Illuminati/Freemason symbols in the new Omen movie

Originally posted by Thodeph
Those who call journalistic reports and children's testimonies 'hearsay' and insist upon 'facts' don't install a lot of confidence. Your chivalrish rescue of those poor, falsely accused freemasons doesn't either.

Again, it might be wiser to admit that at least a lot of indications exist that freemasons have given into paedophilic crimes, or are protecting those accused -- which amounts to the same.

Freemasons are not the only ones guilty of such acts. Catholic priests and bishops apparently can suffer from a similar disease. Which, in their case, could be explained by years of celibacy, not by the compliance to a cult's inherent amoral beliefs.

[edit on 28-2-2007 by Thodeph]

You know, it never fails that those without facts are the first to start complaining about things. Very well then, if you wish to engage in this, then please begin by providing some of these journalistic reporst and children's testimonies that refer to Freemason Dignitaries and their crimes. I eagerly await them.

No one is saying that all Freemasons accused of crimes are falsely accused, only that the link you provided happened to be one of those that the charges were discredited. We are only saying that to accuse the Freemasons of inspiring these acts is just as ridiculous, and equally without merit. There has never been any factual evidence to suggest otherwise. I won't go into the charitable organizations and events, or countless millions of dollars that have gone toward furthering the aid of the downfallen, because as before you would only dismiss these as "a front". What I ask of you then, is to provide some instance where Freemasons were directly behind some major scandal, or destruction of property, or atrocious sin. If you can't, then we have yet another clone of countless conversations before......

Repost for EdenKaia

Dunblane Inquiry Was a Cover Up and Peers Bullied Me to Keep Quiet, Says Lord Burton, Ex-Masons Leader


Cullen Inquiry Whitewash
-- "I asked Lord Cullen to recuse himself if he was a Freemason. He denied he was a Mason following the question posed. I then asked him to instruct every witness to the Inquiry to declare if they were Masons, because too many sinister loopholes were created for Thomas Hamilton over a number of years to enable him to retain his gun licence and continue running boys clubs. Hamilton was given this seal of approval despite many misgivings from worried members of the public, certain police officers and others. [...] As it happened, Lord Cullen did not recuse himself, even though, as I have recently discovered, he is numbered 1702 on the membership list of the ‘Speculative Society of Edinburgh’, which is an exclusive off-shoot of Freemasonry. In fact, Masons from Lodge Canongate Kilwinning No 2, founded the “Speculative Society” in Edinburgh in 1764."

Dunblane update: Police involved in paedophile ring
-- "Lord Cullen, who led the inquiry and imposed the 100-year ban, was asked to recuse himself if he was a Freemason. (Hamilton, reportedly, was himself a lodge member.) Cullen denied that he held membership. Cullen was then asked "to instruct every witness to the Inquiry to declare if they were Masons." Cullen declined. Since the inquiry, Cullen has been found to be "Number 1702 on the membership list of the ‘Speculative Society of Edinburgh’, which is an exclusive off-shoot of Freemasonry. In fact, Masons from Lodge Canongate Kilwinning No 2, founded the 'Speculative Society' in Edinburgh in 1764."

Believe The Children -- Conviction List: Ritual Child Abuse
-- "Children who attended Christchurch Civic Creche described bizarre sexual abuse with references to frightening rituals. The children allege they were removed from the day care facility and transported to other locations, including a cemetary and a Masonic lodge, where they were abused by adults dressed in black and white and wearing masks. [similar stories can be found in many countries (eg. Belgium) and each time the children's stories were discredited as fantasies]

Freemason accused of indecent assault alleges conspiracy - says he was only concerned with ensuring boys proper hygene
-- "Giving evidence, Richardson, a freemason, said: “I personally think it’s been orchestrated by one of them, I’m not mentioning any names."

Information on Ritual Abuse
-- "Luciferian cults (where God is capable of good and evil) are described by some [of their] patients. Many of these patients have alleged ritual abuse where Masonic ceremonies, items or members were there."

Alright, a few things then.

