Is the Statue of Liberty Masonic?

Originally posted by pepsi78
reply to post by network dude

 

So what it just proves masons taking care of the statue of liberty because it's a masonic symbol,
3 million dollars.

Ding Ding! yes it proves that masons generated money to look after it. that DOES NOT prove masons own it, or they gave it away, or that it's masonic.

We also give money to help burned children. Are they masonic?

Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by pepsi78

 

I wonder if you really do understand things and you just purposely try to be so wrong it's pathetic on purpose.

the cornerstone is masonic. The plaque commemorating the cornerstone is masonic. The square and compass on the plaque are masonic. But nothing, I repeat, nothing you have provided shows the statue, nor the funding to build it, being masonic.

What do you mean, it was designed and built by masons, then given by masons Grand orient de france.
The main plate has masonic symbols. how is it not masonic ?

Click here for more information.

nevermind. You obviously aren't smart enough to understand how to debate. I have no idea why I thought this time would be any different than any other. You must be a bitchy woman on her period. That is the only thing that would make you this hard to reason with.

Who raised the funds.

www.ehow.com...
proponents of the project raised funds by various means
The French bore the responsibility of building the statue, while the Americans would build the pedestal. In France, proponents of the project raised funds by various means, such as theatrical performances, boxing matches and auctions. In the United States, Joseph Pulitzer, through editorials in his newspaper "The World," galvanized the public to contribute money. French architect Alexandre Gustave Eiffel designed the statue's framework and support pylon, and American architect Richard Morris Hunt designed the pedestal.

Read more: The History & Meaning of the Statue of Liberty | eHow.com www.ehow.com...

proponents of the project raised funds by various means

The masons raised the founds in France as I stated.

Originally posted by pepsi78

nevermind. You obviously aren't smart enough to understand how to debate. I have no idea why I thought this time would be any different than any other. You must be a bitchy woman on her period. That is the only thing that would make you this hard to reason with.

Who raised the funds.

www.ehow.com...
proponents of the project raised funds by various means
The French bore the responsibility of building the statue, while the Americans would build the pedestal. In France, proponents of the project raised funds by various means, such as theatrical performances, boxing matches and auctions. In the United States, Joseph Pulitzer, through editorials in his newspaper "The World," galvanized the public to contribute money. French architect Alexandre Gustave Eiffel designed the statue's framework and support pylon, and American architect Richard Morris Hunt designed the pedestal.

Read more: The History & Meaning of the Statue of Liberty | eHow.com www.ehow.com...

proponents of the project raised funds by various means

The masons raised the founds in France as I stated.

edit on 16-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)

here is your chance to make me look like an ass. All you have to do is show everyone here where in the above quote you offered as proof that masons were the ones to raise this money. this is the kind of thing that makes me wish we could vote the boneheads off the ATS island. If you were on the apprentice, you would be fired.

All you have to do is show everyone here where in the above quote you offered as proof that masons were the ones to raise this money. this is the kind of thing that makes me wish we could vote the boneheads off the ATS island. If you were on the apprentice, you would be fired.

history1800s.about.com...
The French writer and political figure Edouard de Laboulaye first came up with the idea of a statue celebrating liberty that would be a gift from France to the United States. And the sculptor Fredric-Auguste Bartholdi became fascinated by the idea and went forward with designing the potential statue and promoting the idea of building it.

The problem, of course, was how to pay for it.

The promoters of the statue in France formed an organization, the French-American Union, in 1875.

Masons raised the founds for it ? Are you happy ?

Edouard de Laboulaye also a mason and Fredric-Auguste Bartholdi well know mason.

Masons design it, built it, rased funds for it.

twins.babyaf.com...
Masonic brothers from both France and the United States formed a fund-raising committee called the Franco-American Union. By the time Libertas was ready to be shipped from France, little progress had been made on the other side of the Atlantic. Controversy continued to swirl over the origin of the statue and its mammoth costs.

here is your chance to make me look like an ass.

