I Don't Effing Believe it!

[mike martin]

After all these years telling people that the Illuminati didn't infiltrate Freemasonry I now find that apparently it actually did!

Bet you can't guess which member of this very Forum is involved (clue: look at the "history" page):

http://www.illuminati-freemasonry.org/

Mike

[choosewisely]

-_-, hasn't this been known from the likes of people like David Icke for aages now?

[purplepebble]

Was it humbling for you?

[luciferhorus]

Originally Posted by mike martin

After all these years telling people that the Illuminati didn't infiltrate Freemasonry I now find that apparently it actually did!

Bet you can't guess which member of this very Forum is involved (clue: look at the "history" page):

http://www.illuminati-freemasonry.org/

Mike

It is entirely ridiculous to suggest that the Grand Secretary is a proponent of Adam Weishaupt's Anarcho-Communist ideals; indeed he is entirely opposed to him and one of his purposes on this forum has been to shower those who do defend them with abuse.

In common with GS's Lodge, which was allegedly founded by a couple of guys in a pub a few years ago, similarly, under the religious freedom laws in the UK, anyone can open a lodge or start a religious cult, sell fake degrees, set themselves up as a Messiah, or claim to represent Adam Weishaupt or the Illuminati and yet represent the opposite of their ideals.

Similarly anyone can open a "Christian" church, and thus by default claim to represent the teachings of Jesus and yet represent entirely the anti-thesis of the teachings of an anti-propertyist, anti-Capitalist, homeless Israelite martyr, as is the case with our current state religion.

As far as I recall, it was GS's view that modern Masonry was designed by modernist, progressive, Enlightenment philosophers (who in common with many new religions, claimed to represent an ancient legacy) and that it is his ancient Lodge (founded I think in 2002) which claims to represent a more ancient Druidic Masonry (though he apparently has confused the Northern European Druids with the Phonecians, since in GS's historicity, he alleges that the worship of Moloch is Druidic.); this is all entirely expected when a group of idiots get together in a pub and form a new religious cult.

GS has claimed that his form of Masonry is "religious, but not a religion," whatever that means in his own private language (i.e., he clearly does not use established definitions of the English language), however, to state the obvious, I would expect the inheritors of Adam Weishaupt's philosophy to be both Anarchists and (by default) Anarchistic and Communists and (by default) Communistic.

Lux
Blasphemy, heresy, war, revolution etc.

[bougz]

I just had a chat with a friend of mine (non Mason) and but a satanist.
We were shooting the shyt. Well he explained to me about the original order of Freemasonry that was pure Satanism. Until it was infiltrated by the Jews.

I've seen a lot of Jewish bros. Hmmmm! LOL!

[zero1]

Originally Posted by luciferhorus

Grand Secretary Peter Clatworthy still reads here on this forum, but doesn't post regularly; this was proven by a recent post he made. He is watching though.

And the guy in the middle is named in the History section of that website as the head of this Masonic 'Illuminati' order. Looks Jewish, too.

Originally Posted by luciferhorus

As far as I recall, it was GS's view that modern Masonry was designed by modernist, progressive, Enlightenment philosophers (who in common with many New Religions, claimed to represent an ancient legacy) and that it is his ancient Lodge (founded I think in 1992) which claims to represent a more ancient Druidic Masonry (though he apparently has confused the Northern European Druids with the Phoenicians, since in GS's historicity, he alleges that the worship of Moloch is Druidic.); this is all entirely expected when a group of idiots get together in a pub and form a new religious cult.

I laughed out loud, I did.

Originally Posted by luciferhorus

GS has claimed that his form of Masonry is "religious, but not a religion," whatever that means in his own private language (i.e., he clearly does not use established definitions of the English language), however, to state the obvious, I would expect the inheritors of Adam Weishaupt's philosophy to be both Anarchists and (by default) Anarchistic and Communists and (by default) Communistic.

Lux
Blasphemy, heresy, war, revolution etc

I've said before that I believe (though I cannot verify with proof, obviously, I'm in no position) that Weishaupt's Bavarian Illuminati was a socially and intellectually subversive group fomented by the Jesuit order for the purposes of infiltrating Freemasonry at the highest levels and bringing it to the heel of the Church. Weishaupt himself may not have been aware of this, until it was too late.

[soleil]

Sometimes I wonder if we men ever grow up. I recall starting secret clubs and dressing up as a knight as if it was yesterday before getting home in time for tea.

