The Antimasonic Propaganda Machine

I thought I had really seen it all when it comes to antimasons and conspiracy theories. But give these guys credit, their ingenuity knows no limits. Check this one out:

http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/cosmicconflict.htm

This is a great site that ties in all sorts of conspiracies and suspected conspiracies from history all into one package. It has everything from UFO involvement in ancient times, the pyramids, the Illuminati, the Masons, several pseudo-masonic organizations, and to top it off, it even has lizard men in UFO's abducting people and then encouraging them to join the Masonic Lodge.

(My personal favorite on the site is "How to Detect and Nullify Chip Implants." http://www.sherrytalkradio.com/sherry/chips.htm )

All the conspiracies that the O.F.F. site and others invent, find their culmination in this one. It's the ultimate antimasonic conspiracy to tie all the loose ends together and make them meet in some phantasmagorical cosmos-shattering final event, usually overshadowed with satan and the 666 beast and microwave beams that enable their mind control plans, with Masons and Illuminati, and/or a hybrid of the two, right at the very heart of things.

But don't believe a word of it, especially don't believe anything the lizard men tell you.

I find it interesting that the following introduction, which appeared on the site when I first visited two months ago, has been removed:

Introduction

C O S M I C C O N F L I C T D E F I N E D




"And the Lord said unto the Serpent... I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed..."
-- Genesis ch. 3, vs. 14-15

The title of this work will be fully understood as the reader studies the files contained herein. The following files, originally appearing in printed form and later transcribed to the present format, are an attempt to tie-together various unanswered questions relating to Christian theology, prophecy, cult research, science, vanguard technology, phenomenology, Einsteinean theory, electromagnetism, aerospace technology, modern and pre history, myth-tradition and legend, antediluvian societies, ancient artifacts, cryptozoology, biology and genetic sciences, computer sciences, Ufology, Fortean research, parapsychology, conspiraology, missing persons research, human and animal mutilations, anthropology, para-political sciences, international economics, secret societies, demonology, advanced astronomy, assassinations, psychic and mental manipulation or control, international conflict, et al and attempts to bring the mysteries surrounding these subjects together in a workable and document-able scenario.

Many of the sources for these Files include a loose network of hundreds of researchers who have pooled their corroborative information and resources in order to put together the "Grand Scenario" as it is outlined in the Files. Many of those within the research network prefer anonymity due to the nature of the revelations which they have collectively documented, and these names will be kept anonymous or will be replaced by initials or pseudonyms except in the cases where actual names are mentioned. Many of the researchers feel that the original sources are more important for the cause of documentation than is the need to know the names of those who through sacrifice and perseverance uncovered those sources. Throughout the Files the name "Branton" appears in connection with editorial commentaries; this "name" is a pseudonym for one or more researchers who will presently remain anonymous.


IMPORTANT NOTICE - ALL READERS ARE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DUPLICATE AND DISTRIBUTE THESE FILES PROFUSELY.

THE MORE PERSONS WHO HAVE ACCESS TO THIS INFORMATION, THE LESS CHANCE THERE WILL BE FOR INDIVIDUAL OWNERS OF THESE FILES TO BE SINGLED-OUT AS TARGETS' BY THOSE GROUPS WHO DO NOT WANT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN TO BE MADE PUBLIC.

THE ONLY WAY TO EDUCATE THE MASSES IS THROUGH A QUICK AND DETERMINED GRASS ROOTS DUPLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF THIS INFORMATION.



THESE FILES, ALONG WITH THE JUDAO-CHRISTIAN PROPHECIES ON WHICH THEY ARE BASED, COULD BE CONSIDERED A TYPE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL ANTI-VIRUS DESIGNED TO COUNTERACT THE 'VIRULENT,' DECEPTIVE AND PROPAGANDIST LIES WHICH HAVE BEEN FORCED ON THE COLLECTIVE CONSCIOUSNESS OF HUMANITY BY 'CERTAIN POWERS,' KEEPING THE MAJORITY OF 'HUMAN SHEEP' BLINDED TO THE FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS OF REALITY, AND FORCING UPON THEM A FALSE PERCEPTION OF REALITY DESIGNED TO KEEP THE HUMAN SPIRIT WEAK AND SUBJECTED TO THE 'POWERS' BEHIND THE "GRAND DECEPTION" OR THE "COSMIC CONSPIRACY" AS MANY IN THE KNOW HAVE NOW COME TO REFER TO IT.

