Illuminati and Freemasons in cahoots....

Originally posted by pepsi78
I don't have to, there is no evidence to sustain your claim.

There is enough that people in the field of art believe it was added by Chimenti after the Council of Trent. What is the altenative theory you ahve located?

Yes so it must be concluded that what you talk about is unknown, show what ? there is nothing to show because the timing and the artist is unknown, what do you want me to show you ?

Not unknown, it is hypthosized by people who study art, including the art of Pontormo in general.

Source with date, artist and the eye in the triangle please. I await.

I gave you Romano's painting with the triangle (after you said it was never used). When I find more art work I will most certainly post it, I, unlike you, actively seek out the truth instead of just offering my opinion.

The one with where he says it's a "item from antiquity borrowed by masons"

Ask the poster who included the quote. I am not here to do your work for you.

We all know it was franklin delano roosevelt who put it on the dollar.

But he did not design it. Irrelevant.

They hold a connection to saturn and the virgin, well known masonic icons. Statue of liberty, father time and the virgin, we have been thru this points before. The writing on the seal is just about that.

The design submitted by the Mason on the committee included none of these depictions.

They all made the same thing, triangle/pyramid and eye. They were told what to do.

So says you. You will never be able to prove what anyone said 200+ years ago by inference.

But you have failed to provide that at that time. You failed with your examples, painting.

The handwritten notes were supplied quite early and are still available. The Romano painting is accurately dated to the 15th Century.

It's the truth, you don't like it I know.

I thank God every day that I do not liven in a world where your opinion is 'truth'. It would be a sadly paranoid and ignorant place.

I would give up trying. This is a circular argument and will never resolve as long as one of the parties refuses to listen to reason, refuses to use logic and presents opinions as facts.

There is enough that people in the field of art believe it was added by Chimenti after the Council of Trent. What is the altenative theory you ahve located?

If it was added by who you speak then source with the date, or is it maybe they added it, or probaly who knows, or they believe. They believe ? Some people believe in flying spaghetti monsters.

There is no alternative story, because it is really unknown if it was so, and there are no solid facts.

Not unknown, it is hypthosized by people who study art, including the art of Pontormo in general.

There is no evidence, other wise you would have produced it.

I gave you Romano's painting with the triangle (after you said it was never used). When I find more art work I will most certainly post it, I, unlike you, actively seek out the truth instead of just offering my opinion.

Where is it, post it here, with the date and artist from the source.

Ask the poster who included the quote. I am not here to do your work for you.

He stated it was from the masonic enciclopedia for masons.

But he did not design it. Irrelevant.

He added it on the dollar bill.

The design submitted by the Mason on the committee included none of these depictions.

It really does not matter if they told them what to do, it was not included because it had to have a nice design but with the elements they wanted, the eye and the triangle/pyramid.

So says you. You will never be able to prove what anyone said 200+ years ago by inference.

I don't say so, I provided the drawings, they were all the same thing in differend postures.

The handwritten notes were supplied quite early and are still available. The Romano painting is accurately dated to the 15th Century.

Provide a source, with the eye and the triangle, the author and the date. I await.

reply to post by YourPopRock

Your friend is bluffing, it's what it's called. When you bluff and you don't got what is necesary to back it up.
His so called evidence is rated zero, since it does not have:
1 A date.
2 The description of the precice object.
3 The artist.

It's not you know how it is, here is a wall with a bunch of paintings on it, it is rumored that it was added around when dinosaurs roomed around the earth.

He just gives random sources stating that.

On close inspection the items turn older like the french note. I'm not going to search all his stuff that he posts by stating that it is rumored it is so.

He must provide in a quote from the source.
1 A date.
2 The description of the precice object.
3 The artist.

Originally posted by pepsi78
If it was added by who you speak then source with the date, or is it maybe they added it, or probaly who knows, or they believe. They believe ? Some people believe in flying spaghetti monsters.

There is no alternative story, because it is really unknown if it was so, and there are no solid facts.

If artists dated their work and supplied written receipts this would be quite easy. It is obvious you have forgotten that we are talking about the 16th and 17th CENTURY. Accurate records for many things DO NOT EXIST. It does not mean however that a certain event did not happen. It means it can not be pinned to a precise date. Enough art histrians believe that Chimenti altered Contormo's painting after the Council of Trent that it is listed in the catalogs of both artists.

There is no evidence, other wise you would have produced it.

The information I provided gives an accurate enough time for this to have occured. There is no other commentary to suggest otherwise, unless you think someone used Jefferson's son-in-law's time machine to change the painting.

Where is it, post it here, with the date and artist from the source.

