Royal Order of Jesters testify about Illegal Drugs, Child Prostitution

reply to post by jaamaan


I hope fitz doesn't mind, but I'd like to play as well. You took a news story about a slander suit that involved a few jesters as witnesses, and made the following comments:


From what i have been reading from some mason members i thought that masons where in it for making a better world for every one. These news bits seem to prove the opposite.

An indication of what realy happens in their secret meetings?

It might be an incident but the secrets surrounding these masons make it that i tend to believe there "can be" more to it, than i usualy do.

Typical behaviour ?
Under aged prostitutes?
You dont mean typical jester behaviour, do you ?

Well here the parties seemed to get quite out of hand.
What i would like to know is if it is a regular thing to these people.
It seems that these men like their parties to be wild.

After reading some of these stories i tent to believe that mothers advice their children to stay home at these events.

this is not an isolated incident but maybe something more structural.

A pattern so far could be, sex orgies.

All of these - every one - an insuation that this must be usual behavior of Jesters. Sure, you were very good about adding in a "maybe" and "could," but if you really thought that this was just a possibility, you wouldn't be saying the same stuff every time - because its the only possibility you've considered. And then:

I am not judging any one,

You are doing exactly that. Not only judging the jesters in this case, but all jesters - from your own comments above.

Additionally, I did not quote your numerous rhetorical questions like this one:

No one convicted, but are there more of these cases ?

Once would have been enough - since your question was answered - but you keep asking it to give the illusion that things are more serious than they really are. A covert tactic, but a potentially slanderous one nonetheless.



[edit on 13-3-2008 by pacificwind]

reply to post by Mirthful Me



Well said Mirthful Me,

Sadly, no intelligent thought will come of it. Those whom you refer to have drawn their conclusions and will not be swayed, even with actual information on the subject as opposed to Googled "facts"

Too bad for them, really. Pseudo-intellectualism is fascinating, though. Pike called these folks the "illiterati" . . . now isn't that a pun on this particular part of the forum. Perhaps 'ol Albert was indeed ahead of his time. (Satanic plot, for sure! "Doubt it not")

But it's OK, because the real truth of the matter (as you and several others here know) is that they aren't capable of understanding the truth of the matter in the first place.

It's much like the lyrics from a Jimmy Buffet song actually "Don't try to describe the scenery if you've never seen it"

In the end, it truly IS fun to read what they write, though. Sure makes my day more bearable.




[edit on 13-3-2008 by senrak]

Busted pervs blaming their actions on whatever fraternal order they happen to belong to.
Ask yourself a question: If they didn't belong to some order of fraternal brotherhood, who would they blame it on?

reply to post by pacificwind

Originally posted by jaamaan

Originally posted by earthman4
My granfather was a Jester. The prostitutes were not part of the Jesters, just typical bussinessman behaviour.

Typical behaviour ?

Under aged prostitutes?

You dont mean typical jester behaviour, do you ?

This is where you partly quoted from.
See how it is VERY different of what you try to show what THAT bit of your quote list.

From the very start of my post i made sure i used a lot of question marks, and maybe, could there be, and so on remarks.

Originally posted by pacificwind
All of these - every one - an insuation that this must be usual behavior of Jesters. Sure, you were very good about adding in a "maybe" and "could," but if you really thought that this was just a possibility, you wouldn't be saying the same stuff every time - because its the only possibility you've considered. And then:

You are trying to twist my words.

And i felt the need to repeat myself a couple of times when people tried to downplay accusations as strong as "child prostitution"

reply to post by pacificwind



There is to much word twisting in your post to react on like this.

Lets put it this way.

Show me one of my complete posts where i slander "all" jesters as a group

fair enough ?

Originally posted by NGC2736
I am seriously doubtful that anyone here wants to truly further understanding.

From this point on, i tend to agree.
Honestly, a couple of pages ago allready

reply to post by jaamaan


No. I've shown your tactics. You can claim its twisting all you want, but your wrong. You have an agenda. The one case you have tried to challenge is hilarious, because its obvious the poster meant that prostitutes are normal behavior among business people, not Jesters. But you still had to ask the question like you didn't understand, in order to continually give the illusion that there is something more here.

