Shouldn't Secrets be hidden?

reply to post by AccessDenied



Actually one thing you learn when you´re initiated as a master mason is that "the secret is lost". It follows that masons dont know what the secret is and much less non-masons.

If there are any major secrets then they are somehow hidden/encrypted in the allegories of freemasonry.

So the secret is lost and in the meantime masons strive to relieve the suffering of their fellow humans.

reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men



The best way to oppose freemasonry if you are serious about bringing them down, is to join an organization such as the Hamas. They not only have it officially included in their charter to bring down freemasonry but also have the weapons and means.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I have no intention of bringing anybody down in a bloody racist hail of homemade rocketry. Nope. And the post you've linked to does not insinuate such a thing. You've arbitrarily linked to it just so you can have a swipe at me personally, even while I've been silent on this thread for a day; and after we've all been warned to stay on topic.

But, hey ... you're the (Masonic) forum moderator, so you get free reign to pontificate about my objectives all you like.

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
But, hey ... you're the (Masonic) forum moderator, so you get free reign to pontificate about my objectives all you like.

Take a look at the bottom of the page. Im not the Moderator of the Secret Societies Forum. Research before you accuse.


As not to derail this thread I once again respectfully invite you to participate in a "Challenge Match" in the neutral ATS-Debate-Forum. I am sure there is much to learn from both sides.

[edit on 26-5-2008 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Take a look at the bottom of the page. Im not the Moderator of the Secret Societies Forum. Research before you accuse.

...invite you to participate in a "Challenge Match" in the neutral ATS-Debate-Forum

Terry Melanson said: "you're the (Masonic) forum moderator"


Where in there have I said, quote: "the Moderator of the Secret Societies Forum." Answer: nowhere. You know what they say about assuming....

Debate? Get in line pal, the sharks have already been circling (the first day I got here) and have already closed in. If I can definitively pinpoint the Alpha in the bunch, perhaps.

I may even decline to answer any of you just for spite. Besides, I'm doing fine here all by myself - 25 on 1. In any case, I'm quite content, at the moment, to hold all the cards.

I would had posted sooner, but I was too busy handing out stars to everyone
Most orgs won't hand out membership list, reason being the members don't want to be put on a junk mail list or to by vacation homes in the south. Geenpeace won't even hand out a list. They don't want their members to be hassled by every Tom, Dick or Harry. As for as Public duty. Why does someone who wishes to be public servent have to become a second class citizen. Why would they have to give up their rights when the public they serve can keep thiers?

Just this once...

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
Terry Melanson said: "you're the (Masonic) forum moderator"

Where in there have I said, quote: "the Moderator of the Secret Societies Forum." Answer: nowhere. You know what they say about assuming....

There is no "Masonic forum moderator," and to be clear there is no "Masonic Forum." There is a Secret Societies Forum in which Freemasonry is the dominant subject of discussion. Within the Secret Societies Forum the following moderators have responsibilities:

This thread is in a forum moderated by: TheBorg, lombozo, WyrdeOne, benevolent tyrant, HarlemHottie, lombozo, yeahright, Sauron, NGC2736, khunmoon, JacKatMtn, Spiderj, GAOTU789, junglejake, kleverone

Of course all forums fall under the purview of the Super Moderators, Admins, and Ownership (The Three Amigos).

Of course there is always the possibility that this was a clumsy inference that Skyfloating is a Freemason... No... That couldn't possibly be it... Could it? Never mind.

I hope this clarifies the misunderstanding.

Debate? Get in line pal, the sharks have already been circling (the first day I got here) and have already closed in. If I can definitively pinpoint the Alpha in the bunch, perhaps.

We anxiously await the moment that you can definitively identify this "Alpha."

I may even decline to answer any of you just for spite. Besides, I'm doing fine here all by myself - 25 on 1. In any case, I'm quite content, at the moment, to hold all the cards.

So you're going to take your ball, and your cards and go home? How inspired...

reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men


Get used to it.

I did, before i even got on ATS.

reply to post by Mirthful Me


You guy's are all a bunch of jocks, right? I've just figured it out. Your sisters sold girl guide cookies, while you yourselves partook in the proverbial male bonding.

Boys Scouts to DeMolay to the Freemasonry.

Once a joiner, always a joiner.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
As not to derail this thread I once again respectfully invite you to participate in a "Challenge Match" in the neutral ATS-Debate-Forum. I am sure there is much to learn from both sides.

He refuses. He won't respond to my PMs asking for a debate. If he has truly done "research," it should be easy to defeat us all! I have no problem with him pontificating about how much he hates masonry, but really, if your going to do it this much, at least agree to a debate on it. But its so much easier to take pot shots at people with comparing them to a "pack" and other carefully crafted innuendo.

