Secrecy is Repugnant: An honest request to Masons.

Originally posted by Josephus23


When you do, then tell me if you think that the concept of secrecy being acceptable in government had anything to do with the INTENSE mental suffering that these kids endured.

and still endure...

Secrecy in government is, generally, not a good thing. Naturally, there will be issues that are top secret that must remain so for national security reasons, but again in general, good government is transparent.

This is much different with fraternities (like Freemasonry) and sororities who employ a level of secrecy. Masonic secrecy concerns only Freemasons, not all citizens, like government secrecy does. Same thing with other fraternities and sororities, each of whom have their own traditional secrets that I am not privy to, not being one of their initiates.

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
reply to post by Josephus23

 

Thanks. Just so you know, I'm not a mason. Being an atheist, I couldn't be one even if I wanted to.

You can check my posts in this thread by clicking on the little "thread" label at the bottom of any of my posts. (or you can click here) You'll see that I have always been respectful. I too, thought the mud slinging was going a bit far for a bit.

I've seen the movie you posted as it's been discussed numerous times here on ATS. Isn't it about child abuse though? Washington sex ring? I don't believe it involved the masons, but it's been a while.

I do understand that your point is that "secrecy is repugnant", but the Masons' only secrets are the modes of recognition.

I personally see the focus on freemasonry to be a red herring. There are more nefarious organizations such as the CFR, Bilderberg, Trilats, etc. that in my opinion deserve much more attention.

I've commented on EO 11110 and JFK's "secret society speech", but the insults started flying soon afterwards, and I'm afraid it was lost in the storm.

[edit on 22/12/09 by ConspiracyNut23]

I think that the Freemason's are REINFORCING the idea of secrecy being acceptable.
Because it is their M.O., and SO many of the people who are involved in government are either a mason, or they belong to some type of initiatory organization, they reinforce the idea of SECRECY being benign in government.

This framework that is found in secret societies, a series of compartmentalized levels, is what allows for situations, such as the child prostitution ring in DC that the movie is describing, to exist.

It was about child abuse and the resulting cover up that went all the way up to the White House, but the framework for any cover up is the exact same framework that is used in an initiatory secret society.

By existing within this framework, and simultaneously existing in government, these individuals reinforce the framework as acceptable.

And the idea of SECRECY in government, which is repugnant, becomes reinforced as acceptable as well.

Do they feel culpable? and why or why not?

Originally posted by Josephus23
Did you watch the movie?
If not, then please take the time to watch the movie.

Which movie? The Mystery Schools one or the Franklin Child Abuse one? I watched about 20 minutes of the latter, but really didn't have time for a 2 hour presentation. If there are any particular points you'd like to hit, I'd recommend bringing them up in your own words within the thread rather than say "Here, spend an undue amount of time watching this thing. I won't tell you why, or what's in it, but it will change your life."

When you do, then tell me if you think that the concept of secrecy being acceptable in government had anything to do with the INTENSE mental suffering that these kids endured.

All charges relating to child abuse were dropped. The district attorney called the claims made "a well devised hoax". Of the 20 minutes or so that I watched, a majority of the videoed statements that were made were made by felons in jail on other charges. (One victim that they interviewed was even in jail himself for being a pedophile.)

Did these events really occur and they were covered up by someone of immense power shutting down the investigation? I don't know.

Were these claims made up by someone with a grudge against the parties involved and entered before the court with no merit? Again, I don't know.

Conspiracy theorists love to go off about the number of children sacrificed by ritual abuse, or satanists, or whathaveyou. My question is, why can't we name the victims? Where are the outraged parents? Where are the bodies? A child doesn't disappear without causing an uproar. And statistically, I believe more than 90% of child abductions are perpetrated by family members, most often as a matter of taking custody rather than to spill their blood for Beelzebub or something silly like that.

As to the greater thrust of your thread in general, you have yet to convince me that Masons as an organization have any greater tendency towards secrecy than any other two people who might have a prior relationship with each other. You keep going on and on about conflict of interest, but couldn't the same be true of any church member, PTA member, company board of directors, alumni from the same college, or rabid fan of the same sports team? People by their very nature have biases, and any two people who share any common bond could use that bond as an excuse to turn the other cheek or give preferential treatment. We can do nothing more than ask our judges and lawmakers to be fair and hope that they consistently do so. But they're people nonetheless. They have histories. They may have been passed over for a job at one point in their life by a Yale graduate; or had their car rear-ended by a Mormon; or lost an inheritance to which they thought they were entitled to a cause or organization that they don't believe in or don't support. Any or all of these things in their lives has the potential to influence their judgment and treatment of others. Being a member of one club has no greater or lesser bearing on their ability to act fairly than any other aspect of their life, going back to something as fundamental as their gender, race, or heritage.

