using phrases such as 'Freemasons' or worse 'the Freemasons' is an attempt to dehumanize them and that is the thin end of the wedge of persecution
it has no bearing in this discussion, is not helpful and should be avoided.
Like they said, Hitler thought there was a plot to take over the world (there still is btw :rolleyes: ). Mostly some lower level members were taken out. This has nothing to do with dehumanizing them, as it's taken as a given that not all of them are going to be involved. Some people believe they have a lot of power concentrated between their number, this is true, there are many within high levels of power. Bringing up somebody else's beliefs and actions, quite despicable ones, and from a long time ago and using it to claim we can't (as individuals) talk online about some group now because of what they did?
I do agree with you though, it should be avoided here if we can, of course it's not right to claim an entity could be guilty of something, and trying to find links to them is not fair at the moment (or at all really). Until there is clear evidence we can show of any concerted involvement we should probably stear clear of mentioning them.
Blimey, it's the Freemasons heading up some sort of national paedophile conspiracy this morning. Last night it was members of the Athenaeum (even though membership for one person named appears to be speculation).
Blimey, it's the Freemasons heading up some sort of national paedophile conspiracy this morning. Last night it was members of the Athenaeum (even though membership for one person named appears to be speculation). I can't keep up.
Well i would think ''IF'' there was such a thing then ofc their name will be brought up, among others. Don't know who you're talking about with the speculated member, not important/or something we should be talking about anyway.
he knew a lot of people with blue eyes. Your attempt to join the dots to back up your preconceptions does not help the police. Substitute the term 'The Freemasons' for 'The Jews' or 'The blacks' and you're hopefully see how wrong such blanket accusations are
This thread seems to be filling up with tin foil David Icke loons...
I agree, I used to like debunking stuff from conspiracy loons, it's fairly easy as they generally just pick out certain facts that fit their agenda, ignore other facts that don't, and then make-up more 'facts' to fill in the gaps, based on no evidence whatsoever, so they can put forward their theory. However, it got boring, because they will never accept reality, they have very closed minds.
At first reading a lot of their theories seem possible, but as soon as you start drilling down into them and analysing them they start falling to pieces. It does make me laugh how some people just fall for them without any critical analysis, perhaps it shouldn't as these conspiracy loons are dangerous as they tend to muddy the waters and make it so much harder getting to the real truth.
The chances of Jimbo being a Freemason when he was a devout Catholic is highly unlikely, being that Catholic are prohibited by the church from becoming Freemasons.
Not that that will stop people claiming otherwise, as any 'good' conspiracy theory needs a group/body/organisation to wrap the theory around, so often it boils down to the Freemasons or the Jews (or shape-shifting lizards), there's no Jewish link here (although I think one poster has tried to make such a link), so by default it has to be the Freemasons.
Like they said, Hitler thought there was a plot to take over the world (there still is btw :rolleyes: ).
who has and why has it taken so long?
Mostly some lower level members were taken
out.
Oh that's alright then..
This has nothing to do with dehumanizing them,
You just did!
as it's taken as a given that not all of them are going to be involved. Some people believe they have a lot of power concentrated between their number, this is true, there are many within high levels of power.
What truth? Obama plays golf. Is golf a symbol of the global elite? what really goes on in the bunkers on the 18th at Augusta National Golf Club?
Bringing up somebody else's beliefs and actions, quite despicable ones, and from a long time ago and using it to claim we can't (as individuals) talk online about some group now because of what they did?
You confuse me....What on Earth are you referring too?????
I do agree with you though, it should be avoided here if we can, of course it's not right to claim an entity could be guilty of something, and trying to find links to them is not fair at the moment (or at all really). Until there is clear evidence we can show of any concerted involvement we should probably stear clear of mentioning them.
My pet hate is conspiracy theories,whilst i hate the Mcanns with a passion that story is ridiculous. The husband and wife statements contradicted each other(Gaspars) and were so feeble it's a joke. See people get carried away."Jimmy Saville squeezed me too tight one day" =I knew he was a weirdo.:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
There seem to be a few people trying to work themselves into this story through the most tenuous links imaginable.
Jimmy was around in the 1960’s the same decade as the moon landings....I wonder!!
Maybe if I google I can find at least one nut job web site that can confirm my suspicions therefore making me feel clever that someone else is right and not just me..I've always known it you see..Savile and the moon landings..but everyone laughed at me. Bliiiip bloooonk blurrrpp. I notice that NASA have been very silent on this issue since the Savile scandal broke, proof enough for me.
