"Secret History of Freemasons"; Ritual Weirdness

[philipacentaur]

FB wrote:

No one cares?

No, FB, I care, but was looking forward to something a little more substantial than a fluffy analysis based on "that's f*cking weeird, man!"

Some MEAT (pardon the pun) I could sink my teeth into, think about, and respond to.

I'll let you in on a deep, dark secret: I suspect that behind the New World Order, Skull & Bones, zionism, the "New Age" movement and all sorts of other things that we think of as separate, is a secret Masonic cult intent on world domination. "The Stargate Conspiracy" is a good place to start, especially if one has already read the books by Graham Hancock and the other international best-sellers promoting masonic themes, Robert Lomas, Richard Hoagland, the stuff about Edgar Cayce, et al, many of which are related to ancient Egyptian artifacts / extraterrestrial intelligence and their heavy portents for our world.

The fact that the coming New World Order was announced by Bonesman Bush on September 11, 1990, and launched 11 years later on September 11, 2001 -- the Pharaonic New Year, by a global superpower with his eldest son enthroned, started the masonic ball of string rolling for me. A striking characteristic of Masons is their obsession with Ancient Egyptian "secrets" and symbols, as well as the "two pillars", stars, the square and compass (the Masons fancy themselves "architects" and "engineers" -- of reality?), as well as the black-and-white checkerboard (the "grand" global chess-game?).

There. But despite compelling pings! of recognition, I haven't got anything more coherent than disparate bits and pieces. Just enough to mark me as a registered tinfoil paranoid kook, for now.

Yeah, forget reading any actual history or anything. Forget that neither Bush is a Freemason. Forget that the Skull and Bones club isn't a Masonic organization.

It's about time you showed your utter gullibility.

Who sent you a message about "quitting" the message board? Let me guess -- slimmouse?

[FourthBase]

It's not fluffy analysis, Alice. That's what you're missing.

I wouldn't be surprised if your "deep, dark secret" was partially true.

And phil, you sound just like that show's empty punchlines!

"Only 1 out of 3 presidents were Freemasons! Neither of the Bushes were masons because they were actually Skull and Bones and that's not a masonic lodge, so there, nothing to see, move along."

[philipacentaur]

And phil, you sound just like that show's empty punchlines! :lol:

"Only 1 out of 3 presidents were Freemasons! Neither of the Bushes were masons because they were actually Skull and Bones and that's not a masonic lodge, so there, nothing to see, move along."

Well, if you're going to talk about Freemasonry, then talk about Freemasonry. If the things you wish were true aren't, I guess you'll -- have to just make something up like everyone else. I saw this show already, and I was pleased that they at least mentioned the Morgan affair. I agree, they delivered the wrong conclusion about that, but to even see it mentioned on television for more than a minute was nice, considering what it meant for American politics of the time. The ritual the showed was not (to the best of my knowledge) even an initiation ritual. It certainly wasn't the entire Entered Apprentice ritual -- that's for sure. So, yeah -- the show sucked -- I expect that from The History Channel. You were expecting -- History? I wasn't.

[streeb]

Forget that neither Bush is a Freemason.

Isn't Poppy P2? Not that P2 was any more than a storefront lodge for something else.

(I know I might be showing my ignorance here)

[philipacentaur]

Forget that neither Bush is a Freemason.

Isn't Poppy P2? Not that P2 was any more than a storefront lodge for something else.

(I know I might be showing my ignorance here)

Nope.

[FourthBase]

And phil, you sound just like that show's empty punchlines!

"Only 1 out of 3 presidents were Freemasons! Neither of the Bushes were masons because they were actually Skull and Bones and that's not a masonic lodge, so there, nothing to see, move along."

Well, if you're going to talk about Freemasonry, then talk about Freemasonry. If the things you wish were true aren't, I guess you'll -- have to just make something up like everyone else. I saw this show already, and I was pleased that they at least mentioned the Morgan affair. I agree, they delivered the wrong conclusion about that, but to even see it mentioned on television for more than a minute was nice, considering what it meant for American politics of the time. The ritual the showed was not (to the best of my knowledge) even an initiation ritual. It certainly wasn't the entire Entered Apprentice ritual -- that's for sure. So, yeah -- the show sucked -- I expect that from The History Channel. You were expecting -- History? I wasn't.

Do I wish that the Bushes were Freemasons? No. They're not. Does that make all the suspiciousness disappear or something? They are bonded to a separate fraternal organization which imposes secrecy on its super-powerful members with supposedly-mock death threats and which practices bizarre death-related rituals. Nothing ordinary or innocuous about that.

It was not merely a poorly researched show, it was blatant pro-mason propaganda. Did you not also catch that vibe? We shouldn't be pleased that the Morgan affair was mentioned, because it was only mentioned on a show the intention of which was to force feed the viewer with pro-mason propaganda. The show's purpose isn't to reach people like you and me, and it's not to reach masons that's for sure, it's to reach everyone in between, especially the semi-politically-literate History Channel demographic.

Who cares if the ritual was incomplete, or if I didn't describe it right. Whatever it was, it was weird. The next question ought to be, what exactly was weird about it.

[philipacentaur]

Did you not read my post, or what?

[FourthBase]

Well, if you're going to talk about Freemasonry, then talk about Freemasonry. If the things you wish were true aren't, I guess you'll -- have to just make something up like everyone else.

How have I not been talking about Freemasonry?
What are the things I wish were true that aren't?

I saw this show already, and I was pleased that they at least mentioned the Morgan affair. I agree, they delivered the wrong conclusion about that, but to even see it mentioned on television for more than a minute was nice, considering what it meant for American politics of the time.