I posted it earlier.

He stated it was from the masonic enciclopedia for masons.

And? Hall's opinions are still Hall's OPINIONS.

He added it on the dollar bill.

Irrelevant to the debate.

It really does not matter if they told them what to do, it was not included because it had to have a nice design but with the elements they wanted, the eye and the triangle/pyramid.

Sure. Whatever you say. I bet you impress everyone when you tell them what random people were thinking centuries ago. You have an amazing gift.

I don't say so, I provided the drawings, they were all the same thing in differend postures.

The majority were different. That is why they had 4 different committess. Hell, you even got the mixed up you did not even know who's was who's.

Provide a source, with the eye and the triangle, the author and the date. I await.

The notes were already linked as was the painting. Go back and find them, I am not here to do lazy peoples work.

If artists dated their work and supplied written receipts this would be quite easy. It is obvious you have forgotten that we are talking about the 16th and 17th CENTURY. Accurate records for many things DO NOT EXIST. It does not mean however that a certain event did not happen. It means it can not be pinned to a precise date. Enough art histrians believe that Chimenti altered Contormo's painting after the Council of Trent that it is listed in the catalogs of both artists.

Yes so it must be conluded that there is no real evidence for this, some people think so some think otherwise, there is no official version of the story, just concepts, the eye that you speak of and the addition could of been made at anytime in history.

I firmly dissagree with you, the french note provided has an accurate dating for example
Further more even with no accurate dating there is still doubt when the item was added.

The information I provided gives an accurate enough time for this to have occured. There is no other commentary to suggest otherwise, unless you think someone used Jefferson's son-in-law's time machine to change the painting.

You havent even produced a source, look at you, not even speaking about the painting.

I posted it earlier.

Post it, with quotes from the source.

And? Hall's opinions are still Hall's OPINIONS.

It comes from a 33 writen in the ecicopedia for masons.

He added it on the dollar bill.

Irrelevant to the debate.

I don't see how it is irelevant, it shows a masonic connection.

Sure. Whatever you say. I bet you impress everyone when you tell them what random people were thinking centuries ago. You have an amazing gift.

It's really what happened review the seals I have posted, they are all the same.

The majority were different. That is why they had 4 different committess. Hell, you even got the mixed up you did not even know who's was who's.

Except for the 2nd cometee they all had the same concept, eye and triangle/pyramid.

The notes were already linked as was the painting. Go back and find them, I am not here to do lazy peoples work.

You can't produce it, all you produced in the past posts is the same thing, giving sources and then explaining them in your own way without any quotes from the source at all. Because it's not there.

Originally posted by pepsi78
]Your friend is bluffing, it's what it's called. When you bluff and you don't got what is necesary to back it up.
His so called evidence is rated zero, since it does not have:
1 A date.
2 The description of the precice object.
3 The artist.

The theory is good enough that art historians use it to describe the piece. No one forced them to come up with this theory (although you may say that). If it was so irreputable why are they using it? Answer that.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

So now it's theories ? My facts are 100 more solid proof then this theories you got.
Remember you said that conspiracy theories are a bunch of bull crap, now you back it up saying that theories are facts. it's not the first time you go against your word. You argue with your self.

There is no evidence to sustain what you say, the painting that you speak of with the eye does not even have circumstantial evidence that it is that way.

You came up with no sources about the object stating it is so. It's just your word about the object.
Can I see where you got these theories from, where is the source for this, not even for the theory you have not provided a source, because you know it's going to say , maybe, probaly, some think like that some don't.

It's why you don't give out the source.

Originally posted by pepsi78
So now it's theories ? My facts are 100 more solid proof then this theories you got.

It is not a 'theories I got', it is from art historians whose credibility is millions of times higher then yours when it come to a subject such as this. Your 'facts' are non-existant, it is only your opinion. Why is your counter arguement to the Contormo painting other then to ridicule the historians that agree it was modified by Chimenti after the Council of Trent?

Remember you said that conspiracy theories are a bunch of bull crap..

Not all, just yours.

It's why you don't give out the source.

I supplied it already. You are obviously too lazy to go back and find it.

reply to post by pepsi78


the two or so sources you have linked were either an opinion piece, wild speculation, or had the words "MYTH" or "LEGEND" in the title. A myth or legend is usually accepted as fictitious . Your sources may have possibly been the worst I have ever seen here on ATS.