Now all I need is a picture of Savile with a bit of sky in the background, preferably night time sky as it looks a bit more 'spacey' .vrrruuoop. bruuuup. bllluuurghhh.
I can't believe no one else has made the connection...I did...it makes me clever yes?
This is great isn't it, it's just like Miss Marple but on the Internet, I hope they bring a board game version out in time for Christmas.
I agree, I used to like debunking stuff from conspiracy loons, it's fairly easy as they generally just pick out certain facts that fit their agenda, ignore other facts that don't, and then make-up more 'facts' to fill in the gaps, based on no evidence whatsoever, so they can put forward their theory. However, it got boring, because they will never accept reality, they have very closed minds.
At first reading a lot of their theories seem possible, but as soon as you start drilling down into them and analysing them they start falling to pieces. It does make me laugh how some people just fall for them without any critical analysis, perhaps it shouldn't as these conspiracy loons are dangerous as they tend to muddy the waters and make it so much harder getting to the real truth.
The chances of Jimbo being a Freemason when he was a devout Catholic is highly unlikely, being that Catholic are prohibited by the church from becoming Freemasons.
Not that that will stop people claiming otherwise, as any 'good' conspiracy theory needs a group/body/organisation to wrap the theory around, so often it boils down to the Freemasons or the Jews (or shape-shifting lizards), there's no Jewish link here (although I think one poster has tried to make such a link), so by default it has to be the Freemasons.
Ironically They also will tell you Tony Blair is a 33 degree Freemason when he had quite publically converted to Catholicism !
Of course then it become the Opus Dai who are up to no good...:rolleyes:
Sadly if you don't take the time to debunk this stuff as soon as possible then it get's logged into the subconscious as 'truth' how? - well I read it somewhere, can't quite remember where but it must be true because I read it
.
So they repeat this 'truth' circle unquestioningly and the next person pick it up and so it continues.
New interview with Karin Ward this morning, detailing the Jimmy Savile & Freddie Starr allegations that were in the online chapters of the book she wrote before it was removed from the fanstory site.
Given her real name and place of birth, seems she was born in June 1958. So at least that's been cleared up. Maybe!
Changing her story so that he no longer smells of booze (given his position that he's never drunk) but now of cologne doesn't really inspire confidence in her evidence, to be honest. Starr's right - his brief would take her apart in a courtroom just on that one point, and cast doubts on everything else she's said.
Ironically They also will tell you Tony Blair is a 33 degree Freemason when he had quite publically converted to Catholicism !
Of course then it become the Opus Dai who are up to no good...:rolleyes:
Sadly if you don't take the time to debunk this stuff as soon as possible then it get's logged into the subconscious as 'truth' how? - well I read it somewhere, can't quite remember where but it must be true because I read it
.
So they repeat this 'truth' circle unquestioningly and the next person pick it up and so it continues.
Hmmm. A little learning and all that...
I find it interesting the kind of images which are associated with a couple of crimes in which children have died. Certainly, my former colleagues who are in the midst of a big cover up have something important in common. Or should that be 'Common'?
What truth? Obama plays golf. Is golf a symbol of the global elite? what really goes on in the bunkers on the 18th at Augusta National Golf Club?
You confuse me....What on Earth are you referring too?????
At least we can agree on something
The site did. I was being sarcastic with the smiley.
Did i say it was alright? For any conspiracy to exist and carry on the elite members would have to survive, this was a reference to what we are saying, we don't want to castigate any lower level members, as they are not going to be at the heart of any power-plays.
The truth is, many people in positions of power are also members.
The fact you tried to invoke Hitler, and compared what we are saying to what he did.
For basically the same reasons, we just took 'slightly' different paths to get there.
That's fine then. It's all about a few people at the BBC years ago or maybe just Jimmy Saville.Anyone who suggests differently is a conspiracy theorist, a loon, or some sort of demented Miss Marple.
It should all blow over in a couple of weeks when the public get tired of it but of course the BBC will get a good bashing. Good to know that things are being kept within bounds because that's, of paramount importance. Apparently.
So the BBC are going to hold two enquiries . Wow .
Judging by the comments from George Entwistle who was Head Of Television at the BBC when the Newsnight program was pulled he said yesterday.
