Page 1 of 1

Exhibit traces influence of Freemasonry

PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2005 4:14 pm
by Rigorous Intuition
AP, Wed, May. 18, 2005<br><br>WASHINGTON - Some of the most famous buildings in Washington, including the White House, are deeply marked by Freemasonry, the brotherhood that goes back to the cathedral builders of the Middle Ages, says a new exhibit.<br><br>The show is called "The Initiated Eye: Secrets, Symbols, Freemasonry and the Architecture of Washington D.C." It opened to the public Wednesday.<br><br>Peter Waddell, 49, a history painter born in New Zealand, contributed 21 pictures to the show. Now an American citizen, he puts emphasis on George Washington, shown as he dons his ritual Masonic apron on the way to lay the cornerstone of the Capitol in 1792. Washington and 14 of his successors have been Freemasons, down through Lyndon Johnson.<br><br>Among the artifacts on view are a narrow white coffin strap, painted with Masonic symbols, used to lower Washington's body into the tomb at Mount Vernon.<br><br>...<br><br>On July 4, 1848, President James K. Polk, a Mason, presided over the laying of the cornerstone of the Washington Monument, with the widows of Alexander Hamilton and President James Madison in attendance. Using the same Masonic trowel that Washington had used at the Capitol, Benjamin Brown French as Grand Master of Masons in Washington and clerk of the House of Representatives presented the symbolic Masonic tools and defined the meaning of the symbols to Freemason Robert Mills, the architect.<br><br>"The square, level and plumb are the working tools you are to use in the erection of this monument," he said. "You, as a Freemason, know to what they morally elude: the plumb(line) admonishes to walk upright in our several stations before God and man, squaring our actions by the square of virtue, and remembering that we are traveling on the level of time..."<br><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="" target="top"></a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

Masonic Presidents

PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2005 5:29 pm
by antiaristo
"Peter Waddell, 49, a history painter born in New Zealand, contributed 21 pictures to the show. Now an American citizen, he puts emphasis on George Washington, shown as he dons his ritual Masonic apron on the way to lay the cornerstone of the Capitol in 1792. Washington and 14 of his successors have been Freemasons, down through Lyndon Johnson."<br><br>Why is it that apologists for Masonry are so coy about their current devotees? What does Mr Waddell think about Skull & Bones? Does he not know it is Masonic? Does he not know that George W Bush is a Bonesman? Does he not know that George H W Bush is a bonesman?<br>Does he not know that William J Clinton was a DeMolay youth? Does he not know that both of the latter have been dubbed by Her Majesy, giving them a second identity which is not a US citizen (Israelis are not the only duals in American public life)?<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

Poppy and Clinton

PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2005 7:44 pm
by Qutb
Do you have some more information on the "dubbing" of these two by the queen? I've never heard about that before. Is it verifiable or is it just rumours?<br><br>They have been getting awfully tight lately anyway, Barbara calling Bill her son and all. I predict Jeb v Hillary in 08, whoever wins America will still be ruled by the Bush-Clinton dynasty, as it has been since 1981. <p></p><i></i>

forbidden knowledge

PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2005 7:52 pm
by michael meiring
all this information has been in the public domain for years. One just has to do the research oneself as the black propaganda broadsheets passing for newspapers in the Uk seem obsessed with such stories on the frontpages as kylie cancer scare etc.<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :lol --><img src= ALT=":lol"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>It never ceases to amaze me that pictures of prince william, princess margeret and in fact most of our 'royal bloodline' family giing the satanic sifn are passed off as these being fans of the texas longhorns. Come on, i mean....still it seems to work and thats why they do it. <p></p><i></i>

Poppy and Clinton

PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2005 9:07 pm
by antiaristo
Quth<br><br>Poppy was widely reported in the 90's, but they seem to be more coy thesedays. Sorry, I don't have a specific reference.<br>The Clinton knighthood is more sensitive, and has never been reported. The closest we came was when London newspapers were reporting that Tony Blair "wanted to grant his friend an honorary knighthood. Then it got dropped. The reason I know about it is because Clinton was photographed in London in January 2001. He was "paying a private visit to Buckingham Palace". Also in the photo were Hillary and Chelsea.<br><br>There is no such thing as an "honorary" knighthood. When Clinton accepted the dubbing he had sworn personal allegiance to Queen Elizabeth. He became Sir William Clinton, subject of Her Britannic Majesty. He has been given a British passport in his new name. Under common law, Sir William Clinton is a completely different name than William Clinton.<br>Ask a good lawyer about the value of a second LEGAL identity!<br>At the same time Hillary became Lady Hillary. She may choose not to use her title in public, just like the wife of the Prince of Wales. And for the same reason - embarassment. <p></p><i></i>