What you seem to be asking for is legislators who have no life, no personal experience, and no bond to other human beings. I don't think you're going to find that. The best you can do is put trust in those who you elect to fulfill such duties that they will set aside as much of their personal baggage as they can and treat every case on its merits, and not on the qualities of the other people involved.

Originally posted by Josephus23
I think that the Freemason's are REINFORCING the idea of secrecy being acceptable.
Because it is their M.O., and SO many of the people who are involved in government are either a mason, or they belong to some type of initiatory organization, they reinforce the idea of SECRECY being benign in government.

Well, first you'd have to show that there were, in fact, so many people in power who are Masons or members of initiatory organizations. You're assuming that it's a large number, but it's also quite possible that the number isn't as great as you think it is. Simply stating that it is so doesn't make it so.

This framework that is found in secret societies, a series of compartmentalized levels, is what allows for situations, such as the child prostitution ring in DC that the movie is describing, to exist.

It was about child abuse and the resulting cover up that went all the way up to the White House, but the framework for any cover up is the exact same framework that is used in an initiatory secret society.

By existing within this framework, and simultaneously existing in government, these individuals reinforce the framework as acceptable.

Can you detail this framework? How does it work? What are the compartments? How does a higher level get a lower level to do their bidding against the knowledge or consent of that lower level member?

And the idea of SECRECY in government, which is repugnant, becomes reinforced as acceptable as well.

Freemasons teach that secrecy is a virtue—if a brother comes to you in confidence and tells you something, it is the mark of an honorable man to be able to council that brother privately without gossiping his secrets to other with whom the troubled brother could entrust. That being said, there are a large number of safeguards in place within the oaths of Freemasonry which would allow one brother to violate that bond. If a brother has done something which violates the law of the land he has acted in an unmasonic manner and other brethren are under no obligation to keep his secrets.

In other words, if a brother comes to me and tells me in confidence that he's lost his job, but doesn't want the others to find out because he is shamed, I'll keep his secret because it is my Masonic obligation to do so.

If a brother comes to me and tells me in confidence he's buggering 6 year old boys every other Tuesday, I'm going to call the cops on him because it is my Masonic obligation to do so.

Do you see how that works? That's the extent of "secrecy" within Masonry.

[edit on 12/22/2009 by JoshNorton]

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by Josephus23
Did you watch the movie?
If not, then please take the time to watch the movie.

Which movie? The Mystery Schools one or the Franklin Child Abuse one? I watched about 20 minutes of the latter, but really didn't have time for a 2 hour presentation. If there are any particular points you'd like to hit, I'd recommend bringing them up in your own words within the thread rather than say "Here, spend an undue amount of time watching this thing. I won't tell you why, or what's in it, but it will change your life."

When you do, then tell me if you think that the concept of secrecy being acceptable in government had anything to do with the INTENSE mental suffering that these kids endured.

All charges relating to child abuse were dropped. The district attorney called the claims made "a well devised hoax". Of the 20 minutes or so that I watched, a majority of the videoed statements that were made were made by felons in jail on other charges. (One victim that they interviewed was even in jail himself for being a pedophile.)

Did these events really occur and they were covered up by someone of immense power shutting down the investigation? I don't know.

Were these claims made up by someone with a grudge against the parties involved and entered before the court with no merit? Again, I don't know.

Conspiracy theorists love to go off about the number of children sacrificed by ritual abuse, or satanists, or whathaveyou. My question is, why can't we name the victims? Where are the outraged parents? Where are the bodies? A child doesn't disappear without causing an uproar. And statistically, I believe more than 90% of child abductions are perpetrated by family members, most often as a matter of taking custody rather than to spill their blood for Beelzebub or something silly like that.