THIS INFORMATION IS GIVEN FREELY TO ALL THOSE WHO WILL RECEIVE IT, YET IT WAS PRODUCED AT GREAT COST ON THE PART OF COUNTLESS RESEARCHERS, PATRIOTS, FREEDOM FIGHTERS, AND LOVERS OF THE TRUTH WHO HAVE GIVEN MUCH OF THEMSELVES, EVEN THEIR VERY LIVES IN MANY CASES, SO THAT WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO READ WILL NOT REMAIN FOREVER HIDDEN FROM THE EYES OF THE MILLIONS, POSSIBLY BILLIONS, OF PERSONS WHOSE VERY FUTURES DEPEND ON IT.



​

​

Click to expand...

Gee, now why do you suppose they would remove something like that?

And I have to wonder why:

1. "Many of those within the research network prefer anonymity"
2. ALL READERS ARE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DUPLICATE AND DISTRIBUTE THESE FILES PROFUSELY
3. Throughout the Files the name "Branton" appears in connection with editorial commentaries; this "name" is a pseudonym for one or more researchers who will presently remain anonymous
4. GROUPS DO NOT WANT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN TO BE MADE PUBLIC. ]
5. THE AUTHORS HAVE "GIVEN MUCH OF THEMSELVES, EVEN THEIR VERY LIVES"

MOST OF ALL:

Where does the author get off making a comment about anyone "FORCING UPON THEM A FALSE PERCEPTION OF REALITY?"

If this is reality, I'll keep my "false perception" any day!

The above post, of course, is only a tongue-in-cheek parody of what the antimasons have been doing since Day One: Take the most blameable quote you can find from someone who claims the name Mason, and then paint the entire fraternity as though the worst-case scenario were emblematic of the whole.

The closest analogy I can find to the practice is the suspicion of the early church by the Romans, who suspected them of cannibalism after hearing an out-of-context comment from the Communion ritual about eating someone's flesh and drinking His blood. Imagine how it must have compounded things for them when it was discovered they were living in the catacombs. Never mind that circumstances had forced them to do so, when put on t5he defensive, that would only sound like making excuses. Sort of like it is with Masonry right now, the conspiracy theorists having been given about 10 years head start inventing accusations to put Masons on the defensive.

As a reminder of just what those tactics are, a brief restatement might be in order. (Originally there were 9 stated, but on re-reading them, there was very little difference between numbers six and seven, so they were combined.)

TACTIC #1: Use of ellipses to misquote and distort Masonic authors.

TACTIC #2: Careful choice of where to begin and end the selective quoting, to make thoughts that are only one part of a discussion appear as though they were the main conclusion.

TACTIC #3: Making things that are not appear as though they are.

TACTIC #4: Accuse them with “Masons are biblically illiterate and spiritually ignorant.”

TACTIC #5: Keep repeating the same accusations, but adapt them after each refutation to prevent them being refuted the same way.

TACTIC #6: The miscast, by the use of obscure sources with slightly different wording than is found in most Masonic sources, and playing on the nuances.

TACTIC #7: Substituting the obscure for the obvious.

TACTIC #8: Use the accusation of “scripture-twisting.” This one is actually mis-stated from the beginning. The Scriptures in question were never "twisted," they have been the object of criticism for omissions, and the omissions are attributable to one man who took it upon himself as GM of the most prestigious GL in the world, to remove all Christian references from Masonry. (And he actually gave up the task later, finding it more than he bargained for.)


In the most recent discussion here, a different tack was noted in a supposed quote of Joseph Fort Newton, attributed to his book The Builders, but not appearing there. I've done some fairly extensive searching since that time to try to track this thing down, and I have found the quote on a webpage of accusations of satanism (Ben Alexander, espministries), and nowhere else online. I have also turned the quote up in Ron Carlson and Ed Decker's Fast Facts on False Teachings, and in Ankerberg and Weldon's Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge.