Re: Poppy and Clinton

PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2005 2:05 am
by marykmusic
All US Presidents, except for Kennedy (because he was Catholic) were/are masons.<br><br>And look at the Burke's Peerage studies on the percent of royal blood; every election, we have to choose between two of the same bloodlines. Whichever candidate has the highest percentage of royal blood has been the winner every time... except for the last election. And there's rumbling in Ohio again... perhaps this will finally be overturned after all? --MaryK <p></p><i></i>

Catholic Masons

PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2005 6:07 am
by antiaristo
Mary,<br>You are quite correct about all presidents bar Kennedy. But did you know that the last Pope changed the rules about Masonry in 1983. Now Catholics are allowed to be Masons - as long as it is Scottish Rite. To all intents and purposes the membership of Opus Dei overlaps with the Scottish Rite. See for example Ruth Kelly in the UK.<br><br>The Grand Orient are not happy about this. They vetoed any mention of Christianity in the draft European Constitution. John Paul II was not popular in France.<br><br>But John Paul was VERY popular with Zionists. And of course he personally received a fabulous press, even as the Church was going down the lavatory.<br><br>And last, did you know that JPII refused to take the oath of his office. And he stepped into a dead man's shoes. <p></p><i></i>

Re: Exhibit traces influence of Freemasonry

PostPosted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 1:01 pm
by semper occultus
Freemasonry’s Titanic heyday has probably long gone

Chris Mullin

Yes, masons may have influenced the Titanic and Bloody Sunday inquiries – but I think the days of attracting the likes of the Duke of Wellington and royalty are over

Freemasons parading through the City of London this month after losing a VAT fight with the taxman.

The news that the freemasons, in an unprecedented bout of candour, have made available online the names of their entire membership up to 1923 will only fuel the paranoia that surrounds their present-day activities.

Diane Clements, director of the Library and Museum of Freemasonry, said: “The records demonstrate the extensive involvement which freemasons have had in British society.”

David Cameron hosted freemasons event at Westminster
read more

I’ll say. According to the documents, the masonic roll call included at least 5,500 police officers (many occupying senior positions), several thousand army officers – including the Duke of Wellington and Lord Kitchener – 170 judges, 169 MPs and 16 bishops. Not to mention senior members of the royal family, up to and including Edward VII.

Attention has focused on the inquiry into the sinking of the Titanic, widely regarded at the time as a whitewash. It now emerges that Lord Mersey, the judge who conducted the inquiry, was a mason; likewise two of his five expert assessors. In addition, the president of the Board of Trade, which got off remarkably lightly, was a mason; and so was Lord Pirrie, the chairman of Harland and Woolf, the company that built the Titanic, and a board member of the White Star shipping line that owned the ship. Whatever the truth of the matter, it doesn’t look good.

There has long been concern about the role of freemasonry in public life, particularly in the police and judiciary and in some local authorities, where they tend to graduate towards planning committees. In the police, until fairly recently, masons have tended to favour the elite squads.

Some years ago, when investigating miscarriages of justice, I began to wonder whether the wall of silence that greeted inquiries, official and unofficial, into allegations of police malpractice, had anything to do with the high incidence of masons in certain forces.

Sir Robert Mark, Metropolitan police commissioner in the 1970s (who famously remarked that he wanted to catch more criminals than he employed) certainly thought so. On his watch about 500 officers, including many masons, were sacked or forced to retire; several were jailed for corruption.

Sir Kenneth Newman, who became commissioner five years after Mark retired, published a code of ethics that included the following: “The discerning officer will consider it wise to forgo the prospect of pleasure and social advantage so as to enjoy the unreserved regard of those around him.” Far from complying, masons in the Met subsequently set up a Scotland Yard lodge, – the Manor of St James – which, if nothing else, suggests a certain self-confidence.

The late lord chief justice, Lord Widgery, who conducted the 1972 inquiry into the Bloody Sunday shootings in Northern Ireland, was a mason. Like the inquiry into the Titanic, it was widely regarded as a whitewash. I have no idea whether the fact that he was a mason had anything to do with the outcome, but as with the Titanic, it doesn’t look good.

The masons, of course, hotly deny that they are a secret society. They are, they say, a society with secrets: a distinction lost on those of us who are not masons. Nor does it do much for public confidence that they fight so tenaciously to protect the identity of their members. When I succeeded in persuading the last Labour government to require that applicants for the police, judiciary and planning inspectorate disclose membership of secret societies, they resisted vigorously, even threatening legal action and eventually forcing the government to back down.