I find it fascinating that some of the anti-masons have such a victimization mentality going on. Its one of the worst I've seen - and thats saying a lot for ATS. Just because people disagree with you does not mean they are in a conspiracy against you. It could - collective gasp - just be that you have not shown sufficient evidence for the majority to agree with you.

I do give you praise for being leagues above the average anti-mason, fire. As I've said before, it is truly refreshing to talk to someone who doesn't resort to the usual hysteria of calling us all child rapists. If most anti-masons were like you, we might be able to get somewhere in this forum and avoid all the needless drama that arises from calling millions of people Satan worshipers. However...it seems as though your beginning to insult everyone more and more with each post.


[edit on 26-5-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


There's nothing passionate about it. I'm just stubborn - on purpose.

And I don't like YOU personally. I don't even like reading the words that come off your keyboard. ...there's nothing "fun" about that at all.

I find it interesting you admit that your holding on to what all evidence says is wrong just because you enjoy being stubborn. It fascinates me, really - why are you here? Just to stir up trouble?

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
And I don't like YOU personally. I don't even like reading the words that come off your keyboard. ...there's nothing "fun" about that at all.

This is most unfortunate. I tend to base my like of people on who they are, and not their affiliations and personal alignments with my ideology. But that is just me.

But surely the best way to show your distaste would be to debate me, right? I've got tons and tons of peer reviewed articles to cite against the classic anti-mason arguments. I wish someone would debate me on it. =( Wheres the love?

[edit on 26-5-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


What's your name?

You know mine.

Give a little to get a little.

I'll review those peer-reviewed articles and then I'll get back to you.

reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men


I'm afraid this red herring tactic will fail, my friend. The bad news I'm not going to fall for it, the good news is that my name and lodge affiliation are on these very boards and easily available to you via the search button.

But of course, my identity doesn't really have any consequence on the outcome of this discussion. I could care less what your name is personally, as it also does not have any consequence on the discussion.

I'm so happy your willing to take a look at those peer reviewed cites - does this mean you agree to a debate? That way we can formally analyze them, and let ATS decide.

And if you worried that the people reviewing them will be easily swayed by the preponderance of the evidence, let not your heart be troubled. Many of those who rate the debates are your fellow anti-masons or those who simply buy into conspiracy theory whole sale, and will always find that you've "won." In fact, the deck is probably stacked against me - thats OK with me though - lets do it!

[edit on 26-5-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
I tend to base my like of people on who they are

Me too. And you've shown me that your the type of person that I really dislike. You have personalized it - all up in my face (the "research" tirade).

We were talking about Freemasonry as an organization, not about ALightinDarkness as a person.

You upped the ante pal, not me.

THAT's why I don't like you. Because you had the nerve to do that.

reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men


Not only are you just not telling the truth, your trying to use a red herring. I'm afraid its going to fail.

Are you going to address the topic at all? Have you tried to get a membership list from the boy scouts yet? When they refuse you, are you going to come on here and tell us that the boy scouts have hidden secrets and are also in some sort of conspiracy plot?

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men

You guy's are all a bunch of jocks, right? I've just figured it out.

You lost me here mate.

Good show though.

reply to post by Anti-Tyrant


Ya, quite a show isn't it?

In goes on like this ad infinitum on every thread in the secret societies forum. The Masons think it is their own play-thing in which to proselytize with.

They need their own forum.

If anyone wants to have a real conversation about a subject I am really passionate about, here it is:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'll debate anyone on the Bavarian Illuminati. I'd relish the opportunity, and I would quote peer-reviewed journals, history books from a university press, PhD dissertations, and primary sources - up the ying yang! - to support my arguments.

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
I'll debate anyone on the Bavarian Illuminati. I'd relish the opportunity, and I would quote peer-reviewed journals, history books from a university press, PhD dissertations, and primary sources - up the ying yang! - to support my arguments.

What about them specifically? If there's a way that I can help expedite this debate, just let me know.

If I seem anxious, it's because I am. I wanna see all of this supposed "evidence" that is just laying around for the average researcher to find.

Again though, if you could expound upon what specifically you would like to debate about the Bavarian Illuminati, then please DO let me know.

The anxiety is killing me!!!

TheBorg
Forum Moderator

reply to post by TheBorg


Possible debate titles (pro and con):

The Illuminati control the world

The Bavarian Illuminati still exist

The Illuminati secretly control Freemasonry.


(Sorry for your thread being temporarily used for this AccessDenied)