That makes a total of three, and of the three, Ankerberg/Weldon is the only source that gives any attribution other than "Newton's book The Builders." The lack of attribution is not surprising. Ankerberg & Weldon list several page numbers in reference to remarks supposedly made from The Builders, none of which appears there. It would be understandable had they simply gotten some notes crossed and inadvertently got a wrong page number. Had that been the case, it would be easily tracked down. But none of the longer attributions made by Ben Alexander on his website, or Carlson and Decker in their book, can be found anywhere in Newton's book The Builders.

But in reading Ankerberg/Weldon again, it became apparent that the quote cited by both the other sources, and set off from the rest of the text as is common with longer quotes, did not appear there. In fact, the main part of Ankerberg's comments that I could find repeated in Alexander's piece was, "to bring about a universal league of mankind and to form mankind into a great redemptive brotherhood." In Ankerberg, it is separated into two thoughts joined by the "and"; the first appears in The Builders, but the second does not--or at least, not on the pages cited.

And then, all of a sudden, there it was, right in front of me, undetected because it was not set off with indents as in the other two sources. But when I looked at it carefully, it became clear that not only was it not set off by indents--it wasn't set off by quotation marks either. It took a minute, but I soon realized that the reason I couldn't find the material in Newton was a very good reason after all: it was not Newton's material, but Ankerberg's! Take a look:

Perhaps the most widely read and influential book among Masons today is the book written by Joseph Ford Newton entitled The Builders. In it he says that the goal of Masonry is "to bring about a universal league of mankind and to form mankind into a great redemptive brotherhood." Newton declares that as Masonry expands, all religious dogmas will cease to be, all individual creeds and doctrines will be done away with, and what remains will be "The One Eternal Religion" that Masons are bringing to the world.

Newton goes on to say:
Why does Masonry seek to change the world? Because
Masonry teaches that all non-Masons are living in spiritual
darkness. The ritual of Masonry for the first degree, the
Entered Apprentice, teaches a candidate that he is long
been in darkness and now wishes to be brought to the light
of Masonry. The Lodge teaches that only true Masons are
enlightened and live in the truth.

The goal of Masonry, according to its leading authorities, is to do away with religions and their creeds and doctrines, and to establish a one-world, universal religion free from the confining dogma of such narrow scope as is found in Christianity. We need to remember that Masonry only requires its members to have a belief in any god. The identity is not important.​

Click to expand...

The indented portion in the quote is the paragraph cited by both Alexander and by Carlson/Decker, and attributed by both of them to John Fort Newton's The Builders.

That presents us with some interesting points. (1), the so-called "quote" attributed to Newton is not only not his, it does not belong to any other Mason either. They are the words of one of their fellow anti-masons. If we accept the dates given, Ankerberg/Weldon penned the piece in 1989, Alexander cited it in 2001-02, mistakenly attributing the paragraph to Newton, and in 2003 Carlson and Decker lifted it from Alexander's website, while attributing it to Newton's book instead. (2) It would be a safe assumption that neither Alexander nor Carlson & Decker ever actually read The Builders, but instead read Ankerberg & Weldon, and improperly cited the words of Ankerberg & Weldon as though they came from Newton. The evidence certainly points that way, since any other explanation would be hard-pressed for explanations of why BOTH these sources incorrectly attribute these words to Newton. (3) Even though Newton does make certain remarks about a "universal league of mankind," the remarks are clearly taken out of context and reinterpreted by Ankerberg. Newton said nothing about "forming mankind into a great redemptive brotherhood" under the Masonic banner as Ankerberg claims. In fact, Ankerberg's six listed page references cover only two chapters in Newton's book, and the words "redemptive brotherhood" are simply not present in either chapter. That is Ankerberg's recast of what was said.

But the real culprits here are Alexander and Carlson/Decker: Alexander for attributing Ankerberg's words to Newton; Carlson and Decker for not questioning a source which cites sources without citing specific page numbers; and both Alexander and Carlson/Decker for citing secondary sources without any attribution that they were doing so. Not only is it improper for someone in their position, claiming to have researched this subject, to consult secondary rather than primary sources; it is perhaps even more improper to quote secondary sources without citing BOTH sources, as even the most amateur researcher can tell you.

This discovery just serves to illustrate further, in an unmistakable way, how antimasons create their accusations--not by quoting from original sources, but by repeating what they hear without even bothering to verify what they are claiming--nor, for that matter, even taking the time to proofread what they write to make sure they have their material cited or attributed correctly.