As to the greater thrust of your thread in general, you have yet to convince me that Masons as an organization have any greater tendency towards secrecy than any other two people who might have a prior relationship with each other. You keep going on and on about conflict of interest, but couldn't the same be true of any church member, PTA member, company board of directors, alumni from the same college, or rabid fan of the same sports team? People by their very nature have biases, and any two people who share any common bond could use that bond as an excuse to turn the other cheek or give preferential treatment. We can do nothing more than ask our judges and lawmakers to be fair and hope that they consistently do so. But they're people nonetheless. They have histories. They may have been passed over for a job at one point in their life by a Yale graduate; or had their car rear-ended by a Mormon; or lost an inheritance to which they thought they were entitled to a cause or organization that they don't believe in or don't support. Any or all of these things in their lives has the potential to influence their judgment and treatment of others. Being a member of one club has no greater or lesser bearing on their ability to act fairly than any other aspect of their life, going back to something as fundamental as their gender, race, or heritage.

What you seem to be asking for is legislators who have no life, no personal experience, and no bond to other human beings. I don't think you're going to find that. The best you can do is put trust in those who you elect to fulfill such duties that they will set aside as much of their personal baggage as they can and treat every case on its merits, and not on the qualities of the other people involved.

Okay, so, just so the readers know what Norton (man I had high hopes for you) is talking about:

1) The only movie that I asked anyone to see is called Conspiracy of Silence and it involves the Franklin Child Abuse Scandal
For a more detailed analysis look here

2) Your information regarding the movie is only partially correct.
The rest is straight up incorrect.

I have to run, but I will be back to further comment on Norton's discourse.
The one that unfortunately displayed his true character.

What inside you Masons makes you go into attack mode?

For a group of people who are supposedly about all these oaths or what have you, you seem to turn a lot of people off and you attack people who ask you sincere questions.

So now I am a "Conspiracy Theorist"?
Did you mean that in the playful or pejorative sense, kind sir?

Originally posted by Josephus23
1) The only movie that I asked anyone to see is called Conspiracy of Silence and it involves the Franklin Child Abuse Scandal
For a more detailed analysis look here

Sorry, I'd never clicked through on the Bill Cooper link, so I was assuming that was video as well, rather than audio. My bad.

What inside you Masons makes you go into attack mode?

Where have I attacked you?

So now I am a "Conspiracy Theorist"?
Did you mean that in the playful or pejorative sense, kind sir?

I did not call you a conspiracy theorist. I'm saying that often conspiracy theorists make certain claims. I'm not saying that you've made those claims, nor that by making any claims that makes you a conspiracy theorist. It isn't all about you, so lighten up if you're feeling attacked. (Oh no! Telling someone to lighten up is an attack too, right?)

The only bit of that post that directly reflects you as a member of this board are the last two paragraphs in which I discuss in what I consider to be a non-inflamatory tone, what I, in my personal opinion consider to be flaws in the underlying topic which you're trying to put forth.

If that reflects poorly on me, then so be it. I'm not sure how my true nature has suddenly been revealed, because I've been making comments in similar tone for more than 2 years here. (Even to the point of getting a decent share of applause from those pesky Mason-infiltrated mods. )

Originally posted by Josephus23


What inside you Masons makes you go into attack mode?

Why do you consider debunking false claims to be "attacking"? What inside you conspiracy theorists makes you attack Masons for things like this that are completely unrelated to Freemasonry and Freemasons?

reply to post by Josephus23


In regards to your OP, I suppose that anyone on the outside would feel threatened by any group member being in a public office. A member of the First Baptist church, may feel the need to throw a few bones to his fellow parishioners before he would do it for anyone else. A member of the Rotary might be sympathetic to other members causes, when in fact their causes may not have warranted merit. Just as you assert that a mason shouldn't be in office for that reason. By that logic alone, you are correct. But how do you know what groups any person actually belongs to? Should there be a disclosure form to be filled out for any public office? Which groups would you allow, and which ones would you eliminate?

Again, I am sure you will not believe this, but I would trust a mason over a non mason without hesitation, because I know what we believe and what we stand for. I surely would be let down at some point if I put blind faith in any mason I met, but I feel strongly that the majority of them would be as I hoped they would.

I agree with you 100% about the need for an organized effort to change the direction of the USA. I would only hope that you and others like you would do some actual research into what Freemasonry is so you don't limit your options should that dream ever come to fruition. ( by real research, I mean other than freemasonrywatch)

Originally posted by Josephus23
So, I am going to continue letting you guys hijack this thread and not respond to what I have said.

Considering you did not answer the response I gave to one of your posts this is an unusual comment.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


This is really a reply to all of you guys.

