|
Post by melloyellow on Oct 14, 2005 16:42:18 GMT
Well I will just tell you all right now, I cannot stand masons. They are evil pagans who claim to be Christians. I at one time began to doubt that they where evil, I just believed that the internet articles where written by anti-mason propagandists, but then a goth friend of mine, working for a lawyer in this town was confronted by the lawyer, who was attempting to get him intrested in the masons occult practices. My gothic friend backed out, but being the sneak that he is, he managed to snatch a masonic book, which he claims, show that they are "pagans". I mean, my friend is a goth and an athiest, but after reading that masonic book, he even says he hates them... and he said that "just to piss them off" he is going to scan the book and put it up on the net..... Anyway, I was browsing for CD's because I am collecting John, P(f)aul, and George's solo work. And I am currently working on P(f)aul. So I come to this one, it is called Rushes, but it does not say it is put out by Mccartney, instead, it says "The Fireman", I later find out that Mccartney used this as a nickname to release it under. It is a kind of Avant-Garde electronica album that came out in 99..... But whats more is...... When I went to the website: www.fire-man.com I noticed it was dated, probably not updated since 99, but also on one of the links it reads.... "the fireman is no mason" What does this mean? Does it mean that Bill knows about the masons and their evil ways and is against them? Wouldnt this make bill a good guy? Who can we trust? I have ordered the album, it should be here by tuesday I would guess... Then I will post a review.
|
|
|
Post by byrdsmaniac on Oct 14, 2005 17:30:16 GMT
Mellowyellow wrote: ""the fireman is no mason" What does this mean? Does it mean that Bill knows about the masons and their evil ways and is against them?"
It means that, if Bill is the fireman, he's not a mason. Anything else is conjecture. However I am of the opinion that Bill is motivated to keep "Paul" alive in the public perception, either because a.) It's his job:
"What does it matter to you when you got a job to do? You gotta do it well"
or b.) because he wants to spite those whose purpose it was to see Paul dead. Or c.) all of the above.
|
|
|
Post by melloyellow on Oct 14, 2005 17:38:36 GMT
You said "if" bill was the fireman, but I assure you that he is, just look up the album "Rushes" on amazon.com, read a couple reviews... It was bill and some anonymous producer called "youth" who he teamed up with.
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Oct 14, 2005 23:02:42 GMT
the way he used "if" was not questioning whether Faul wrote the album...
|
|
|
Post by emuri99 on Oct 15, 2005 3:39:57 GMT
After joining here a while back and TRYING to read all these posts, I have noticed a lot of the Mason criticisms, and I'm bewildered. My dad was a Mason. In fact I was a Rainbow Girl, which happens to be the club the female children can join. All I ever saw the Masonic lodge do was steak fries and hayrides to raise money for charities. We girls sold cookies and held carwashes. And religion was not stressed, only trying to help others misfortunes. This thread is a hoot!
|
|
Dr.No
Contributor
Posts: 177
|
Post by Dr.No on Oct 15, 2005 4:15:47 GMT
^^ Lilke similar groups, it's all fun and games until you move up the ranks.
|
|
|
Post by emuri99 on Oct 15, 2005 18:06:08 GMT
^^ Lilke similar groups, it's all fun and games until you move up the ranks. That's fine, but let's not lump them all together then. That appears extremely prejudiced. And not speak of things when we've had no personal experience.
|
|
|
Post by helterskelter on Oct 15, 2005 22:25:34 GMT
I agree with emuri99. It's like you guys are stereotyping them, which is never right. It's like saying all Canadians live in igloos and eat maple syrup and all Americans are obese and love guns. (I hope I don't offend people with that last part of my post about Canadians and Americans. I was just trying to make a point. I don't think that Canadians live in igloos and eat maple syrup and that Americans are all obese and love guns. It was just an example.)
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Oct 15, 2005 22:54:25 GMT
I don't think you neede to defend that example because you satrted it of by saying it's a stereotype (not to mention it was a humourous example!)
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Oct 15, 2005 23:03:43 GMT
I agree with emuri99. It's like you guys are stereotyping them, which is never right. It's like saying all Canadians live in igloos and eat maple syrup and all Americans are obese and love guns. (I hope I don't offend people with that last part of my post about Canadians and Americans. I was just trying to make a point. I don't think that Canadians live in igloos and eat maple syrup and that Americans are all obese and love guns. It was just an example.) What the Sam Hill is you talkin' 'bout, boy?