First off, anything from the "freemasonwatch" website has to be taken with a grain of salt, as they have had proven hoaxes brought out publically. Apparently had something to do with complete articles, names, and events being completely fabricated. The site has since made a public apology and "were not sure how these false reports came through". Either way you look at it, this kind of kills any credibility.

Second, on that child abuse article: Instances of abuse and rituals were described from nearly every state. Not one of them mentions Freemasonry, but rather "satanic rituals", "animal sacrifices", and "men in robes". Did you automatically assume this meant these people were Masons? For this to be true, you would have to believe that Masons participate in things like these sacrifices and whatnot. Have you ever been inside a lodge or seen any of these rituals? Do you know if they have anything to do with Satanism or animal ritual sacrifice? If you've seen this firsthand, I will stand humbly corrected. Otherwise, you are only making the assumption that any group participating in traditional ceremonies MUST be satanic in nature. This just isn't true.

Now, I wouldn't exclude the YMCA, but then that's an entirely different story.

Originally posted by EdenKaia
Alright, a few things then.

First off, anything from the "freemasonwatch" website has to be taken with a grain of salt, as they have had proven hoaxes brought out publically. Apparently had something to do with complete articles, names, and events being completely fabricated. The site has since made a public apology and "were not sure how these false reports came through". Either way you look at it, this kind of kills any credibility.

I rather think your own credibility sinks with every reply.

You're calling the Freemasonwatch non-trustworthy, yet the link on Freemasonwatch refers to an article in the Guardian.

You're remarkable quiet about the Dunblane case also. Maybe because the judge presiding it closed the investigation for the next 100 years. The judge was revealed to be president of a Scottish freemason group.



[edit on 1-3-2007 by Thodeph]

Call my credibility what you will. I'm not here to win a popularity contest.

As for the Dunbane case, much of that was later discredited as well. I've also said before that Masons will go to lengths to protect their own, to a certain extent, but that does not mean that Masons have an agenda of sin and crime. Here is where your logic falls short of sense.

In regard to the article Freemasonwatch posted from the Guardian, again, I take anything they say with a grain of salt. Regardless how credible the source it comes from, anything posted by that site has the potential and probability to be either blown out of proportion, completely fabricated, or some combination of the two. It is not I that have come out against them. Not I to expose their hoax for what it was. I call them discredible because they are, and it has been shown time and again. Simple as that.

I ask you again. Have you ever been to a Freemason ritual, of any kind? You call me quiet. I would make the same observation. What of your "child accusations", which you were so fond of bringing to the table as more than the "hearsay" I claimed it to be? I have no doubts that these things happened, and for which I am truly sorry to those involved. I do, however, have serious doubts that it was a sanctioned Masonic ritual.

Keep something else in mind. You've been making the argument that Freemasons are evil on a grand scale; that the group is corrupt. What brittle evidence you've shown is for nothing but individual accounts. The Dunbane case is your best example, and it was only a few masons involved to begin with. How does this provide substantial proof that the Masons are "brainwashing" and all of this other nonsense that most anti-masons are prone to spewing?

Finally an admission that Freemasons were involved in the Dunbane case.

I emphasized this case as a test to Masoniclight's freethinking abilities. Unfortunately, he/she refused to review the evidence or take it seriously. People who belong to an organization without allowing criticism towards it, in my opinion, take on the characteristics of the brainwashed.

Originally posted by Thodeph
Those who call journalistic reports and children's testimonies 'hearsay' and insist upon 'facts' don't install a lot of confidence.

I'm sorry, you're right. We should never let those big bad facts get in the way of good journalism and the testimony of 4 year olds who've been instructed in what to say by religious zealot "therapists".

Sheesh....what was I thinkin'!!!!

Originally posted by Thodeph
Those who call journalistic reports and children's testimonies 'hearsay' and insist upon 'facts' don't install a lot of confidence.

I'm sorry, you're right. We should never let those big bad facts get in the way of good journalism and hearsay

Sheesh....what was I thinkin'!!!!



[edit on 1-3-2007 by Masonic Light]

Originally posted by Thodeph
Finally an admission that Freemasons were involved in the Dunbane case.