The official page of where these paintings are given, at least have some truth to them, you know, since they own the painting and' stuff. When the painting is given to such a place , they have a thing called documentation at the very least. If you really want to , why don't you give that place a call and see what kind of information they will give you? I'd think the owners of the painting will be able to tell you far more than an internet forum. You can report your findings back here to us! Trust me, the owners are very reluctant to researchers, and people who show an extreme interest to their paintings.

the two or so sources you have linked were either an opinion piece, wild speculation, or had the words "MYTH" or "LEGEND" in the title. A myth or legend is usually accepted as fictitious . Your sources may have possibly been the worst I have ever seen here on ATS.

What don't you get, were talking about your friends picture, not about mine.

The official page of where these paintings are given, at least have some truth to them, you know, since they own the painting and' stuff.

I don't see how, none of the sources provided by your friend contain the author the date and the drawing painting.
It is why he did not quote from the source, because there is nothing to quote, in stead he makes things up on his own.

He failed to provide a quote from the source, in stead what he did, he explained it like he wanted to.
Meaning he gave a source then started talking about it how he views it.

In one picture there is just a triangle without the eye on this guys head.
Here it is, there is no eye of providence, where is the eye ?

The concept of the eye in the triangle comes from secret sociaties.


In another there is in fact the eye of providence on a church wall but no details are given as to what specific drawing from the rest of the drawings, what date and what author, in exchanged your fried states he is going to get the details. Then later shows up in the thread stating he gave the details.

Here it is, no quotation from the source, he failed to do so.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Then he comes up with a french note stating it's from that time, another great invention.
That is all for the examples he gave out.


Now back for the other painting, with the eye and triangle with the christian supper he failed to provide a source with the author who modified it and a date because his source will not have an exact time, his soruce will probaly state, maybe, probaly, or that they think it's like that.

Meanwhile there are other examples stating that the eye does come from secret sociaties, other examples, masonic and related to masonry that do have facts behind them.

It must be concluded that the idea of the eye and triangle publicly around europe sprang from secret sociaties around 17th century(hidden from view not public maybe sooner) with the revolutions of independence going around in france and united states. Especialy the eye, the concept of the eye in the triangle, trinity comes from such organisations. So there for the seal of united states, the independence, the revolution, the change.

It's really what it is, changes, and this items came with the changes into public view. What was hidden became public, incorporated into religion, money, and so on. That is where the notion of the eye of providence came from.

reply to post by AdamAnt


i pray for your guidance. be open minded, empty your heart, and listen
In the name of God:

وَلَمَّا جَآءَهُمۡ رَسُولٌ۬ مِّنۡ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ مُصَدِّقٌ۬ لِّمَا مَعَهُمۡ نَبَذَ فَرِيقٌ۬ مِّنَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ ٱلۡكِتَـٰبَ ڪِتَـٰبَ ٱللَّهِ وَرَآءَ ظُهُورِهِمۡ كَأَنَّهُمۡ لَا يَعۡلَمُونَ (١٠١) وَٱتَّبَعُواْ مَا تَتۡلُواْ ٱلشَّيَـٰطِينُ عَلَىٰ مُلۡكِ سُلَيۡمَـٰنَ‌ۖ وَمَا ڪَفَرَ سُلَيۡمَـٰنُ وَلَـٰكِنَّ ٱلشَّيَـٰطِينَ كَفَرُواْ يُعَلِّمُونَ ٱلنَّاسَ ٱلسِّحۡرَ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَى ٱلۡمَلَڪَيۡنِ بِبَابِلَ هَـٰرُوتَ وَمَـٰرُوتَ‌ۚ وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنۡ أَحَدٍ حَتَّىٰ يَقُولَآ إِنَّمَا نَحۡنُ فِتۡنَةٌ۬ فَلَا تَكۡفُرۡ‌ۖ فَيَتَعَلَّمُونَ مِنۡهُمَا مَا يُفَرِّقُونَ بِهِۦ بَيۡنَ ٱلۡمَرۡءِ وَزَوۡجِهِۦ‌ۚ وَمَا هُم بِضَآرِّينَ بِهِۦ مِنۡ أَحَدٍ إِلَّا بِإِذۡنِ ٱللَّهِ‌ۚ وَيَتَعَلَّمُونَ مَا يَضُرُّهُمۡ وَلَا يَنفَعُهُمۡ‌ۚ وَلَقَدۡ عَلِمُواْ لَمَنِ ٱشۡتَرَٮٰهُ مَا لَهُ ۥ فِى ٱلۡأَخِرَةِ مِنۡ خَلَـٰقٍ۬‌ۚ وَلَبِئۡسَ مَا شَرَوۡاْ بِهِۦۤ أَنفُسَهُمۡ‌ۚ لَوۡ ڪَانُواْ يَعۡلَمُونَ (١٠٢)