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Oct 16, 2005 0:28:49 GMT
lol
|
|
|
Post by helterskelter on Oct 16, 2005 1:50:09 GMT
Perplexed, that made me laugh so hard I practically fell outta my chair...
|
|
TheDZ
Provocative Operator
Posts: 435
|
Post by TheDZ on Oct 16, 2005 3:28:45 GMT
Damn, that's a big gun there...got some big rabbits down in the States there Bubba?
Um..for whomever is interested, Masons are for the most part, civic minded and reasonably intelligent people who enjoy the benefits of fraternity and networks. They are in all likelyhood good people...but, because of the secretive nature and oaths, the fraternity is vulnerable to infiltration and comprimise by those of a devious nature.
In fact, the devious ones depend on the kind and giving nature of the majority of masons in order to hide amongst them.
To hate masons per se, is to entirely miss the point..IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Oct 16, 2005 8:08:42 GMT
Damn, that's a big gun there...got some big rabbits down in the States there Bubba? Um..for whomever is interested, Masons are for the most part, civic minded and reasonably intelligent people who enjoy the benefits of fraternity and networks. They are in all likelyhood good people...but, because of the secretive nature and oaths, the fraternity is vulnerable to infiltration and comprimise by those of a devious nature. In fact, the devious ones depend on the kind and giving nature of the majority of masons in order to hide amongst them. To hate masons per se, is to entirely miss the point..IMO. That's the way I feel about it as well. It all depends on the make-up of the people inside the group. And, there are organizations, and then there are fellowships. Organizations seek to fulfill a specific mission statement, and follow rigorously devised plans for achieving defined goals. They thrive under very tight central governance, a hierarchy of leadership, and a well enunciated division of labor. The lifeblood of all organizations is money. Their goals are usually material and measurable. Their purposes are specialized; achievement is met by the channeled use of human industry. Organizations answer to trade, commerce, government, science, welfare, education, medicine, i.e. all domains of external human need. Their success is evaluated in terms of secular productivity and performance. At least, that's the common understanding. As far as I can see, the masons are a fluid fellowship bonded by traditions and philosophic principles. The lifeblood of any fellowship is individual integrity. Their goals are usually spiritual and potentiated. Their purposes, as far as I have been able to ascertain, are broad; achievement is met (ostensibly) through the universal application of divine inspiration. Fellowships answer to love, peace, prosperity, goodwill, creativity, trust, honor, i.e., all domains of internal human need. Their success must be confirmed from the benevolent impact their works have on society at large. At, least, that is the popular perception these days. "Should be" and "is" can be two different things. The darker side of humanity can express itself through associations of all kinds. Where there is no outside scrutiny, checks and balances are needed on the inside to preserve morally responsible activity. Where moral decay arises and consumes, the natural action of collective intervention from outside of the organization eventually acts to ensure it's extinction. History often shows that such intervention arrives late, partly due to a public apathy, but partly due as well to the measures that evil doers take in order to avoid detection. Increasingly intoxicated by it's own corruption and unabashedly arrogant about it's power, a vile organization sets its own trap, and when the time is right, forces from inside and outside accumulate sufficient pressure to extinguish it. It's operations fail from incompetence from within, and aggravated beseigement from without. Worthy organizations spring up in the void, fueled by the conscientious zeal of it's membership. They remains well functioning as long as the members uphold honor. Unfortunately, history teaches us how quickly grows the cancer of greed and selfishness, when, in a brief passage of time, a once noble association turns corrupt, and the cycle continues. The agenda of evil isn't always to just promote evil per se, as much as to sabotage good. By extension, then, the best way to sabotage evil is to practice good.
