The Masonic Era of Judicial Tyranny.

I've restrained myself tons over the last year in deference to you.

I don't profess to know lots and tons about the Masons either.

I haven't knowingly engaged in false witness, either.

I realize that hearsay is hazardous.

I'm strongly convinced that there's more going on than meets the eye.

I'm not impressed by the Masonic defense diatribes nor by those rabidly wholesale shrill in hostility toward the Masons.

I do have some experience counseling folks with varying degrees of Masonic background.

And I'll stop there.

241 posted on 09/13/2006 6:17:33 PM PDT by Quix (LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)

Several different Masonic posters have explicitly told you where it came from and what it means.

I realize that. I was there at the time. Thank you for once again pointing it out to me, though. One can't remind me of things too often...I can be very dense sometimes.

242 posted on 09/13/2006 6:22:28 PM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)

To: MeanWestTexan

It was about money, but to cover it, they made up some fake accusations, which they are now stuck with.

It is not my intent to shatter anyone's world view by entering into these discussions, as I believe someone's faith is a personal matter. You realize, you & I are talking heresy.

243 posted on 09/13/2006 6:49:56 PM PDT by GoLightly

Here we go again. Masons vs. Catholics.

Stuff and nonsense.

(mumbles something about talking to a brick wall)

244 posted on 09/13/2006 6:52:59 PM PDT by bannie (HILLARY: Not all perversions are sexual.)

I have NOT ever joined in on the piling on, of you, vis-a-vis some of the things you have posted. And yes, your own term, "benign neglect" is what I gave/give you. I don't even post to those threads.

OTOH, the reverse has not been the case. If you want the gloves to come off, so be it and I know far more about YOUR topic, than you know about Freemasonry.

And please don't use weasel words with me! Throwing in "knowingly" and your counseling, doesn't cut it.

Oh, so now accurate, historically factual, and detailed replies, used to refute baldfaced lies and 1/2 truths, are to be labeled "diatribes", are they? I'll remind of this; of THAT you can be sure.

245 posted on 09/13/2006 7:00:22 PM PDT by nopardons

246 posted on 09/13/2006 7:00:50 PM PDT by nopardons

To: bd476; dangus

"Not long ago I heard the story of a practicing active Roman Catholic priest who was a Mason."

You can be a catholic, or a baptist, or a presbyterian, or whatever, but what you cannot be is a child of God.

247 posted on 09/13/2006 7:06:38 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Atheist and Fool are synonyms; Evolution is where fools hide from the sunrise)

To: MeanWestTexan

As an interesting sidelight, I had the honor to be a member of Benevolent Lodge #7, Milford, NH. Within the Lodge is an object they call "The Ancient Relic". It is a 24-lb solid shot. The story is that when Ethen Allen captured Fort Ticonderoga, and helped Brother Knox bring the captured guns down to Boston, he saved one shot and gave it to the Brethren of Benevolent Lodge. It was used when Benevolent met in a small room over the taproom of a post house in Amherst, NH, where the lodge was originally founded. It was the duty of the two most junior Brothers to roll the shot back and forth along the floor to prevent the patrons below from hearing any of the ritual.

Every year, the ancient relic is rolled by the Senior Warden from the East to the Junior Warden in the West, and back again in commemoration of the Lodge's early years.

248 posted on 09/13/2006 7:16:28 PM PDT by Redleg Duke (¡Salga de los Estados Unidos de América, invasor!)

To: stylecouncilor

Ping to self for later.

249 posted on 09/13/2006 7:24:15 PM PDT by stylecouncilor

Look up Masonry and Morgan. Masonry took a big hit when Morgan disappeared and apparently was murdered. Use old books for any info.

Masonry WAS A BIG DEAL and Washington was King of the Hill!!

I was stunned to find out recently that a particular person was a Mason. It was then that I realized is "IN" for everything at the time....Robert Morris via GW!!

250 posted on 09/13/2006 7:47:13 PM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)

I thought my last was a very mild and very submissive bow to you and your preferences and sensibilities. I really don't understand what in it triggered all this:
= = = =

I have NOT ever joined in on the piling on, of you, vis-a-vis some of the things you have posted. And yes, your own term, "benign neglect" is what I gave/give you. I don't even post to those threads.
= = = =

Qx: And I you on this topic. Very rarely do I post anything on it and very, very, very little when I do. Seems like you are dishing out a 150,000 lb response to a 1.5 oz stimulus.
= = = =

OTOH, the reverse has not been the case. If you want the gloves to come off, so be it and I know far more about YOUR topic, than you know about Freemasonry.
= = = =

Qx:
I don't recall saying anything or behaving in any way or using any words which would even imply the remotest desire to treat you with anything but respect and deference even on this topic.