"And when there came to them a Messenger from Allah confirming what was with them, a party of those who were given the scripture threw away the book of Allah behind their backs as if they did not know. And they followed what the devils gave out falsely of magic of the reign of Solomon; for Solomon did not disbelieve but the devils disbelieved, teaching men magic and such things that came down at Babylon to the two angels Harut and Marut, but neither of these two (angles) taught anyone (such things) until they had said: we are only for trial, so don't disbelieve. And from them (magicians) people learn that through which they would cause separation between a person and his spouse, but they could not thus harm anyone except by Allah's authority; and they learn that which harms them rather than profits them. And indeed they knew that its practitioner would have no share in the Hereafter. And how bad indeed was that for which they sold their own selves if they but knew" (Qur'an, CH2, V101-2).




this is why no masonic oriented government can allow for Islamic law in any other nation . The taliban had actually established afghanistan as the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan" before the United States marched in. It is because when the Qur'an is recited in arabic, it is the only thing that can put their so called 'craft' to a halt

i've had my experiences in a courthouse in New Jersey.



In the name of God:

وَلِسُلَيۡمَـٰنَ ٱلرِّيحَ غُدُوُّهَا شَہۡرٌ۬ وَرَوَاحُهَا شَہۡرٌ۬ۖ وَأَسَلۡنَا لَهُ ۥ عَيۡنَ ٱلۡقِطۡرِۖ وَمِنَ ٱلۡجِنِّ مَن يَعۡمَلُ بَيۡنَ يَدَيۡهِ بِإِذۡنِ رَبِّهِۖۦ وَمَن يَزِغۡ مِنۡہُمۡ عَنۡ أَمۡرِنَا نُذِقۡهُ مِنۡ عَذَابِ ٱلسَّعِيرِ (١٢) يَعۡمَلُونَ لَهُ ۥ مَا يَشَآءُ مِن مَّحَـٰرِيبَ وَتَمَـٰثِيلَ وَجِفَانٍ۬ كَٱلۡجَوَابِ وَقُدُورٍ۬ رَّاسِيَـٰتٍۚ ٱعۡمَلُوٓاْ ءَالَ دَاوُ ۥدَ شُكۡرً۬اۚ وَقَلِيلٌ۬ مِّنۡ عِبَادِىَ ٱلشَّكُورُ (١٣)

And unto Solomon (We gave) the wind, whereof the morning course was a month's journey and the evening course a month's journey, and We caused the fount of copper to gush forth for him, and (We gave him) authority over the jinn(genies/demons) who worked before him by permission of his Lord. And such of them deviated from Our command, them We caused to taste the punishment of flaming Fire. (12) They made for him what he willed: synagogues and statues, basins like wells and boilers built into the ground. Give thanks, O House of David! Few of My bondmen are thankful. (Qur'an, CH34, V12-13)


this following set of videos clarifies everything.
HUGE WEALTH OF INFORMATION HERE.

reply to post by de1111codEiT


I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying persay but i have a different out look on it to a degree, first off i don't really think the Mason's and Illuminati (modern day version) are in cahoots the way you think, i feel this group of cabal's that collectively make up the Illuminati infiltrated Freemasonry and thus use them when need be so in a sense in that way there working together but it's not a joint marriage, i also don't think there's as many quote un quote "Illuminati Masons" in the know of any plot but just a select few.

That being said and let me set the record straight i'm by no means pro-mason i'm anti secret society all together altho i like many of the Mason's who post on this board as people (hold that againts me if you will) but i was thinking if my theory is correct and a infiltration took place as many speculate, then wouldn't that make the real Mason's mortal enemys of the Illuminati??? I mean after all here's a group that infiltrated Masonry with the sole purpose of using there teachings for many nefarius means and if were to look at both groups separate on face value the Mason's slogan is to "make good men better" and altho i don't subscribe to it, it's hardly anything nefarius while the Illuminati is known for such things as wanting a one world government, commiting mass genocide, causing trauma to split a person into alters for mind control and pedophile networks just to name a few, so both groups again on face value are in complete contrast to each other.


That being said the Mason's who aren't part of what ever plot more then likely make up the majority of what again constitues a real mason and if they knew a group like the Illuminati as i described above for a FACT infiltrated them they would kick out any members who were Illuminati Masons and if the Illuminati had indeed infiltrated them so deep there was no going back most would quit and form there own group.


You gotta remember things are never as simple as they seem.