I just want to prove the statue is masonic, that is all.

reply to post by pepsi78

The big mistake you made here was replying to a thread purely meant for the back slapping freemasons!
There is no conspiracy surrounding the masons. You hammered home your point correctly yet get accused of being a "woman on her period".
Network Dude, do the terms and conditions concerning politeness and decorum not apply to you? When you post insults like that you let yourself and the masons down. An apology for the ill thought out insult would not be amiss in my humble opinion.

Could someone tell me if this is an Masonic ring on the left side? (click link) I might be working for him soon.

(Its a little bit stupid to make a thread on it just to ask)

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours
Could someone tell me if this is an Masonic ring on the left side? (click link) I might be working for him soon.

(Its a little bit stupid to make a thread on it just to ask)

edit on 16-6-2011 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)

No, that is not a Masonic ring...but both ARE gaudy rings!

Originally posted by no1smootha

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours
Could someone tell me if this is an Masonic ring on the left side? (click link) I might be working for him soon.

(Its a little bit stupid to make a thread on it just to ask)

edit on 16-6-2011 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)

No, that is not a Masonic ring...but both ARE gaudy rings!

I think he might be rich

reply to post by TribeOfManyColours


he's into bling. That doesn't prove he's not a mason, just doesn't look like a masonic ring. If he's a mason, you should see some other signs of it.

Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours

 

he's into bling. That doesn't prove he's not a mason, just doesn't look like a masonic ring. If he's a mason, you should see some other signs of it.

The below link is his homepage. Look at the pic slide. It has an obelisk and an sun next to it. And A golden bird as logo.

www.foreverliving.com...;jsessionid=0AFB185BB67830D5FE073316B58740DA?store=USA&en

reply to post by pepsi78

So "various mean" implies the Masons did it? How illogical and ignorant.

reply to post by pepsi78

So you're saying the French-American Union is a Masonic organization? So if I start an organization then it must be Masonic simply because I am a member of the Masonic fraternity? Again, you're the biggest culprit of non-sequitur arguments I have come across in a long time.

Originally posted by pepsi78
I just want to prove the statue is masonic, that is all.

This is very telling. You're not here for truth, you're hear to prove a certain side whether its true or not. You're not here for truth, but here to prove that somehow Masonry has its in hand in everything. From your past posts though, you don't want to prove that Masonry does anything good, but rather we have sinister intent.

reply to post by TheLordVeack

Pepsi isn't here for truth or discussion, but strictly for defamation. That is clearly seen from all his/her posts.

If you think Network Dude broke a rule there is a way you can report his posts. Instead of bitching about it, report him if you think it needed.

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours
I think he might be rich

Just a tad

So you're saying the French-American Union is a Masonic organization? So if I start an organization then it must be Masonic simply because I am a member of the Masonic fraternity? Again, you're the biggest culprit of non-sequitur arguments I have come across in a long time.

The organisation was founded by masons, I do not know what you mean.

reply to post by pepsi78


here is what you seem to keep missing.

Because a man is a mason, doesn't make all of his actions masonic in nature. I am trying to find a definitive link here to use as proof that the Statue is either masonic or not. You seem to think you have won, but you don't understand your own evidence. And you being so thick headed is really a large stumbling block in the conversation.

Lets list the facts that are undisputed:
1. the men who thought of designed and built the statue were masons.
2. The platform that was built by the US to hold the statue has a masonic cornerstone that was put there by masons in a masonic ceremony. They put a plaque there to commemorate the cornerstone and the builders.
3. The same men who came up with the idea (the builder and designer) (who were masons as was already mentioned) helped form the Franco-American Union. The formation of said union was to solicit funds to complete the project.

Knowing that we all agree on these three points, lets look at the things that make it hard to say it's purely masonic.

It was proposed as a gift from France. The reason for this was to keep a strong relationship with the US as France was going through a turbulent time and had a less than stable government at the time.