Yeah, led to the first third party in American political history. Funny that, what "paranoid tinfoilers" were capable of back then. What was capable then of being discussed as seriously as possible in a national political conversation is now relegated to paranormal-type internet message board ranting. "There's nothing to see here, move along"...the motto that keeps on ticking, centuries later.

The ritual the showed was not (to the best of my knowledge) even an initiation ritual. It certainly wasn't the entire Entered Apprentice ritual -- that's for sure. So, yeah -- the show sucked -- I expect that from The History Channel. You were expecting -- History? I wasn't.

It was half history, wasn't it? Half history, half propaganda. The ritual shown was a legitimate Freemason ritual of some kind, was it not? Whether it was described accurately according to Freemasonry terminology is hardly relevant to its fundamental weirdness.

[philipacentaur]

Whoa, hold on a second. Are you accusing me of this "there's nothing to see here, move along" attitude? Because if you are, my participation in this discussion is over.

[FourthBase]

Whoa, hold on a second. Are you accusing me of this "there's nothing to see here, move along" attitude? Because if you are, my participation in this discussion is over.

No, man.

I'm saying that there was once a time in American politics when membership in Freemasonry was a perfectly legit target of suspicion, so much so that the first third party in U.S. history was founded on that suspicion more or less. But soon after, and a century and a half later, "nothing to see here, move along, it's just an ordinary fraternal organization" has held sway, and now anyone who even suspects Freemasonry of anything unseemly is a "tinfoil nutjob" unfit for rational dialogue let alone mentally fit enough to, say, found a national third party.

[8bitagent]

Best thing I ever saw on Freemasons was the avant garde dialogue-less 3 and a half hour art house film by Mattew Barney called "Cremaster 3".

No, this is Cremaster 3











Basically the movie is a 3 hour series of Masonic rites and rituals, allegories through the Chrysler building. It begins with 33rd degree Masons and children necromancing underneath the Crhysler, then working up to the top of the structure with a number of meticulously reptitious and bizarre rituals working from entered apprentice to Master Mason. Various Masonic rituals are elaborated on. Its quite a challenging movie, graphic wise and bizarre wise with some pretty out their scenes. Its structured around the Solomon Temple and Hiram Abiff lore.

"The third installment of the cycle is a 182-minute narrative based around the final construction of New York City’s Chrysler Building. The building itself can be seen as a character, a host to the events that happen therein. The main story involves a struggle between Hiram Abiff, the supposed architect of the Temple of Solomon (played by Richard Serra), and ‘the Entered Apprentice’ (played by Barney). They reenact the myth of Hiram Abiff, a murder deeply soaked in Masonic initiation rites."

[8bitagent]

And phil, you sound just like that show's empty punchlines!

"Only 1 out of 3 presidents were Freemasons! Neither of the Bushes were masons because they were actually Skull and Bones and that's not a masonic lodge, so there, nothing to see, move along."

Well, if you're going to talk about Freemasonry, then talk about Freemasonry. If the things you wish were true aren't, I guess you'll -- have to just make something up like everyone else. I saw this show already, and I was pleased that they at least mentioned the Morgan affair. I agree, they delivered the wrong conclusion about that, but to even see it mentioned on television for more than a minute was nice, considering what it meant for American politics of the time. The ritual the showed was not (to the best of my knowledge) even an initiation ritual. It certainly wasn't the entire Entered Apprentice ritual -- that's for sure. So, yeah -- the show sucked -- I expect that from The History Channel. You were expecting -- History? I wasn't.

I think it was the tone and words used by FB in the thread's original post that turned people off.

I welcome an open discussion on all aspects of the Craft.

[FourthBase]

Well, I do want to discuss how weird their rituals are, I don't want the weirdness to be lost. How weird it is for people in powerful positions to be participating in those rituals. What exactly is weird. And what it all means in the big picture.

(I can't help the tone sometimes. It's how I think/talk/type. What you see is what you get, I call it like I see it, I don't mince words, I'm not polite, I use too many curse words, and I use way too many auxiliary words. This is who I am.)

[8bitagent]

Well, I do want to discuss how weird their rituals are, I don't want the weirdness to be lost. How weird it is for people in powerful positions to be participating in those rituals. What exactly is weird. And what it all means in the big picture.

(I can't help the tone sometimes. It's how I think/talk/type. What you see is what you get, I call it like I see it, I don't mince words, I'm not polite, I use too many curse words, and I use way too many auxiliary words. This is who I am.)

While the rituals may seem elaborate, ornate and strange...

it is the the power of influence, cooercion, leverage, etc of deal makers and institutions in Europe and America that has happened to use MAsonry to forment an agenda that is the bigger interest...that which just so happens to revolve around Solomonic-Celestial-Egyptian occult mystery and rites.

[FourthBase]

Well, I do want to discuss how weird their rituals are, I don't want the weirdness to be lost. How weird it is for people in powerful positions to be participating in those rituals. What exactly is weird. And what it all means in the big picture.

(I can't help the tone sometimes. It's how I think/talk/type. What you see is what you get, I call it like I see it, I don't mince words, I'm not polite, I use too many curse words, and I use way too many auxiliary words. This is who I am.)

While the rituals may seem elaborate, ornate and strange...

it is the the power of influence, cooercion, leverage, etc of deal makers and institutions in Europe and America that has happened to use MAsonry to forment an agenda that is the bigger interest...that which just so happens to revolve around Solomonic-Celestial-Egyptian occult mystery and rites.

I understand what the bigger interests are. Yet I really don't see what's so wrong about pointing out that the rituals are fucking weird, and that it's fucking weird that these community leaders and national politicians et. al. participate in them. Leaders shouldn't be participating in those kind of rituals and secret oaths, should they? Why is it that their participating in them is taken for granted?