Amazingly, as bad an effort as this was, what they engaged in was not the worst example. At least somebody along the line did some typing; most of the time it is simply cut, paste, and run.

What I find most amazing of all, is that anyone professing to be interested in truth can be so willing to accept such a poor substitute for it--though apparently quite a few people do. A word of caution is always in order, to follow the pattern of the Bereans who heard Paul, and then spent some time investigating whether what they heard was true. If that was a necessary precaution in their times, imagine how much more careful we should be in our own times.

Al the praises of freemasonry don't change the fact that prominent freemason Mazzini founded the Italian mafia, whose members are the P2 Lodge, capable of any crime, no matter how contemptable.

Click to expand...

Nobody "praising" Freemasonry or anything else here, just defending Freemasons and Freemasonry against illegitimate claims of paranoid suspicions and accusations. The one you keep repeating is simply one more of them.

The P2 Lodge was at one time a legitmate part of Freemasonry, yes. But it had been so infiltrated since its 1895 inception, by political and and economic interests, that in 1976 the Grand Orient of Italy felt it had no choice but to close it (Decree #444 L.S., June 1876). Lucio Gelli, who had been the master of the lodge, kept the name alive and compiled lists of those who had been members. The things that were done from that point by P2 lodge were not done as a body of Freemasonry. Unfortunately, some zealous antimasons have seized on it as an opportunity to accuse, and some people are all too willing to accept their accusations without any investigation of them.

Crowley and LaVey were not part of regular Freemasonry, nor is Ordo Templi Orientis a Masonic body. When Freemasonry is discussed, and particularly as it has been discussed at christianforums, "regular" Freemasonry is meant. By that is meant, bodies of Freemasonry which have their derivation from, which are recognized by, the original modern Freemasonic Lodge, the United Grand Lodge of England.

I have no idea why Jehu is considered to have anything to do with Freemasonry, that's a rather odd inclusion here. But I'm afraid you make a misattribution of the circumstances, by not considering what is said in the context just before and just after the portion you cited. Verse 17 says, for example:

"When Jehu came to Samaria, he killed all who were left there of Ahab's family; he destroyed them, according to the word of the LORD spoken to Elijah."

And verse 30 says:

"The LORD said to Jehu, 'Because you have done well in accomplishing what is right in my eyes and have done to the house of Ahab all I had in mind to do, your descendants will sit on the throne of Israel to the fourth generation.'"

Sure, he put to death the prophets of Baal, but that was not why the promise was given to him of 4 generations of his family on the throne. That promise was because of his obedience to the command given through the prophet Elijah to put to death all of Ahab's family, which occurred before the confrontation with the priests of Baal ever took place.

But Jehu went too far in what he did, so that later, judgment was pronounced upon him and his house:

"Then the LORD said to Hosea, 'Call him Jezreel, because I will soon punish the house of Jehu for the massacre at Jezreel, and I will put an end to the kingdom of Israel.'" (Hosea 1:4)

And most interpreters consider his actions in putting the priests of Baal to death to be a negative rather than a positive thing, because it was conducted in deception.

I find it rather strange to cast your lot in with those who accuse Freemasonry of deception, and then praise the actions of one who used deception to carry out his desires.

But I consider your post of these unfounded accusations to be done in ignorance of the information that reveals them for what they are, so I am not accusing you of anything in posting them, other than being mistaken and not checking the facts.

As for the rest of your post, it's just the same as the beginning of it, more common antimasonic fare that has no foundation in truth. It's all common lore on the conspiracy circuit, but most of it follows the common pattern of being either false, or falsely portrayed, or simply unverifiable.

The English lodge tried to distance itself from Crowley by refusing to recognize him, though he was recognized across the channel.

Click to expand...

That's a mischaracterization. It had nothing to do with "not recognizing Crowley," and everything to do with not recognizing the groups with which he chose to affiliate himself, and with good reason: they do not follow the path of true Freemasonry and in doing so, relinquish the right to call themselves Freemasons.

May I point out . . . .

Click to expand...

You may point out all you wish. But with the tenor of what you're posting, you make it clear we are not even talking about the same thing. Nothing of what you are posting has anything to do with Freemasonry. The fact that you defend the statements about P2 confirms that you have no interest in discussing Freemasonry as it is in regular grand lodges recognized by the UGLE.