The fundraisers tried to get funds form all kinds of sources. It was difficult to raise all the funds. There is nothing pointing to the funding being from masons and masonic lodges, although I am sure some money did come from men who happened to be masons. (this is where your logic usually flies off the deep end)

the proposed statue, the reason for it, the funding for it, and the meaning behind it, seem to not be masonic. meaning that:

1. she is not holding a square and compass or anything remotely masonic.
2. there is nothing on the statue itself that is remotely masonic. (forget all about the plaque and the cornerstone since that is something that has happened to thousands of structures all over the US since George Washington first did it at the Capital Building)
3. The funding didn't come from a masonic source. the majority of the finding came from the people of France for the statue, and the people of the US for the platform. (note that "the people" includes men, women, and perhaps children who may or may not have anything to do with masonry)
4.The government of France was not solely masonic. I am not sure who was in power or who was a mason, but I am using the idea that of the leaders were in fact all masons, it would be a bigger conspiracy that any to date)
5. The government of the US was not solely masonic, although there was a very strong masonic influence at that time. (this point is fuzzy enough that it could go either way)

Again, for the record, I have no agenda to prove the statue is or isn't masonic, I would be happy either way. But proof is not circumstantial innuendo, it is historical proof. there is a huge difference.

I wish some unbiased sources would look over this thread and put their opinions in as to weather or not enough factual evidence exists to call the Statue of Liberty masonic.

reply to post by KSigMason

"If you think Network Dude broke a rule there is a way you can report his posts. Instead of bitching about it, report him if you think it needed."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------

I wouldn't waste my time sunshine. The guy can't bring himself to apologise or acknowledge my post, and has to rely on people like you, his fellow brothers (oh dear!) to stick up for him, thats his problem. Why should I inform on him?
My comment wasn't personal I just thought it was in pretty poor taste and was in breach of the terms and conditions set out by ATS concerning decorum.
If you dont mind I'll leave all the informing on fellow members of ATS to the masons, if thats okay with you?

here is what you seem to keep missing.


Because a man is a mason, doesn't make all of his actions masonic in nature. I am trying to find a definitive link here to use as proof that the Statue is either masonic or not. You seem to think you have won, but you don't understand your own evidence. And you being so thick headed is really a large stumbling block in the conversation.

You wanted evidence you got it, it shows contribution on all levels, design, bulding of the statue, and fouding

Lets list the facts that are undisputed:
1. the men who thought of designed and built the statue were masons.
2. The platform that was built by the US to hold the statue has a masonic cornerstone that was put there by masons in a masonic ceremony. They put a plaque there to commemorate the cornerstone and the builders.
3. The same men who came up with the idea (the builder and designer) (who were masons as was already mentioned) helped form the Franco-American Union. The formation of said union was to solicit funds to complete the project.

Knowing that we all agree on these three points, lets look at the things that make it hard to say it's purely masonic.

We all agree, masons did everything.

It was proposed as a gift from France. The reason for this was to keep a strong relationship with the US as France was going through a turbulent time and had a less than stable government at the time.

Yes it came from grand oriend de france as a gift, and not really but there was another reason, it was solidarity.

The fundraisers tried to get funds form all kinds of sources. It was difficult to raise all the funds. There is
nothing pointing to the funding being from masons and masonic lodges, although I am sure some money did come from men who happened to be masons. (this is where your logic usually flies off the deep end)

The franco american union was built by the masons, I do not know what you mean.

the proposed statue, the reason for it, the funding for it, and the meaning behind it, seem to not be masonic. meaning that:

It holds the meaning of enlightment, how can it not be
It's about enlightment, about liberty, freedom of the american and french revolution, how could it not be masonic ?

1. she is not holding a square and compass or anything remotely masonic.

2. there is nothing on the statue itself that is remotely masonic. (forget all about the plaque and the cornerstone since that is something that has happened to thousands of structures all over the US since George Washington first did it at the Capital Building)

3. The funding didn't come from a masonic source. the majority of the finding came from the people of France for the statue, and the people of the US for the platform. (note that "the people" includes men, women, and perhaps children who may or may not have anything to do with masonry)

It did, from the french american union built by masons.