" All that all I knew was that Newsnight was looking at Jimmy Saville . That's as much as I was told. I didn't know what aspect of Jimmy Saville they were looking into and and another important point is that I had no idea of the strength of any information they might have or allegations they were dealing with."
So that's one of the main people in charge at the BBC at the time and the first thing he does is to cover hus back and deny all knowledge of anything .
Of course then it become the Opus Dai who are up to no good...:rolleyes:
Yeah, I forgot to mention Opus Dai.
I think the conspiracy loons problem is just fear, fear of the unknown, the whole Freemason conspiracy trip seems based on the fact that they are often described as a 'secret society'.
So, 'secret' that everyone knows they exist, then it's because of their 'secret' rituals & symbolism, so 'secret' that there's loads of reference sources to what they are, it's just totally bonkers.
OK, they don't publish their membership list, but nor do most clubs & societies, the Masons at the end of the day are based on the principles of "Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth".
Sure there's going to be some bad eggs amongst them, just like there will be at your local golf club, Rotary club, working men's club, or any other club.
And, no I am not a Mason, I know a few and I've been invited to join on a few occasions, but it holds no interest to me.
I think the conspiracy loons problem is just fear, fear of the unknown, the whole Freemason conspiracy trip seems based on the fact that they are often described as a 'secret society'.
So, 'secret' that everyone knows they exist, then it's because of their 'secret' rituals & symbolism, so 'secret' that there's loads of reference sources to what they are, it's just totally bonkers.
OK, they don't publish their membership list, but nor do most clubs & societies, the Masons at the end of the day are based on the principles of "Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth".
Sure there's going to be some bad eggs amongst them, just like there will be at your local golf club, Rotary club, working men's club, or any other club.
And, no I am not a Mason, I know a few and I've been invited to join on a few occasions, but it holds no interest to me.
So, then, on what evidence are you basing what you are saying?
So the BBC are going to hold two enquiries . Wow .
Judging by the comments from George Entwistle who was Head Of Television at the BBC when the Newsnight program was pulled he said yesterday.
" All that all I knew was that Newsnight was looking at Jimmy Saville . That's as much as I was told. I didn't know what aspect of Jimmy Saville they were looking into and and another important point is that I had no idea of the strength of any information they might have or allegations they were dealing with."
So that's one of the main people in charge at the BBC at the time and the first thing he does is to cover hus back and deny all knowledge of anything .
Great , just flipping great .
It's perfectly normal that people try to ring fence themselves against blame.We all have mortgages and lifestyles to pay for
plus, owning up to everything now not knowing what that my mean will make it more difficult if the truth is not quite what the present storm is whipping it up to be..
However with the Police involved and TV centre considered a scene of the crime it's difficult to see how the beeb can avoid closer scrutiny from outside
The truth is, many people in positions of power are also members.
And, so what?
An even greater number of people in power are not members, and an even greater number of people not in power are members, it means absolutely nothing whatsoever.
Lots of people in power are members of golf clubs, I meet a lot of people in power via my involvement in my local Chamber of Commerce, and its links other Chambers.
If anyone thinks there's some great conspiracy among Masons, you may as well claim the same among members of golf clubs, Chambers of Commerce, etc., etc.
That's fine then. It's all about a few people at the BBC years ago or maybe just Jimmy Saville.Anyone who suggests differently is a conspiracy theorist, a loon, or some sort of demented Miss Marple.
It should all blow over in a couple of weeks when the public get tired of it but of course the BBC will get a good bashing. Good to know that things are being kept within bounds because that's, of paramount importance. Apparently.
No what would be sensible would be to stick to the facts as they are and avoid wild conjecture. Throwing in the Freemasons (or any other group) at this stage isn't helpful. I struggle to believe the bbc is stuffed full to the gunnel's with kiddie fiddlers. Likely there would be a few who had similar interests who naturally congregated together.
There will also a few who in perhaps a moment of stupidity brought on by drink, drugs or the moment got carried away and shagged some 15 year old on the R1 road show.
We need to separate both and concentrate on what actually happened, who was involved, who knew what and when. Then the evidence needs to be correlated and presented to the CPS. If any of those implicated have sufficient evidence then a prosecution will be brought forward to trial.
Quite apart from the repellent sexual abuse Savile perpetrated, what I find so frightening is the casual lack of security applied to him and all those implications. It's mind boggling thinking that be was given keys in Broadmoor, even if it were only to the stationery cupboard, but to think he could have roamed the corridors popping in for a cuppa and a rich tea to PS & co is horrifying. Did he potentially have the ability to come and go without any checks at all. Decisions like this aren't usual for starters but also aren't usually made by one person.