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Oct 16, 2005 8:54:38 GMT
Mellowyellow wrote: ""the fireman is no mason" What does this mean? Does it mean that Bill knows about the masons and their evil ways and is against them?" It means that, if Bill is the fireman, he's not a mason. Anything else is conjecture. However I am of the opinion that Bill is motivated to keep "Paul" alive in the public perception, either because a.) It's his job: "What does it matter to you when you got a job to do? You gotta do it well" or b.) because he wants to spite those whose purpose it was to see Paul dead. Or c.) all of the above. OK, here is my my simple, "on the surface of it" interpretation: Masons build structures (and, inferentially, design them as well); firemen put out fires. So, his role was "putting out a fire", not constructing or building the stucture. I think I hit this idea in a post months ago, but, interestingly, Billy Joel tells us that "we didn't start the fire." So, perhaps William has been taking care of something that could have been very destructive and burned a lot of people. Perhaps I am hyper-extending that inference a thousand miles beyond it's intended meaning, but, tarnation, that just seems to come naturally to me. Perplexed, Perpetrator of Hyperbole---100,000 times a day. OK, now there I was just exag---gyrating.
|
|
|
Post by gracemer on Oct 16, 2005 18:47:36 GMT
Could we agree that when we refer to Masons that we mean 33rd degree or higher? I believe that 50% - 100% are fully-initiated luciferians while all those below are ignorant of their true beliefs. Those at the top are always looking for "adepts" to promote. There is no doubt whatsoever what the 33rds and higher believe. They're satanic. As to the lower orders, they are basically a benevolent organization, but those don't factor into the Paul/Faul investigation.
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Oct 16, 2005 20:26:37 GMT
I think everyone who suspects the masons of being involved in conspiracies and the like is more than willing to accept that 90 percent of the masons go there to drink beer and socialize.
|
|
|
Post by emuri99 on Oct 16, 2005 22:58:51 GMT
I think everyone who suspects the masons of being involved in conspiracies and the like is more than willing to accept that 90 percent of the masons go there to drink beer and socialize. LOL! Perfect analysis.
|
|
|
Post by ironmask on Oct 20, 2005 7:51:50 GMT
As I understand it, low masons are told there are only 10 levels. When they get to the 10th they are told there are 32. When they get to 32 they are told there is a 33rd. Who knows? Maybe there's more above level 33 that noone has lived to tell about.
|
|
|
Post by beatled on Oct 20, 2005 23:25:39 GMT
I've been meaning to scan this for some time, and this thread inspired me. It was difficult, because Life magazine is so huge, so i had to make 4 separate scans and try to merge them together, with somewhat lousy results. (but you get the idea) It's from the Oct. 8, 1956 issue. This chart is quite candid about the whole 33rd degree business, surely no one can say it's something they never heard of?? Clicking on the small version will take you to a bigger version. http://*banned link*/Shoebox/Masons_Life_Mag_1956/LifeMag_10_8_56_small.jpg[/IMG][/url] And, so that you can see the parts that got messed up, the separate pieces are in this folder: http://*banned link*/Shoebox/Masons_Life_Mag_1956/ Photomerging is a b**ch, sorry.. ;D
|
|
|
Post by byrdsmaniac on Oct 20, 2005 23:33:11 GMT
Thank you for posting that Jojo. I haven't seen that depiction in decades.
|
|
|
Post by beatled on Oct 20, 2005 23:50:44 GMT
Story on how I got this, I was trying to get it on Ebay, and it went to ridiculously high sums for a 50's Life magazine, and couldn't find it on the internet anywhere at the time. One day, I walked into a junk shop in the next town, and it was just sitting there on a pile of misc. junk.. The owner only wanted 10 bucks for it, although I think she looked at how pleased I was and realized she made a big mistake, lol. Too late.
|
|
|
Post by defhermit on Oct 21, 2005 0:02:32 GMT
Doesn't every library hold back collections of major magazines? Especially big ones like Life.
|
|
|
Post by beatled on Oct 21, 2005 0:54:17 GMT
Doesn't every library hold back collections of major magazines? Especially big ones like Life. Course, but sometimes you want to own. This one is in far more demand than the week before or the one after..
|
|
|
Post by Power 2 The People on Oct 21, 2005 3:11:07 GMT
I agree with emuri99. It's like you guys are stereotyping them, which is never right. It's like saying all Canadians live in igloos and eat maple syrup and all Americans are obese and love guns. (I hope I don't offend people with that last part of my post about Canadians and Americans. I was just trying to make a point. I don't think that Canadians live in igloos and eat maple syrup and that Americans are all obese and love guns. It was just an example.) What the Sam Hill is you talkin' 'bout, boy? Wonder whut he's a compensatin' fer? ;D
|
|