[elirien]

Domain ID156943286-LROR
Domain Name:ILLUMINATI-FREEMASONRY.ORG
Created On:24-Aug-2009 11:19:30 UTC
Last Updated On:24-Oct-2009 03:54:12 UTC
Expiration Date:24-Aug-2010 11:19:30 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:OnlineNIC Inc. (R64-LROR)
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Registrant ID:ONLC-3816099-4
Registrant Name:NICOLAS LAOS
Registrant Organization:NICOLAS LAOS
Registrant Street1:84 KRISTALLI STR
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:BYRONAS
Registrant State/Province:ATTIKI
Registrant Postal Code:16231
Registrant Country:GR
Registrant Phone:+30.2107647722 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +30.2107647722 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:+30.2107647722 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +30.2107647722 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:nlaossmi@gmail.com
Admin ID:ONLC-3816099-1
Admin Name:NICOLAS LAOS
Admin Organization:NICOLAS LAOS
Admin Street1:84 KRISTALLI STR
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:BYRONAS
Admin State/Province:ATTIKI
Admin Postal Code:16231
Admin Country:GR
Admin Phone:+30.2107647722 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +30.2107647722 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:+30.2107647722
Admin FAX Ext.:
Admin Email:nlaossmi@gmail.com
Tech ID:ONLC-3816099-2
Tech Name:NICOLAS LAOS
Tech Organization:NICOLAS LAOS
Tech Street1:84 KRISTALLI STR
Tech Street2:
Tech Street3:
Tech City:BYRONAS
Tech State/Province:ATTIKI
Tech Postal Code:16231
Tech Country:GR
Tech Phone:+30.2107647722 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +30.2107647722 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:+30.2107647722
Tech FAX Ext.:
Tech Email:nlaossmi@gmail.com
Name Server:NS1.DYNAMICSITE-GR.COM
Name Server:NS2.DYNAMICSITE-GR.COM

If anyone is interested.

[thelonious]

Originally Posted by bougz

I just had a chat with a friend of mine (non Mason) and but a satanist.
We were shooting the shyt. Well he explained to me about the original order of Freemasonry that was pure Satanism.

Actually, original Freemasonry was pure Christianity, and Roman Catholic at that (just read the Gothic Constitutions).

As for Peter posing with the Illuminati wannabe guy: Priceless!

[moon monkey]

I wouldn't have a beer with any of them or let them near my kids.

Complete and utter oddballs.

[astrochicken]

Originally Posted by moon monkey

I wouldn't have a beer with any of them or let them near my kids.

Complete and utter oddballs.

Mr GS looks like a decent enough fellow, probably lacking in friends as a child, which is why he got tapped and is now solely in it for business purposes.

The greek guy in the middle and the one on the right just look sick and twisted,
i wouldn't hesitate to whack their heads with an axe if i saw them near a kiddies playground.

Originally Posted by mike martin

After all these years telling people that the Illuminati didn't infiltrate Freemasonry I now find that apparently it actually did!

Bet you can't guess which member of this very Forum is involved (clue: look at the "history" page):

http://www.illuminati-freemasonry.org/

Mike

Sorry to hear that your bubble's burst!

[luciferhorus]

Originally Posted by astrochicken

The greek guy in the middle and the one on the right just look sick and twisted,
i wouldn't hesitate to whack their heads with an axe if i saw them near a kiddies playground.

Generally I would define myself, along with David Icke and others here as an "anti-cultist," and "anti-religionist" and an opponent of Freemasonry, however I don't think it is helpful to make false accusations against them.

Freemasons may in general be those willing to make a pact with other "Capitalist Devils" and tend to be evangelical Capitalists for whom state terrorist, narco-terrorist collaboration is considered "moral" in their own private "cult insider" language, however to accuse them of paedophilia is quite another matter.

Certainly their Grand Master and those who collaborate with them are collectively responsible for the "genocide" of children and for rape, torture, narco-terrorism etc., and all the suffering which is a consequence of Capitalist revolution, loan sharking, prostitution, sex slavery (including the buying and selling of children), however just as there are many drugs dealers who do not themselves take drugs, similarly with most establishment narco-terrorist collaborators, and similarly I doubt that most Masons are paedophiles, despite supporting the Capitalist system which does indeed encourage sex slavery.

Lux.

[moon monkey]

Originally Posted by luciferhorus

Generally I would define myself, along with David Icke and others here as an "anti-cultist," and "anti-religionist" and an opponent of Freemasonry, however I don't think it is helpful to make false accusations against them.

Freemasons may in general be those willing to make a pact with other "Capitalist Devils" and tend to be evangelical Capitalists for whom state terrorist, narco-terrorist collaboration is considered "moral" in their own private "cult insider" language, however to accuse them of paedophilia is quite another matter.

Certainly their Grand Master and those who collaborate with them are collectively responsible for the "genocide" of children and for rape, torture, narco-terrorism etc., and all the suffering which is a consequence of Capitalist revolution, loan sharking, prostitution, sex slavery (including the buying and selling of children), however just as there are many drugs dealers who do not themselves take drugs, similarly with most establishment narco-terrorist collaborators, and similarly I doubt that most Masons are paedophiles, despite supporting the Capitalist system which does indeed encourage sex slavery.

Lux.

I remember the vile and pathetic attack that GS made upon you LH. He clearly delighted in his spiteful, twisted and libelous attack whilst goading others to join in.