The same applies to the NHS. I have worked for the health service for years and again, everything works by committee. Decisions are made by one set of people, instigated by another and finally delivered by someone else. Just taking his name badge in the 'Jimmy's' picture. Someone said it was ok for him a) not to have a real ID badge b) put Al Pacino on instead and whatever the other one is (it sure isn't JS). In other words - lots of people were going along with whatever had been decreed, probably asking themselves lots of questions but it being sanctioned from on high. It doesn't seem possible in the NHS organisation (not the same one) I work in where security is as tight as a drum, but those style of name badges haven't been around for that long so go figure!
Ironically They also will tell you Tony Blair is a 33 degree Freemason when he had quite publically converted to Catholicism !
Of course then it become the Opus Dai who are up to no good...:rolleyes:
Sadly if you don't take the time to debunk this stuff as soon as possible then it get's logged into the subconscious as 'truth' how? - well I read it somewhere, can't quite remember where but it must be true because I read it
.
So they repeat this 'truth' circle unquestioningly and the next person pick it up and so it continues.
Comments
Sorry. Found it.
Like they said, Hitler thought there was a plot to take over the world (there still is btw :rolleyes: ). Mostly some lower level members were taken out. This has nothing to do with dehumanizing them, as it's taken as a given that not all of them are going to be involved. Some people believe they have a lot of power concentrated between their number, this is true, there are many within high levels of power. Bringing up somebody else's beliefs and actions, quite despicable ones, and from a long time ago and using it to claim we can't (as individuals) talk online about some group now because of what they did?
I do agree with you though, it should be avoided here if we can, of course it's not right to claim an entity could be guilty of something, and trying to find links to them is not fair at the moment (or at all really). Until there is clear evidence we can show of any concerted involvement we should probably stear clear of mentioning them.
I can't keep up.
I can't be arsed filling in the gaps but putting 2+2 together I find myself coming to 6
http://www.elviscommunity.com/_jimmy-and-elvis/photo/13481060/27782.html?enlarge=true
But it is clear Jimmy has just sold Priscilla on at a cracking price.
I'm clever..I have taken two things and forced them together. This is a great game.
Well i would think ''IF'' there was such a thing then ofc their name will be brought up, among others. Don't know who you're talking about with the speculated member, not important/or something we should be talking about anyway.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/liz-taylor-had-sex-with-ronald-reagan-1376416
I agree, I used to like debunking stuff from conspiracy loons, it's fairly easy as they generally just pick out certain facts that fit their agenda, ignore other facts that don't, and then make-up more 'facts' to fill in the gaps, based on no evidence whatsoever, so they can put forward their theory. However, it got boring, because they will never accept reality, they have very closed minds.
At first reading a lot of their theories seem possible, but as soon as you start drilling down into them and analysing them they start falling to pieces. It does make me laugh how some people just fall for them without any critical analysis, perhaps it shouldn't as these conspiracy loons are dangerous as they tend to muddy the waters and make it so much harder getting to the real truth.
The chances of Jimbo being a Freemason when he was a devout Catholic is highly unlikely, being that Catholic are prohibited by the church from becoming Freemasons.
Not that that will stop people claiming otherwise, as any 'good' conspiracy theory needs a group/body/organisation to wrap the theory around, so often it boils down to the Freemasons or the Jews (or shape-shifting lizards), there's no Jewish link here (although I think one poster has tried to make such a link), so by default it has to be the Freemasons.
who has and why has it taken so long?
Oh that's alright then..
You just did!
What truth? Obama plays golf. Is golf a symbol of the global elite? what really goes on in the bunkers on the 18th at Augusta National Golf Club?
You confuse me....What on Earth are you referring too?????
At least we can agree on something
Now, where's that 'like' button?
Ironically They also will tell you Tony Blair is a 33 degree Freemason when he had quite publically converted to Catholicism !
Of course then it become the Opus Dai who are up to no good...:rolleyes:
Sadly if you don't take the time to debunk this stuff as soon as possible then it get's logged into the subconscious as 'truth' how? - well I read it somewhere, can't quite remember where but it must be true because I read it
.
So they repeat this 'truth' circle unquestioningly and the next person pick it up and so it continues.
Given her real name and place of birth, seems she was born in June 1958. So at least that's been cleared up. Maybe!
