secret societies

[rr_x]

Originally Posted by kasalt

It seems to me that there are clear and obvious legal distinctions between the terms secrecy and privacy. I don't know why reading both of those articles didn't help you see that. It's not "doublethink", for crying out loud.

Maybe this news article will help clarify the point by way of practical example:

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...no-805136.html

Proverb:
To him that you tell your secret you resign your liberty.

[banoyes]

Originally Posted by slartibartfast

Totally agree. It is an example of information that people don't want other people to have, because there is no need.





Fundamentally, any group of people whether an organisation or just a loose group of like minded individuals are free to assemble and are also free not to tell anyone what happened at those assemblies (this is different for public bodies as they are theoretically working for the public).
Whether it be at Masonic meetings, David Icke meetings or just a bunch of guys down the pub.
It is a basic human freedom.

Not quite
You may not meet in private and conspire to commit a crime.
This is the charge against the Freemasons

There is a group,under your banner, that have been conspiring for centuries.
Why do you think there are so many Royals in masonry?!
and you call it all coincidence,all of it, there is not a word of truth
these dozens of researchers and historians, all liars

Guard secrecy-protect your cults members- prepare to lie
That's the Freemason mantra