I emphasized this case as a test to Masoniclight's freethinking abilities. Unfortunately, he/she refused to review the evidence or take it seriously. People who belong to an organization without allowing criticism towards it, in my opinion, take on the characteristics of the brainwashed.

There is a difference between constructive criticism, and outright foolishness. You are one that walks a fine line between the two.

Don't feel so personally attacked.

I never said all freemasons were pederasts. I presented evidence that some were, and that others have covered up child killings to a degree that's quite disturbing. Furthermore, indications are rife that this occurs all over the world, suggesting something inherently problematic with freemasonic sexual ethics.

Apparently, instead of admitting this, cult-like denial came to the front on the legitimacy of press publications about official paedophilia scandals involving particular freemasons.

It would have sufficed for Masonic Light to admit that some freemasons have practiced paedophile actions. Instead, the usual skepticism-bluster was produced; apparently members of a cult deny any possibility that their fellowship could be prone to criminal behaviour or even moral deviance.

[edit on 2-3-2007 by Thodeph]

Originally posted by Thodeph
Don't feel so personally attacked.

I never said all freemasons were pederasts. I presented evidence that some were, and that others have covered up child killings to a degree that's quite disturbing. Furthermore, indications are rife that this occurs all over the world, suggesting something inherently problematic with freemasonic sexual ethics.

Who has covered up "child killings"? What are "freemasonic sexual ethics"? Sex is not a part of Freemasonry, and I've never heard of any Mason killing kids.

Apparently, instead of admitting this, cult-like denial came to the front on the legitimacy of press publications about official paedophilia scandals involving particular freemasons.

The "cult-like denial", i.e., questioning your motives and challenging your unsubstantiated claims, is part of Denying Ignorance, the motto of this website.

It would have sufficed for Masonic Light to admit that some freemasons have practiced paedophile actions. Instead, the usual skepticism-bluster was produced; apparently members of a cult deny any possibility that their fellowship could be prone to criminal behaviour or even moral deviance.

As I did say, out of the millions of Masons, there have been a small minority who have been bad apples. This is because Freemasonry's membership is composed of humans, and that's just the way some humans are.

But your attempt to take this minority, and make it look like some sort of Masonic conspiracy is both deceitful and bogus, and I think you know it.

Originally posted by Thodeph
You're remarkable quiet about the Dunblane case also. Maybe because the judge presiding it closed the investigation for the next 100 years. The judge was revealed to be president of a Scottish freemason group.

It may be that he knows as little about it as you do. The difference is he doesnt post suspect information.

Robert Cooper, the museum and library curator of the Grand Lodge in Edinburgh’s George Street, said: "We are going to ask for members’ permission from two lodges that Thomas Hamilton has been linked with to print the membership book on the internet to put an end to speculation over whether he was a Freemason or not. We know he wasn’t but we want everyone else to be sure as well."

It’s not just an academic exercise. The Hamilton connection has haunted the Freemasons since he shot dead 16 children, one of their teachers and himself in the school gym of Dunblane Primary in 1996. Last month, a petition was submitted by a local resident to the Scottish parliament asking for the Cullen Inquiry into the murders to be reopened to re-examine alleged Masonic links.

Cooper is more familiar than most with how the theory goes. It sprang, he says, from the clearly-recorded membership of Hamilton’s grandfather, James, a welder who joined the Garrowhill Lodge in the working class district of Baillieston in December 1957 and, after moving home, was a regular attendee at the Royal Arch Lodge in Stirling until his death in 2000.

As the grandfather was a member, then so was the grandson, so the theory progresses. As a mason, Thomas Hamilton would mix socially with other masons, many of them local police officers, the theory dictates. "Thomas Hamilton was unstable but was allowed to keep guns in his house by the police because they were all masons together," Cooper said. "None of this is true."

Membership records were scrutinised for the years in which Hamilton, who was born in 1952, could have been a member. They were from 1973, after he was 21 (you can only join at 18 if your father has been a member), to 1996 when he died. Another two Thomas Hamiltons were unearthed in Scotland but they were both the wrong ages.