Changing her story so that he no longer smells of booze (given his position that he's never drunk) but now of cologne doesn't really inspire confidence in her evidence, to be honest. Starr's right - his brief would take her apart in a courtroom just on that one point, and cast doubts on everything else she's said.
Hmmm. A little learning and all that...
I find it interesting the kind of images which are associated with a couple of crimes in which children have died. Certainly, my former colleagues who are in the midst of a big cover up have something important in common. Or should that be 'Common'?
The site did. I was being sarcastic with the smiley.
Did i say it was alright? For any conspiracy to exist and carry on the elite members would have to survive, this was a reference to what we are saying, we don't want to castigate any lower level members, as they are not going to be at the heart of any power-plays.
The truth is, many people in positions of power are also members.
The fact you tried to invoke Hitler, and compared what we are saying to what he did.
For basically the same reasons, we just took 'slightly' different paths to get there.
It should all blow over in a couple of weeks when the public get tired of it but of course the BBC will get a good bashing. Good to know that things are being kept within bounds because that's, of paramount importance. Apparently.
Judging by the comments from George Entwistle who was Head Of Television at the BBC when the Newsnight program was pulled he said yesterday.
" All that all I knew was that Newsnight was looking at Jimmy Saville . That's as much as I was told. I didn't know what aspect of Jimmy Saville they were looking into and and another important point is that I had no idea of the strength of any information they might have or allegations they were dealing with."
So that's one of the main people in charge at the BBC at the time and the first thing he does is to cover hus back and deny all knowledge of anything .
Great , just flipping great .
Yeah, I forgot to mention Opus Dai.
I think the conspiracy loons problem is just fear, fear of the unknown, the whole Freemason conspiracy trip seems based on the fact that they are often described as a 'secret society'.
So, 'secret' that everyone knows they exist, then it's because of their 'secret' rituals & symbolism, so 'secret' that there's loads of reference sources to what they are, it's just totally bonkers.
OK, they don't publish their membership list, but nor do most clubs & societies, the Masons at the end of the day are based on the principles of "Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth".
Sure there's going to be some bad eggs amongst them, just like there will be at your local golf club, Rotary club, working men's club, or any other club.
And, no I am not a Mason, I know a few and I've been invited to join on a few occasions, but it holds no interest to me.
So, then, on what evidence are you basing what you are saying?
It's perfectly normal that people try to ring fence themselves against blame.We all have mortgages and lifestyles to pay for
plus, owning up to everything now not knowing what that my mean will make it more difficult if the truth is not quite what the present storm is whipping it up to be..
However with the Police involved and TV centre considered a scene of the crime it's difficult to see how the beeb can avoid closer scrutiny from outside
You mean Opus Dei, methinks?
And, so what?
An even greater number of people in power are not members, and an even greater number of people not in power are members, it means absolutely nothing whatsoever.
Lots of people in power are members of golf clubs, I meet a lot of people in power via my involvement in my local Chamber of Commerce, and its links other Chambers.
If anyone thinks there's some great conspiracy among Masons, you may as well claim the same among members of golf clubs, Chambers of Commerce, etc., etc.
No what would be sensible would be to stick to the facts as they are and avoid wild conjecture. Throwing in the Freemasons (or any other group) at this stage isn't helpful. I struggle to believe the bbc is stuffed full to the gunnel's with kiddie fiddlers. Likely there would be a few who had similar interests who naturally congregated together.
There will also a few who in perhaps a moment of stupidity brought on by drink, drugs or the moment got carried away and shagged some 15 year old on the R1 road show.
We need to separate both and concentrate on what actually happened, who was involved, who knew what and when. Then the evidence needs to be correlated and presented to the CPS. If any of those implicated have sufficient evidence then a prosecution will be brought forward to trial.
What do you mean?
What evidence of what are you after?
The same applies to the NHS. I have worked for the health service for years and again, everything works by committee. Decisions are made by one set of people, instigated by another and finally delivered by someone else. Just taking his name badge in the 'Jimmy's' picture. Someone said it was ok for him a) not to have a real ID badge b) put Al Pacino on instead and whatever the other one is (it sure isn't JS). In other words - lots of people were going along with whatever had been decreed, probably asking themselves lots of questions but it being sanctioned from on high. It doesn't seem possible in the NHS organisation (not the same one) I work in where security is as tight as a drum, but those style of name badges haven't been around for that long so go figure!
Like I said before... Mind boggling.