Of course there is a high-degree of "Illuminati"-Mason overlap but they are by no means co-terminous or shadows of the same form. Meetings of an almost ecumenical character on organizational levels take on bizarre tones and use such dense, esoteric language that their speech sounds like drivel to most.

Take the transcript of the minutes of such a meeting that took place recently, which I am at liberty to share here for a variety of reasons which should remain unknown to me:


Dear sir and madame,

Hope this letter finds you sound in mind, well in body and aglow in spirit. Pursuant to your request to learn more about the Board's stance on the ethics of monitoring the activities of uncontacted peoples or componential isolated tribes, the subject in question shall be thoughtfully addressed with the candid words that follow:

1. Isolated tribes are to be observed by Trusted Friends and Auxiliary Fellows such as yourself only insofar as such systems serve to advance Our Mutually Constituted Interests, as defined by the Board and its constituent subcommittees;
2. This being based on canonical precedent and ongoing assessment of said proto-juridical apparatuses;
3. If the Board deems such activities to be actionable in view of said criteria, observational programs must be certifiably unobtrusive and undetectable to the paradigmatic Rational Indigene and thereby innocuous to his or her "Notion of Privacy", and of no consequence to the subjectively-conceived Personhood of his or her in oneness nor in [their] collectivity;
4. That is unless there follows a Friendly Suggestion to Act Invasively, of which the delegating authority is vested exclusively in the Executive, and must receive ratification by each appurtenant committee organ by a show of open eyes and hands;
5. And in such extenuating circumstances that ratification is granted, the Board trusts that all Invasive Acts undertaken by Trusted Friends and Auxiliary Fellows will faithfully adhere to the Board's specifications by virtue of said trusted status;
6. Therefore the ethical mandate for such action is self-evidential.

We are pleased to further redeem your understanding of truth with our facts. Our Trusted Friends and Auxiliary Fellows are important to us. Subsequent inquiries will be referred exclusively to this fact sheet until further notice.

"With my seeing eye, we spy"

-THE BOARD



Strange to say the least!

reply to post by sharialawn

How is that a transcript of the minutes when you posted a letter? Unless your entire meeting was writing a letter?

It's hard to distinguish between the two as it is anyway, especially when you take into consideration the "invisble superiors" of the Masons.

Freemasonry is a good place if you want to refresh your knowledge of Geometry or take a stab at rebuilding King Solomons Temple.

reply to post by doulos33

You're thinking of the Rite of Strict Observance which died away long ago.

reply to post by de1111codEiT


Even the coward freemasons will admit that theyre not Illuminati. The freemasons are knowledgeable in how to use hypnosis and rape people, steal their social security, cause threat and duress, etc. The Illuminati wait for the demise of freemasonry!

Yaaaawwwwn!! Please wake me up when you are not simply repeating the same old retold stuff. If you had done maybe 15 minutes of research instead of 2 you might have something to say. Mods isn't there something in the rules about unnecessary repeat threads on the same topic? Next time, read some of the gazillion threads here on ATS about the very SAME thing you are writing about.

reply to post by redbarron626


Oh nice another troll spewing their vitriolic nonsense on another persons thread. The fact is pretty much every topic other then breaking news has already been discussed on ATS and since many of those threads are old and the op and posters may or may not be around anymore, many are effectively dead, and if people don't want to discuss the topic of the thread it will sink into the past post pages all on it's own. I find it fairly ironic that you bother to post on threads you hate, thereby pushing them back to the top of the recent post list and keeping it alive a little longer, instead of doing what I do when I see a thread I don't like, which is, keep my mouth shut and move on and by not posting, I ensure that it will sink into obscurity a little faster, well at least one less post faster.

Now on to the topic of the thread.

I disagree with you OP, though it was once true that the Illuminati and the masons individually were working to reshape society, it was not for a nefarious purposes and sadly because masonry has devolved into a social club, it's not even the case any longer.

Really, even the symbol you chose to illustrate their "nefarious design"; the pyramid, actually shows what they were trying to do. Which was trying to fulfill the goal of the Dionysian artificers/ architects, whose goal was to build the living temple of the living god. All of the stones represent the people, who after becoming trued by the virtues of fraternity, truth, righteousness and compassion, join together laboring as one for the good of all. And the all seeing eye represents the spirit and blessing of the living god, crowning and glorifying that living temple of true as opposed to false righteousness. In any case since most masons are not really working to improve or perfect society and instead are simply content hanging out with their buddies and occasionally do a vain ritual or two; vain because they obviously only have cursory understanding of what the symbols of the rituals mean, the whole issue is rather mute and the organization will fade into obscurity within the next hundred years anyway, as their lagging membership roles are currently showing.