Originally posted by pacificwind
reply to post by jaamaan

 

No. I've shown your tactics. You can claim its twisting all you want, but your wrong. You have an agenda. The one case you have tried to challenge is hilarious, because its obvious the poster meant that prostitutes are normal behavior among business people, not Jesters. But you still had to ask the question like you didn't understand, in order to continually give the illusion that there is something more here.

Obviously to you maybe.
And could you explain what you mean by "like you didn't understand" ?

See what you like to see in my words and take them out of context.

I am sure i explained myself in an honest way.

Originally posted by jaamaan
Show me one of my complete posts where i slander "all" jesters as a group

jaamaan,

One of the biggest problems this forum faces (in my opinion, of course) is, in fact, "generalization." And I mean that in ALL aspects. If these alleged crimes did, in fact, occur and they were, in fact, carried out by men who were members of the Royal Order of Jesters, which is composed of Masons, then they must INDEED be dealt with. Not only from the legal aspect, because they certainly need to be punished for these crimes (if they are guilty...and the U.S. frowns on this sort of crime, even if committed on foreign soil) but they should (and certainly WILL) be punished from a Masonic stand-point as well. The only fitting punishment for such crimes (if they were indeed committed) would be expulsion. (No, we cannot and will not cut their throats from ear to ear or sever their bodies in twain, etc. etc., but we will punish them.)

All that being said, by the mere mention that they are "Jesters" displays the guilt of "generalization."

Are there "bad apples" as one forum moderator pointed out (and has been pointed out here many times?) Certainly. Does that make "Masons" or "Jesters" bad? Of course not.

Recently on cnn.com I read an article about a young man who had killed his parents and siblings. The head-line read something to the effect of "Eagle Scout Kills Family"

Why the **** did CNN say "Eagle Scout" ? He was a 15 year-old kid for god's sake. Did it sound better to call him an "Eagle Scout" since he belonged to that organization? Are ALL Eagle Scouts murderers?

If he were a Presbyterian would it have said "Presbyterian Kills Family?"

Does this make sense?

Yes, there are bad people who are Masons and sometimes there are several in a group. Think of the local Lions Club. How do they gain membership? Are people lined up at the door to join? No, likely active members solicit friends and business acquaintances to join.

Same thing happens in Masonry (although direct solicitation isn't supposed to happen in most jurisdictions) but it makes for a local Lodge often made up of like-minded people....this for "good" or for "bad" Depends on the circumstances.

Same thing happens in college fraternities/sororities. This is how the *fill-in-the-blanks* house at *ABC* University has a certain reputation while the same house on *XYZ* University is made up of vastly different people.

Did these men commit the alleged crimes? Don't know. I hope not, but if they did, they should be punished and they do NOT deserve the honour of being Masons.

And if they did, they did NOT (that bears repeating) they did NOT do it AS Masons....for Masonry neither teaches, nor condones such activities.

If their morals (or lack thereof) condone such activities, they have missed the lessons Masonry teaches.

All this notwithstanding, ATS members and CNN I'm sure will continue to focus on their membership in Masonry and ignoring other organizations like Mirthful Me pointed out regarding the Governor of New York.

God help him if he's a Mason.....hell, we'll all be labeled as "whore-mongers" *sigh*


[edit on 13-3-2008 by senrak]

Originally posted by senrak

One of the biggest problems this forum faces (in my opinion, of course) is, in fact, "generalization." And I mean that in ALL aspects. If these alleged crimes did, in fact, occur and they were, in fact, carried out by men who were members of the Royal Order of Jesters, which is composed of Masons, then they must INDEED be dealt with.
-
All that being said, by the mere mention that they are "Jesters" displays the guilt of "generalization."

Generalization is near to impossible to avoid i think, but i have to agree that it can quickly get out of hand.

So i can easy say that i used some generalisation, mostly when people where trying to downplay the serious accusations.
And i dont think i used it more than most others in this topic.

But like i said before.

I dont mind to call it a day for this debate, unless anyone has anything new to add to the original topic.