You are welcome to post on any of "my" topics. I've never asked you to lay off. I've never ranted/railed/shrilled at you for any of your opinions that differed from mine--that I can recall. I still consider you a dear and close Friend. I'm pretty mystified by your responses to me on this thread and topic given my extremely mild and inconsequential comments.
= = = = = =

And please don't use weasel words with me! Throwing in "knowingly" and your counseling, doesn't cut it.
= = = =

Qx: Sorry you see them that way. I was merely relating my reality involved--sharing as accurately as I possibly could my perspective and limits of my awareness. It was actually an agreement with you that I had limited awareness. I'm shocked you think it deserves such a harsh slap-down. I don't recall ever even hinting that you were anything remotely close to a weasel.
= = = = = =

Oh, so now accurate, historically factual, and detailed replies, used to refute baldfaced lies and 1/2 truths, are to be labeled "diatribes", are they? I'll remind of this; of THAT you can be sure.
= = = = =

Qx:
I'm not sure what that's going on about at all. Shrill sounding, super strident pontifications on almost any topic come across to me as so much diatribe quite often. Doesn't matter how truthful or not; well founded or not; knowledgeable or not--it's a comment, to me, about the volume and shrillness and perhaps the seeming assumption of virtual or near all knowingness about a topic.

I don't have enough scientific proof level information to emphatically prove much of anything on this topic. I see reasonable points from a lot of; most of the perspectives, if not all of them. So, I'm 99.9% reasonably happy to leave you to it given your vastly greater knowledge and my affections for you and hubby as friends.

You can trounce, pounce on, shred, malign, assault etc. those affections all you feel compelled to do. And they will still be there for and toward both of you as well as for your offspring, to my dying breath regardless of what you do to me privately or publically.

Perhaps it would be good to realize that I didn't wind you up on this topic. And probably I don't deserve to be unwound all over and all on top of because of my weak whiff's of a comment.
= = = =

251 posted on 09/13/2006 7:48:55 PM PDT by Quix (LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)

Your jocularity at other's expense, is what set my teeth on edge. Your smarmy, passive/aggressive, triple dipped in honey reply, was beneath you.

As to my shredding you on one of your pet interests, in public, I probably won't do it. I shall continue to stay off those threads and allow you to do the damage to yourself; you need no help from me, in that quarter.

Oh, so now I'm "shrill", am I? Funny, I would have taken strident, I would even have accepted imperious; I shan't accept "shrill".

The less said about this, between us, the better.

252 posted on 09/13/2006 8:24:53 PM PDT by nopardons

Sorry to have offended.

Sorry authentic earnest heart felt replies are seen as smarmy etc.

GBWU,

253 posted on 09/13/2006 8:33:03 PM PDT by Quix (LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)

Shoot, I'm shrill at times.

I don't see a lot of difference in many cases between shrill and strident.

254 posted on 09/13/2006 8:33:58 PM PDT by Quix (LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)

To: justshutupandtakeit

Not having been one, nor personally knowing any members of Job's Daughters, I can't explain how it came about that that is what they are called, nor what it stands for. If I were to hazard a guess, I would guess that they represent all of the daughters Job had AFTER all of his trials and tribulations. The boys and girls whom he had, were considered to be GOD's gifts to him, for never straying from his unshakable faith in GOD.

255 posted on 09/13/2006 8:43:40 PM PDT by nopardons

I accept your apology.

256 posted on 09/13/2006 8:44:47 PM PDT by nopardons

Much appreciated.

Thanks.

257 posted on 09/13/2006 8:47:01 PM PDT by Quix (LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)

There's quite a difference, though I'll grant you that it is nuanced, between "shrill" and "strident".

258 posted on 09/13/2006 8:47:03 PM PDT by nopardons

Welcome.....as ever. :-)

259 posted on 09/13/2006 8:47:40 PM PDT by nopardons

I don't see a lot of difference in many cases between shrill and strident.

lol

I'd say about the difference between exquisite and beautiful. Both words quite a similar description, but the former slightly greater than the latter.

260 posted on 09/13/2006 9:00:48 PM PDT by beyond the sea ( A tree fell in woods, a conservative wasn't around, would it still kill the liberal chained to it?)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794