While driving home, it hit me.
It hit me what the source of all that you hold dear is, and the more I thought about it, the more everything that I have stated has made sense.

You guys have all exposed yourselves and anyone on here can read it, and when I expose what I will expose tomorrow, then what little attention people pay to you guys will probably shrink that much more.

Stay tuned, because I am going to tell whomever is reading this thread what the big mystery concerning Freemasonry is all about.
It should actually be pretty obvious to anyone reading this thread by now.

Anytime someone comes close to the truth, you spin monsters are all on it, but I am going to make you wait til tomorrow.
I will give you a hint however, because as Masons, you guys are well aware of the universal laws of desire. If you want to have people give you their power then you gotta have something that people are going to chase, or they will never grow and change.
(kind of like a carrot on a stick. man's movement from the darkness into the light)

Just as fire hardens steel and cleanses a man, adversity grows us into the molds that form our character.

You can try to take personal jabs at me. You can say whatever you want.
I actually find it all so entertaining now.

My next post will be my last in this thread. I have learned all that I need to know about Freemasonry.
You guys all exemplify anyone who would join a cult like Freemasonry.

It takes a certain kind of brain chemistry to want to feel exclusive.
Because no matter what you say, exclusivity is only possible when it is balanced by the exclusion of others.

Stay tuned, because exposure is right around the corner.

So...
Oh yeah. The hint.

SECRECY IS REPUGNANT IN A FREE AND OPEN SOCIETY.
(where is it that you draw your power from again?)

Goodnite gents. Tomorrow is going to be SOOOOOOO much fun.

Dude, a couple of points...

People disagreeing with you =/= attacking

People rebutting your arguments =/= "spin"

You've received a number of responses, at length and in great detail. I don't think you've got any right to complain about it, to be honest.

Originally posted by Roark
Dude, a couple of points...

People disagreeing with you =/= attacking

People rebutting your arguments =/= "spin"

You've received a number of responses, at length and in great detail. I don't think you've got any right to complain about it, to be honest.

What you have stated does not reflect the truth of what was presented, unless you have read through the entire thread.
And then you form a minority opinion.

I hope that you stay tuned tomorrow, because I am going to tell you exactly what is a the heart of all their power.

I could go back through and point out all of the spins and personal attacks, but I am over it.
I am done with these guys. I only want to post the information that I will post tomorrow, just so these folks can know that someone else is onto their power game.
Because that is what its all about.
Giving themselves their power through SECRECY.
And I am going go out of my way to get as many people as possible to join me in spreading this information.

My goal is to let as many people as possible know exactly what is at the heart of their game.

There were some valid points made in this last round of debates between me and the Masons. I am not dismissing what they have said, but they layer it with so many lies and personal attacks and then try to play like "I wasn't attacking you". I am just an innocent bystander being persecuted.

It seems a certain state in the Middle East LOVES using this exact same tactic.

Several people have sent me messages and commented in the thread about the very same thing. The only people who think that Masons are cool are Masons. That's real healthy for the social good.
But believe me, they do have a sacred chao
I am glad that you felt the need to tell me what you think, but the only person who actually pointed out a valid critique was Masonic Light.

I thought about responding to him out of respect because he showed me great respect, but Norton sealed the deal with his childish response.
Norton is now known as Greyface Josh.
The pope has retracted all of your rights to a Discordian high holy name.

Emperor Norton doesn't want his good name hijacked any longer.

Manana Por Favor.

Just wait til tomorrow.

And keep those personal attacks coming!

Originally posted by Josephus23
I am glad that you felt the need to tell me what you think, but the only person who actually pointed out a valid critique was Masonic Light.

How was my critique invalid? For that matter, Network Dude, who argued essentially the same thing? You seem to keep insisting that the only people who have secrets are people who are members of initiation based organizations. Not once have you addressed the issue that any two people could have some commonality that could potentially lead to impartiality in the dispensing of justice in our legal system.

I thought about responding to him out of respect because he showed me great respect, but Norton sealed the deal with his childish response.
Norton is now known as Greyface Josh.
The pope has retracted all of your rights to a Discordian high holy name.

Emperor Norton doesn't want his good name hijacked any longer.

Name calling? Great. Gobble, Gobble, Gobble, Gobble, Gobble.

Manana Por Favor.

Just wait til tomorrow.

That's what you've been telling us for three weeks.

reply to post by Josephus23

SECRECY IS REPUGNANT IN A FREE AND OPEN SOCIETY.

