Why don't freemasonry sue conspiracy theorists?

reply to post by Shadow18433


I'm sorry did we breach the "number of Masons allowed to post in a single thread" limit?



Considering it was a question poised to Masons to begin with lol..

On another thread I, as someone who is highly suspicious of all things to do with freemasonry, was having a heated debate about Pikes reference to Lucifer and whether secrets couldn't be kept from the brotherhoods own members, when all of a sudden the talk turned to masons being paedophiles and child abusers. . . I thought at that point that someone was bound to step in and take action but nothing happened! Surely someone labelling all freemasons as being child abusers is libellous and should have resulted in some sort of action even if it opened the society up to the gaze of us outsiders?
Silence and inaction are sometimes looked on as the last refuge of the guilty. . .

Time and money is better invested in the good (such as charity) than in the bad. Its really as simple as that.

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


Masons have many strategies to control informations about freemasonry
and one of them is also to derail threads by exaggerating, indulge in mockery or accusing themself of uncredible conspiracies, so it would sound ridiculous to accuse freemasonry of conspiracies, so the thread is derailed, blocked and forgot.

all their strategies are here in ats, in thousands of threads about freemasonry, which freemasons have been derailng those threads about freemasonry. if needed, they even use their brothers moderators for help.

reply to post by Shadow18433

I've seen those various strategies you refer to but it seems my main point has been over looked. If I was accussed of being a child abuser I would move hell and high water to find out who accussed me and then I would either sort it myself or sue the person in question. And if I was a mason I would do exactly the same. All freemasons can't be child abusers just like all catholic priests can't be! I just wondered why they take this criticism in silence yet if I call the fraternity a religion masons come at me from every corner to refute the claim. Like I said earlier, silence is sometimes taken as a sign of guilt.

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


So you are accusing Masons of being child abusers?

The reason comments like that are ignored is because it's considered the highest level of ignorance.. the type of argument that would ensue would be the kind that ends in a thread getting shut down, members being warned, and a plethora of new threads about how Masons are gang stalking ATS.

If someone wants to accuse us of something, but offers absolutely no evidence with the accusation, why bother even bringing their post up? Some people hate us just to hate us.. they have no legitimate reason, and lambaste us with all kinds of hateful demeaning accusations.. I try to ignore those people.

reply to post by Rockpuck


You have the burden of production in criminal suits mixed up with the burden of production in civil defamation suits. If I say Mr. X kills babies, he is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal law purposes. For civil law purposes, the burden of proof and burden of production can shift.


In a defamation suit concerning an issue of public concern, the burden of proof is on the PLAINTIFF in proving the statements were false. Furthermore, the PLAINTIFF has the burden of production of proving by the defendant either intentionally or recklessly made false statements.

So basically, if a secret society sues somebody for defamation and that person can show the statements at issue revolved around an issue of public concern, the court presumes the statments were true and that they were not intentionally nor recklesly made. The secret society would have to come forward with evidence

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
reply to post by Shadow18433

 

'' silence is sometimes taken as a sign of guilt.''

i agree 100%

Also, over reacting from every corners, when freemasonry is accused of being a religion is, i thing also a sign of guilt...

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


It doesn't shift at all because it's a logical fallacy. Masonic Light made a good point regarding Libel/Slander cases.

reply to post by Shadow18433


What would you consider an overreaction as?

reply to post by Rockpuck

So you are accusing Masons of being child abusers?

I'm not accusing anyone of anything! Here we go again with masons putting words in others mouths. . . In a way I'm supporting freemasonry. I want to know who, or what inner sanctum or committee, decides what accusation is worth proving to be wrong and what to ignore? And once I had that information, if I was a mason, I would then storm along to those individuals and tell them to pull their finger out and get something done about those people trying to tag us all as child abusers. . . I would also ask them to take another look at their priorities because I wouldn't really care whether someone thought I was a satanist or that my lodge was like a religion- but I damn well care that I,and my fraternity buddies, are being accused of raping children and nobody seems to want to destroy or prove wrong those allegations.

reply to post by Rockpuck


You might want to read a hornbook on Tort Law. The burdens of proof and production are different in civil cases than in criminal cases.

Members.

This line here. This line here. This line here.

Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I want to know who, or what inner sanctum or committee, decides what accusation is worth proving to be wrong and what to ignore? And once I had that information, if I was a mason, I would then storm along to those individuals and tell them to pull their finger out and get something done about those people trying to tag us all as child abusers.