Up until that point I thought him a decent enough individual. However, once he started down that road it was clear to see that he is weak beyond his words. A truly vile man still searching for "light" but firmly rooted in self imposed darkness.

[luciferhorus]

Originally Posted by moon monkey

I remember the vile and pathetic attack that GS made upon you LH. He clearly delighted in his spiteful, twisted and libelous attack whilst goading others to join in.

Up until that point I thought him a decent enough individual. However once he started down that road it was clear to see that he is weak beyond his words. A truly vile man still searching for "light" but rooted in self imposed darkness.

Abuse is often the last cry of the desperate in debate. I have been debating on the Internet since around 1994 and have been on probably 1000's of different discussion groups during that time. Ultimately Internet discussion groups represent a global debating forum.

When two philosophers who are ideological enemies (say for example a Capitalist Christian and a Communist Christian) decide to have a meeting of minds and debate, it is perfectly reasonable and indeed recommended that they "attack" each other's ideology; this is all part of the dialectical process; it also allows others who are unfamiliar with both ideologies to observe the debate; further www discussion groups allow a "record" of such debates to be kept almost indefinitely; this is all good; it also allows ideological enemies to have a better understanding of their opponent's positions and to develop their own arguments and examine the weaknesses of their position.

In the world of academics, philosophers and intellectuals, this debating process has been going on for centuries; indeed a modern university education has as part of it's purpose the intent to develop constructive "critical thinking." It is entirely common and respectable for philosophers to attack the positions of other philosophers, such as Marx's tirades against the Anarchist Proudhon, or Karl Popper's tirades against Plato, or Richard Dawkins' attacks on organised religion, etc., however such "attacks" need to have a certain form or they simply "fail." For example to suggest that a person "looks like a paedophile" begs the question of what a "paedophile" looks like and of course this is rather like asking what a "Communist" or a "Christian" looks like; the throwing around of arbitrary insults and false accusations is not conducive to the dialectical process; it is not considered intelligent debate.

This brings me to the issue of David Icke and other opponents of modern day state terrorism such as Alex Jones, Michael Tsarion, the late William Cooper, etc. Despite being in agreement with "some" aspects of their work, it is important not to suspend critical thinking and a develop a "personality cult" type attitude, simply accepting everything they say as "Gospel;" it is also important for such individuals that they are subjected to criticism, since clearly all of the above have certain positions which I think most people in the academic worlds would consider to be rather "dubious," and the downside of this is that the aspects of their work which do need to be taken seriously can be overlooked. It is through the exchange of criticism that we grow and develop; that is after all an aspect of any education system. It is quite normal for a teacher to criticise pupils; however it is quite another thing for a teacher to make false accusations and shower his pupils with abuse.

Generally I find with the "religious" mindset that the religionist places his cult leader or cult founder and theology entirely above criticism and suspends all critical thinking; this is rather "dangerous" and it is such a mentality which has been the fertile soils of Nazism, Fascism, Islam and Capitalist Christianity, where to "question" and "criticise" could lead one to imprisonment, torture and death. Generally I have found over my years as an anti-cultist, that such a mentality is common among Masons and that their general debating strategy is to shower opponents with abuse; in this respect Peter Clatworthy's behaviour here on this forum is rather common among Masons, however I do believe that their general inability to engage in debate is very much to the advantage of their enemies, however it is also important for their enemies not to reduce themselves to the same level and to engage in exchanges of abuse and false accusations.

If the defenders of Masonry on the Internet are going to engage in showering their enemies with abuse and false accusations, it is important for them to be challenged intelligently and this process is one which will improve the quality of debate on forums such as this one; however similarly, if the Masons are going to be on the receiving end of abuse and false accusations, I think it important in the interests of fairness to defend them, and this is not a defence of Masonry, but merely a defence of the dialectical process which involves intelligent argument and debate. Personally I do not believe that the Masons are an army of paedophiles or that they (or even some of them) shape shift into reptiles, and I believe that making such accusations merely weakens the position of their anti-cult enemies.


Above: Illustration from a David Icke Book


I am often reminded of the Mel Gibson film "Conspiracy Theory" where he plays a archetypal "tin foil hat" wearing conspiracy theorist who writes a newsletter exposing numerous different bizzare conspiracy theories, one of which is entirely true, to such an exent that those whom he is exposing attempt to assassinate him, however since all his other conspiracy theories are rather "crackpot" theories, he is simply not taken seriously; this is the "Boy who cried wolf" scenario where when a person with no credibility actually tries to say something of importance, he is not taken seriously.



Similarly with David Icke; his "Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster, (2003)" was an early classic of rather wonderful in depth research which exposed one of the major problems in the world today, that of US black military operations; an issue which is of global importance and necessary in order to understand US military strategy; it is something which needs to be included in the history curriculum in educational institutions throughout the world, however the problem with this is that the issue of US military false flag operations is entwined with numerous other bizarre conspiracy theories from UFO's to shape shifting reptiles; this is not helpful.

Lux