As I pointed out to you earlier, JFK is calling on the media for greater secrecy in that speech.

He might have found it repugnant, but he surely believed it to be necessary.

Ok , tomorrow is here. As you promised, your brain-cleaving response? Hello? Really, nothing less than a huge bombshell is expected here.

Originally posted by Josephus23
What you have stated does not reflect the truth of what was presented, unless you have read through the entire thread.
And then you form a minority opinion.

I did read the whole thread, and I think you're being a bit hysterical, mate. Sorry.

A large proportion of it consists of you bleating about people derailing the thread amidst dozens of posts addressing the thread topic. Another component is you complaining about personal attacks and then, 3 or 4 pages later, engaging in a bit of namecalling and ad hominem yourself.

And what's happening "tomorrow" exactly?

reply to post by Josephus23

Hello? Any reply? Ooooh, today is the day, no? Please devastate all's credibility and enlighten the rest of humanity with your "research results".And try to use proper syntax and common word usage so as other readers might have a chance to understand your points without using an "earth-to-weirdo-decoder" ring (Oh yeah, some masons have them). And if I have followed the post this comment makes me a "minority opinion" as you say?


[edit on 12/22/09 by scooterstrats]

[edit on 12/23/09 by scooterstrats]

[edit on 12/23/09 by scooterstrats]

Originally posted by Josephus23

This is really a reply to all of you guys.

But sadly, not a direct reply to my question which you so evasively and verbously avoided.

So I guess we should start packing our bags now? I guess it would be wise to be ready to vacate the area. After all our greatest secret is about to be revealed. I just wonder if it will be the big one, or the really big one. Oh well, I will just wait and see.

reply to post by network dude


No....

Hahaha.

This is sooooooooooooooooooo much fun, and I will tell you exactly why.

Because a non-mason (sans CN23 I am told) would never respond in the manner that any of the previous responders have, but believe me, I know EXACTLY what gives you guys whatever ridiculous little "individual power" that you have, and anyone who has access to this board will more than definitely find out.

However...

I just like to drag it out and make you guys wait.

This is the exact same thing that you do to initiates, and it is what makes your "religion" so different from true religion of the Abrahamic faiths.
You are the opposite of the true faith of the Abrahamic traditions.
No allegory, No symbols, Nothing, Nada.

In fact, if you look at the ten commandments one of them says explicitly:

You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

And no secret initiation that someone learns will bring them more knowledge(whether through allegory or symbols) of God, because the knowledge simply comes from belief in the one creator.

In the true Abrahamic faiths, salvation is given freely.
There is nothing that anyone can DO that takes them closer to or further away from their creator, but that is the DIRECT OPPOSITE of the mystery schools.
You guys actually believe that through the initiations you will "hopefully" form a stronger bond with your creator (yourself actually, HUMANISM, because God, according to you, was created by MAN, through logic and reason, and any belief is in the construct of one's mind)

I knew that all these coordinated responses would come, and it only tells me that I am on the right track.

As for Masonicus, I would like to point out that you brought to my attention one of my mistakes that I had made. I didn't recognize it at the time because I wanted to keep this ridiculous back and forth going until you guys could help me push this to the top of the "recent hot topics" portion of the
(guess what page of ATS this thread is located greyface josh....
SECRET societies.

I will give conspiracynut23 a good bit of credit. He was respectful and he stuck to the OP, but cn23, you need to listen to the speech again, Kennedy said that that he doesn't want ANYONE in the press to interpret this as a reason to censor ANYTHING.
HE WAS CALLING FOR COMPLETE OPENNESS IN GOVERNMENT.

So, Greyface Josh, I will also point out how you broke down into a rant similar to the rest of the personal attack rants, personal attacks that I wholly took part in at one time, but then I rescinded as soon as this thread got to the top of the "Recent Hot Topics" portion on the Secret Societies page at ATS.
(thank you btw.... my audience would be MUCH smaller otherwise)

Just wait...
11:00 P.M. it will go up EST.

Here's another hint:

SECRECY, SECRECY, SECRECY, SECRECY, SECRECY, SECRECY, SECRECY
(take that away and you guys have NOTHING. you are no different than scientologists, moonies, krishnas, etc....)

Just Keep Coming Back (borrowed from another cult)

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Josephus23]

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Josephus23]

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Josephus23]

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Josephus23]

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Josephus23]

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Josephus23]