"We spent months scouring the relevant documentation and no trace was found of him. Of course people will say you would say that wouldn’t you, which is why we are prepared to open the relevant parts of the register and attendance books up to scrutiny."

There is no evidence whatsoever that Thomas Hamilton was a freemason, just poor journalism and wishful thinking. With Thomas Hamilton not a freemason, the whole sorry hypothesis falls crashing to the ground, like so many others.

Please don't take Freemasonrywatch as truthful without doing further research. They tell lies.

You might also be interested in the following excerpts (the bold is me):

Wikipedia:

Since the massacre, questions have been raised about the actions of Central Scotland Police in the case, and numerous Internet conspiracy theories have arisen regarding alleged involvement by Freemasonry, George Robertson, MI6, the supporters of the Snowdrop Petition and Northern Ireland terrorist organisations.[6][7] These were, to some extent, fuelled by the 100-year restriction on publication of parts of the Cullen Inquiry into the massacre. The partial lifting of these restrictions on 3 October 2005 quelled some of the more outlandish theories. One of the victim's parents, who read the full version of all the documents before they were released, concluded there was no evidence for any conspiracy[2]. Nevertheless Dunblane conspiracy sites still persist on the web.

From the News Of The World - "Dunblane Inquiry Was a Cover Up and Peers Bullied Me to Keep Quiet, Says Lord Burton, Ex-Masons Leader" (your link is dead so I had to go hunting for this)

Lord Burton said "I was Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scotland at the time and I'm aware that most of the conspiracy theories around Dunblane revolve around allegations of a masonic conspiracy. (snip) ... but Hamilton was never a mason. His grandfather was.

He does not at any time suggest that the freemasons were involved in a conspiracy, which he believes is between the legal community and politicians. The News of the World is a tabloid newspaper from England, which Wikipedia says

tends to concentrate on lighter-weight news stories, such as celebrity gossip. Its fondness for sex scandals has gained it the nicknames "Sex 'n' Scandal weekly", "News of the Screws" and "Screws of the World".

Originally posted by Thodeph
As it happened, Lord Cullen did not recuse himself, even though, as I have recently discovered, he is numbered 1702 on the membership list of the ‘Speculative Society of Edinburgh’, which is an exclusive off-shoot of Freemasonry. In fact, Masons from Lodge Canongate Kilwinning No 2, founded the “Speculative Society” in Edinburgh in 1764."

The 'Speculative Society' has nothing whatsoever to do with freemasonry. It may well have been founded over 200 years ago by freemasons (who have founded many other organizations equally unattached to freemasonry) and you may find cross-over of membership too - also in common with many other organizations. But it is not a recognized masonic body, appendent body or any other form of masonic body.

Lord Cullen was right not to recuse himself as his membership of said society does not make one a freemason.

Just to make the point that 666 isn't the number of the devil anyway, he was misquoted, his number is actually 616.

just watched the film today (the 06 remake), and also spotted the Crusader/Templar Ship drawing, along with the Skull and Bones in the hospital. They were really blatant and in your face!

The remake took into account recent events such as 9/11, the Tsunami etc. If you've watched this recent film, and want to watch the rest of the series, just hire out The Omen 2 and 3:The final conflict, because the remake was true to the original IMO.

In 'Erin Brokovich', you can clearly see a Mason symbol on the wall outside the doors into the courtroom. That is odd to me, and I wondered why it would be on a courtroom wall.
That is my only movie mason symbol sighting.
As for the omen, since the Christians who collectively concocted this whole Illuminati tale out of thin air also decided that satanic symbols were also Illuminati symbols, of course a movie about satan would have them.
The main point is that Illuminati diatribe, no matter how immense it becomes, has no substance. Even if millions of people believe they are real, I still want to see one shred of proof. Just one. But after over a decade of reading this stuff I haven't. It is just paranoia and imaginations running wild. I'm amazed at how big it's gotten. Ten years ago no-one had even heard of these Illuminati, and now millions of people are certain they exist despite a total lack of evidence. Wow!!!