Thank you all for your participation so far and i hope to meet you all again when a fresh debate starts somewhere.

Originally posted by jaamaan

Generalization is near to impossible to avoid i think, but i have to agree that it can quickly get out of hand.
So i can easy say that i used some generalisation, mostly when people where trying to downplay the serious accusations.
And i dont think i used it more than most others in this topic.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

We're all guilty of it, both on ATS and in our everyday lives.

It's one of the many things we as humans should endeavour to overcome.

Interestingly, it's an important lesson in Masonry as well. Masons being comprised soley of humans, oftentimes fall short, just like any other human.

But we aren't supposed to.

My Best,

Senrak

[edit on 13-3-2008 by senrak]

Jaamaan,

You have covered this well. The case in Federal Court in Florida is not singling out Jesters but it does include a group of Jesters who have been traveling to Brazil once a year since 2005 for a little "fun" that has included underage girls. If you log into Pacer you can read the entire case file. As per the documents. There is also a criminal case in Brazil focusing on the operator and his customers (I wonder if the Brazilians have notified US law enforcement?). Yes there are other slimeballs involved in this but there is one big group of Jesters involved. Read the list of names.

Again if you login to Pacer (pacer.uspci.uscourts.gov...), take a look at the affidavits of the witnesses that are being brought to the US to testify (you can also see copies of their visas issued by the US Gov that state that the purpose of the visa is to give a deposition in a court case).

Here is part of the affidavit:

"7. When the vessels, including the Amazon Santana, early in the fishing season, are in the Autazes region, two groups of tourists come exclusively to conduct sex tourism. The cost of the tour package for these two groups includes payment for fishing activities, tips for the guides, payments to the hired girls. These two groups are comprised of approximately 20 tourists each. The number of hired girls for each trip is approximately equal to the number of tourists on the trip. The hired girls are brought aboard the Amazon Santana far from the city. Once the girls are aboard the vessel the tourists practice normal leisure fishing whiles the girls sunbathe or swim in the river. While I did not participate in these activities, I fully observed them.

8. Upon the return of the tourists from fishing at the end of the day during the night, there are parties with alcoholic beverages and drugs, mainly marijuana. During these parties, there are striptease competitions among the hired girls with money prizes given by the tourists for the winner of these competitions. During these parties there is explicit sex between some of the hired girls and some of the tourists. There are also orgies. In addition to payments from Amazon Santana Turismo Ecologico the hired girls are tipped for their services by the tourists. Some of the tourists return every year to participate in these sex programs. While I did not participate in these activities, I fully observed them."

I'll bet that the pictures noted in the suit should be real interesting.

Just more fuel for the fire.



[edit on 13-3-2008 by deepdigger]

reply to post by deepdigger


Thank you for the extra information.

I read the article start to finish. I also followed the links and read the complaint and the witness list. I also know several on the men cited; two of whom are members of my Shrine Center and Jester Court and discussed all aspects of the fishing trip when they returned last year.

I am not defending anyone, but explaining that what you read is maybe not what was written.

Most importrantly, the Masons/Shriners/Jesters are not accused of anything. They are witnesses.

First, the blogger, Sandy Frost, is virulently anti-Masonic, anti-Shrine and anti-Jester. I have followed her "reporting" for about a year. While many of the facts she reports may be true, her slant on them is not always "on the level." Further she relies a lot on anonymous single sources. Good journalistic techniques and practices call for at least two documented sources for every anonymous source. If you watch "The Wire" on HBO, part of their story line centers around this very principle.

Next, this case is a dispute between two competitors. Apparently, it is not a very serious suit, as the damages asked for are only $75,000. I may be wrong, but I believe this to be the minimum damages that can be sought in a Federal Court. This case has to go to federal court because one man lives in Dallas and the other in Fort Lauderdale. The case centers around one guy bad-mouthing another guy in front of clients and potential clients. Whoop-dee-doo !!