The late Sir Gerald Vaughan, at the time the most senior freemason in the House of Commons, once remarked to me that “if I have any criticism of freemasonry” (and he didn’t have many), “it is very difficult to leave once you have joined”. And that, of course, is the point. You can be called upon to assist a brother at any time. You can lapse, but you can’t resign.

Since masonic membership is hard to prove, it is rare for masons to be caught out in skulduggery, but it does happen. Martin Short’s classic book Inside the Brotherhood contains many examples; and on a couple of occasions the local government ombudsman has upheld complaints of undue masonic influence on planning committees. In the 1990s Lancashire police authority had to make a multi-thousand-pound payment to two businessmen over claims they were stitched up by masonic officers.

To what extent is masonic influence in public life a problem today? The masons claim to have 250,000 members in England alone, and another 150,000 in Scotland and Ireland; but my guess is that, like much organised activity, freemasonry is in steep decline. Although masons are still influential in some professions, especially uniformed services, membership is far less fashionable than it used to be. Much unjustified paranoia surrounds freemasons, but their obsessive secrecy and the oaths they swear inevitably means that they have only themselves to blame.

Re: Exhibit traces influence of Freemasonry

PostPosted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 1:35 pm
by backtoiam
The late Sir Gerald Vaughan, at the time the most senior freemason in the House of Commons, once remarked to me that “if I have any criticism of freemasonry” (and he didn’t have many), “it is very difficult to leave once you have joined”. And that, of course, is the point. You can be called upon to assist a brother at any time. You can lapse, but you can’t resign.

When I was younger many years ago I was the president of a chapter of a fraternal brotherhood. People that have never been affiliated with a fraternal organization scoff at the idea of a "cabal" that is so closely knit that it develops a life of its own and becomes a living entity in its own right but I can assure you the bond is strong.

I can testify that the fraternal bond is as strong as any family bond. One of our main tenets was absolute secrecy and those who broke that code had to face consequences.

It is amazing what a small group of highly coordinated people can accomplish while the rest of the scattered uncoordinated ducks mill about in the pond completely unaware that we were having a conversation right in front of them in their presence that they didn't understand. Our language sounded exactly like the people unaffiliated with the brotherhood but with nuance and context we were speaking a code that they could not spot and didn't understand.

We ran the show and nobody realized it. We were a benevolent group and did not hurt people but when we decided to make something happen we got the job done in a hurry because it was hard for people to get in our way because of the way we operated.

Re: Exhibit traces influence of Freemasonry

PostPosted: Fri Nov 27, 2015 8:29 am
by semper occultus
Speaking to the 'Withnail and I' Creator Who Believes He's Discovered Who Jack the Ripper Really Was

November 26, 2015
by Kevin EG Perry

The result is They All Love Jack: Busting the Ripper, 801 pages of meticulously argued investigation delivered in Robinson's lurid vernacular. One reviewer wrote that it reads as if written by Withnail after he'd sobered up, which makes Robinson laugh: "Withnail – i.e. me – will never sober up."

The book is less of a departure than it might appear. Robinson is no stranger to rigorous historical research, having written both The Killing Fields, about the rise of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, and Fat Man and Little Boy about Robert Oppenheimer and the development of the nuclear bomb (released in the UK as Shadow Makers). Director Roland Joffé rewrote the script for the latter film against Robinson's will, then realised he needed to get his hands on Robinson's original research. His reply was a curt fax: "You've stolen my car. Don't expect me to buy the fucking petrol as well."

Having bet a friend he could find the Ripper, once Robinson began his search it soon became clear he was looking at a cover up. "There was this constant reiteration from the police that he never left a clue. He came out of the fog, murdered these women and disappeared," he says. "That's the myth of the Ripper and it's patent nonsense. Anyone who's conducting a series of murders in a ritualistic way is leaving clues. If they're ritualistic, what's the ritual? The day you ask that you're going down Freemason street."

Robinson's conclusion – persuasively laid out in They All Love Jack – is that Jack the Ripper was a musician and prominent Freemason named Michael Maybrick. He argues that Maybrick was protected by Metropolitan Police Commissioner Charles Warren, a fellow Mason who wished to avoid a scandal. After assembling his case against Maybrick, Robinson noted that although he had composed "The Holy City", one of the most popular songs in England, he had been expunged from contemporary books like the exhaustive Grove Dictionary of Music.

"This guy was as famous as it got, so how come he's nowhere?" asks Robinson. "How come he's been Jimmy Saviled out of history?"