4.The government of France was not solely masonic. I am not sure who was in power or who was a mason, but I am using the idea that of the leaders were in fact all masons, it would be a bigger conspiracy that any to date)

The majority was, the rest were from other similar oranisations.


Were not even debating the statue anymore, it is clear.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------


Now why the statue of liberty was built , what it meant and what connection freemasonry had at that time.

The statue of liberty was built in honor to show liberty, escape from royal persecution at that time, from the ruling class. These organisations in the backround were mostly masonic plus others. The french revolution held the same meaning as the american revolution. It was the members of this organisations who wanted freedom from opresion of the ruling class, to escape it. It's why the term "FREE" MASON these organisations such as freemasonry wanted a change, the people in the background, free from the curch, from the roiality of that time.

It would of been very dangerous to talk of occult things, symbols at that time, you would be hung, decapitated, or tortured. So these secret sociaties wanted a change. It's why at the base of french revolution you got french masonry. The same thing can be said about the us revolution, it had the same goal independence from the ruling class, the statue of liberty holds that meaning, it is the work of freemasons that were very proud of the sclupture, if they herd what you speak of, you would probaly get moched or even worst. But they can't they are long gone.

The statue of liberty holds this idea of enlightment and freedom from the royal class/inquisition.
It is in solidarity to the french revolution and american revolution, maybe you did not know it but the french have a statue of liberty identical also, but smaller in size.

Same for the templars, same story it's why masons asociate with them, do you think people are that stupid ?
The statue of liberty is a very masonic symbol, not just a masonic symbol but very very very, please remember that.

It does not matter anyway, today the royaity and masonry work hand in hand, even if they hated each other guts
along the past timeline, it's all A ok today.

You got the freedom you wanted to practice the occult that at that time was strictly forbiten plus other things. They would hang you for sure. There for the revolutions of the secret organisations.
It was the same goal as the illuminati to make a revolution take control and change it but they failed, where illuminati failed masonry and others suceded, it's why it's highly probable that mebers of illuminati went on to become free masons, they had the same agenda.

Now stop spilling lies around here, people are sick of lies.

Originally posted by pepsi78
Now stop spilling lies around here, people are sick of lies.

show me a lie. You show me or STFU. You are the one bringing flimsy pseudo information and parading it as some form of proof. When debating, you either bring proof, or you sit on the sidelines and read. That is something you should be doing quite a bit more of. Your links say the same things mine do, yet you link them and then claim they say things they don't, hoping that nobody actually clicks on them to read them. I am all prepared to believe your theories if you can show something other than your personal bias. You hate masons, got it. You hate secret societies, got that too. But either contribute something factual, or run off to freemasonry watch and bash to your hearts content. There are all kinds or boneheads over there that would lap up your theories like it was good soup.
I am sick of people pretending to have a clue.

reply to post by network dude



This was separate from factual information with links, sources and so on, it was an explenation

AS for proof that the statue of liberty is masonic is plenty, at it was already provided.
They built it, design it, raised funds for it and celebrated it with a masonic ceremony.
The main plate bears the masonic inscription.

You asked what the statue stands for so I provided an explenation.


Here is some stuff, everything was done in secrecy.

www.neatorama.com...
Bartholdi spent the next five months traveling around the U.S. and getting support for the statue. Then he went back to France, where the government of Emperor Napoléon III (Napoléon Bonaparte’s nephew) was openly hostile to the democratic and republican ideals celebrated by the Statue of Liberty. They would have jailed him if he’d spoken of the project openly – so Bartholdi kept a low profile until 1874, when the Third Republic was proclaimed after Napoléon III’s defeat in the Franco-Russian Prussian War.

I don't know if anyone has posted this, but isn't the statue of liberty a depiction of the ancient deity, Mithra?




Opinions?