Part of the allegations made in the suit is that one man smuggled drugs and engaged in prostitution. In order to prove or disprove this claim, one man got a list of the other man’s clients and then listed most of the customers as witnesses. Many, but not all of these men, are Masons/Shriners/Jesters who participated in a fishing trip which was not sponsored or endorsed by any Masonic, Shrine or Jester organization. It was simply a group of men who happened to belong the the same organization. No allegation has been made that these Masons/Shriners/Jesters participated in anything .... they are listed as witnesses to prove or disprove the allegations.

Now --- suppose that a man gets on the stand and testifies that there was no prostitution, drug smuggling or drug use that he personally observed. Does this make him guilty of anything????

You see, the blogger took the fact that these men are witnesses and has turned it into an allegation that they are perpetrators.

If I witness a car wreck, should I get ticked for careless driving? All I was doing was minding my own business when the car wreck occurred and I happened to see it. Suppose one driver asserts that the other driver was drunk and calls upon me as a witness. If I cannot testify that I know, of my own personal knowledge, that the other driver was drunk, does that make me guilty lying or of drunk driving?

Again, suppose there was drug smuggling and prostitution involved on the very boats these men were on. If the men did not observe or participate in any of these activities, are they guilty of anything?

Suppose that I spend the night at a Holiday Inn in Alabama where junkies are smoking dope in one room, while the pimps are running the prostitutes in and out of other rooms? After a police raid, all the people registered at the motel are listed as witnesses in the various cases. Being a registered guest, I am listed as a witness. Does that mean that I am accused of drug use and soliciting prostitution? After all, I was in the same Holiday Inn while these illicit or questionable activities are going on.

Remember ---- the Jesters are not accused of anything. They are innocent clients caught up in a petty, nasty dispute between tour operators. How would you feel about the witness list if instead of the Masons/Shriners/Jesters being cited, the only client list that could be found was for a group of Catholic Bishops, or Baptist missionaries or the like?

From what I can tell this thread should be focused not on the events reported but on the report itself. I also fell victim to the subliminal anti-Jester slant to the reporting, which failed to mention that the accusation had virtually nothing to do with the order itself.

I can't imagine what is to be gained from editorializing a report like this, unless its to attract readers by virtue of the mention of Freemasons. I think, unless there is strong disapproval - this thread should be 'redirected' toward a discussion of how the propaganda seeped into the news.

Originally posted by NGC2736

Which brings me, in my verbose way, to the point. It would seem in the best interest of any group, secret organization or otherwise, to keep close scrutiny on those powerful and influential portions of it's membership, lest their actions reflect badly on the whole. This might require a shifting of position from one of antagonism towards investigators, to one of cooperation. I would love to see this "mind shift" happen in the ranks of our police forces, our military, our politicians, our clergy, and the list goes on. Inclusive of Secret Societies, of course.

This is precisely what the blog The Burning Taper has been doing for nearly two and a half years, shining a light on what's going on inside Freemasonry. From the religious rednecks of Georgia to the egotist Grand Masters in West Virginia to the pompous moralists of California to the murderous Masons in the Carribean to the lecherous Jesters, silly Shriners and NASCAR Scottish Rite crowd — the Taper has tried to cover it all.

This is no anti-Masonic site; this is a site for Masons, about Masons, by a card-carrying, former lodge officer, regular recognized Mason.

Widow's Son

Edit: web address removed.


[edit on 17-3-2008 by intrepid]

I will have a look at the site that you posted.

Thank you.

Originally posted by senrak

All this notwithstanding, ATS members and CNN I'm sure will continue to focus on their membership in Masonry and ignoring other organizations like Mirthful Me pointed out regarding the Governor of New York.

God help him if he's a Mason.....hell, we'll all be labeled as "whore-mongers" *sigh*

A few days before the Spitzer "scandal" broke, a former NY judge and his law clerk resigned their positions, after they and a retired police captain -- all Jesters -- were implicated as participating in transporting a prostitute across state lines (a violation of the federal Mann Act) in a motorhome carrying at least nine men on their way to an official Jesters get-together.

It is uncertain at this time whether the Spitzer case and the case involving Judge Tills, et al, are related.

burningtaper.blogspot.com...

Widow's Son

[edit on 17-3-2008 by intrepid]