Yarker era meant change. He was not rebellious by reflex, at least where old British institutions were concerned. He undoubtedly believed O.T.O. had authority from Yarker to work the Antient and Primitive Rite's equivalent to the Craft degrees in England, but once made aware of the issue of regularity when having his own French masonic credentials declined,he was not defiant and on his own made changes to the O.T.O. to avoid conflict. He inserted notices into the last number of The Equinox to the effect that the O.T.O.did not infringe upon the just privileges of the Grand Lodge of England.
Source: Frater Superior Hymenaeus Beta (the current head of the O.T.O.)