This is where the average person's perception of Masons and Masonry is misconstrued. As Masonry is a decentralized there is no 'inner sanctum or committee' that decides how Masonry as an orginization should approach issues such as this. It goes a long way, in my opinion, to show that if there were indeed a 'Masonic World Governing Body'-ala Scientology-where every insult, real or perceived, was indiscriminately brought to trial, it would have happened by now. No one Masons speaks for or decides what each indivdual Masons should or should not do.

Again, the insults being tossed about are rather broadbased in their implications. I have yet to see someone on this forum, or another for that matter, specifically target individual Masons by name. To generalize that 'all Masons are Satanists' does as much as saying, 'all Muslims are terrorists' or, 'anyone who is in the Marine Corps is a baby-killer'. If you were to refer to an indivdual Muslim, who was not a terrosist, or Marine, who was not a baby-killer, as such then you may, and should, come under the scrutiny of the legal system for your actions.

As an indivdual Mason, it really does not bother me much when people write these things as I know they are speaking from a place of ignorance. If I provide what I know to be the truth and they continue, then so be it.

Originally posted by Shadow18433
Also, over reacting from every corners, when freemasonry is accused of being a religion is, i thing also a sign of guilt...

You really thing(sic) so? The only one bringing up religion in this thread, Achilles, is you.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


That is truly the part they cannot grasp.. that there are 51 Grand Lodges, and the Grand Lodges don't have a higher power..

They also fail to understand that Freemasonry is a DIRECT DEMOCRACY .. where we elect through Lodge Officers the Offices of the Grand Lodge.

So the 'Higher Up" Masons are elected by the "Lower Masons" in an open communication. They only serve their respected position for one year (generally) .. and quite often they are not 32 or 33 degree Masons, they may be York Rite or just Blue Lodge (though of course, they are likely to be very involved in various branches, but it's not mandatory to be a "higher degree" than 3rd)

That's why I never understood the "inner cabal" theory.. and I have never seen a shred of evidence to support it.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Wow this dude ''Ahem....'', really have a traumatized fixation..., with one of his ats' foe.
or is this another strategy to derail and avoid conspiracies from being exposed.. .


p.s i didn't brought up the religion isue , Mintwithahole did...but everyone who is not a mason here thinks that way.

when it's up to freemasonry, this site is not a conspiracy site at all...
it a masonic forum Temple site...

Originally posted by Shadow18433
Wow this dude ''Ahem....'', really have a traumatized fixation..., with one of his ats' foe.

Fixation? Nah. More like amusement. I think it is funny how you keep getting banned and then reappearing several months later with the same grammar, syntax and post content. Best of luck to you.






[edit on 25-8-2009 by AugustusMasonicus]

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


well Mister the Masonic Empror , i have been told by a friend, in another conspiracy site, that YOU are using more then one screenname as a strategy to control information and a tool to derail threads to hide the truth about freemasonry.

So you and your 2 other imaginary friends... are only posting for derailing threads to hide the truth.

those ( OFF TOPIC POST ) are clearly just another of your strategies.


i wounder who could be those 2 other imaginary friends of yours.

reply to post by Shadow18433

i wounder who could be those 2 other imaginary friends of yours.

Okay, the masons, if you are to be believed, don't have a inner sanctum or committee to answer those hard questions raised by non masons, but surely there has to be something which connects all the diferent lodges. Also, Augustus, you said that nobody ever mentions a mason by name but instead refers to masonry as a whole but Shadow has now put that accusation to bed by claiming that you have another two identities here on ATS so you can decide which way the debate goes. To my knowledge that's not within the rules. . .
I'm interested to hear Shadows evidence and Augustus' replies!

reply to post by Mintwithahole.


First of all, it is true that masonry is decentralized and therefore "lower" masons are able to elect through a direct democracy, the grand officers of the grand lodge in which they are under. for instance, i am a poor college student who is a Junior Warden and will be able to vote at Grand Lodge this year to decide who the Grand Officers will be and be able to vote on all the legislation that needs to be approved or not. Our Grand Lodge in the state of California is at the end of September, early October. I will be attending to vote.

Secondly, a way that all the lodges and Grand Lodges communicate through each other is quite simple. Mail and E-Mail. One of the things we discuss at our stated meetings every month is the business of communication. That usually entails a huge load of mail that the lodge has received from other lodges and grand lodges telling us what they are doing and whats going on in their neighborhood. We call this the "trestle board". Almost every lodge has one and it displays what they are doing and when they are doing something in that month. everyone can see it....even the public. There is no secret committee that talks to every lodge and "plans" events and dealings that each lodge doesn't know about. Quite absurd...