P2 still exists, with or without complete acknowledgement of it being "accepted".

Click to expand...

What part of "expelled" did you miss?

Sure, you may claim "P2 still exists," but apparently you fail to see the irrelevancy of it. P2 was expelled from Freemasonry when it became something Freemasonry was not, so whether it exists or not is totally irrelevant to any discussion of Freemasonry. It has no connection with Freemasonry whatsoever, and in fact its expulsion makes it even more clear than not.

Everybody loves a conspiracy, or so it seems, and anyone who has the least tendency toward a "secret" becomes an easy target. Masons really have no secrets left, they've all been revealed and are actually pretty benign.

As for your link, you've posted three of them now, and none of them lead anywhere. Kind of like the arguments you raise.

And you might try writing out some of the things you're abbreviating, I don't even know what half of them are--which probably says as much about Freemasonry as the expelled P2 lodge, which is nada.

ITEM 1: Google "Lavey + freemason" for eviences plenty of his masonic affiliations.
In the bogus "Satanic Bible", he promotes using candles made from Christians' babyfat for murder rituals. That's Baalism renamed. The church of satan website even admits they don't accept the Biblical Satan...it's false satanism.

Item 2: Somehow I don't believe that grandmastermason Crowley & the Ordo Templi Orientis have nothing to do with freemasonry or Baalism. You're trying to paint Crowley as a religious saint. That pig don't fly. It's said that Crowley was found torn to shreds in a secure room locked from the inside. Karma, perhaps.

Item 3: Only Baalism had fire altars with statue, and the fire pit at the belly of the statue, as at Bohemian Grove. The owl relates to Ishtar being depicted with owls in Sumerian glyphs.
The fact they are serviced by gay porn stars and strippers at Bohemian Grove relates to Baalisms' temple prostitution tradition. Look at the old historic pix of the Grove, and see what appears to be actual charred corpses there.

Click to expand...

I don't know what part of "LaVey and Crowley were not part of legitimate Masonry" you missed, but judging from the blatant disregard you seem to have given to the well-referenced material that refutes any claims otherwise, apparently you didn't get any of it at all.

Instead of exhorting us to "google LaVey," it's about time you "google LaVey" yourself, since apparently you have already done so, and try to find maybe a shred of what you call "evidence" that supports any of the accusations.

In my personal collection I have a number of Masonic journal and magazine collections, among them the Scottish Rite Journal, all of the Short Talk Bulletins, The Builder Magazine, American Mason, California Freemason, as well as a number of older publications, such as Freemason's Monthly & Freemason's Quarterly, all of which discuss various issues and people related to Masonry. I have them all compiled in a folder together of "Journals and Magazines," 146MB worth, and I ran a complete search of it in its entirety, entering first "Crowley" and then "LaVey" in the search bar.

I didn't get the first hit on LaVey. When I entered Crowley, I got only three hits. One was P.E. Crowley, President of N. Y. Central Railroad at the time (1922), who was mentioned in an article on the Knights of Malta, naming him as a member of that group. The other two referred to the same man, Chetwode Crowley, a figure in earlier Masonry. One cited comments he had made, the other cited the "Chetwode Crowley Manuscript," which suggests it was of at least some significance.

But none at all of either of these two you have named as key "Masonic" figures. In publications in which it might be expected one would find all sorts of topics covering every angle one might imagine in Masonry, it is a striking and significant point to note, that neither of these names can be found there.

The reason? That's very simple, they don't belong there, having nothing at all to do with the Freemasonry we are discussing on this thread.

I have no doubts you may "google LaVey" or Crowley either for that matter, and find a slew of websites and discussions concerning them. But the really noticeable thing about that continued suggestion is, you haven't really cited anything of any substance from them, and you haven't said anything about what types of sources they are. No doubt every single one you could pull up with Google would be one of two varieties: (1) an antimasonic site using Crowley and his veiws to cast accusations at regular Masonry by citing irregular Masonry; or (2) a Masonic site with information countering the antimasonic claims with the facts about Crowley's supposed "Masonic" affiliation, and details explaining exactly why Crowley's views are not the views of Freemasonry.

What say you about former top US freemason Pike and his concern with the establishment of the KKK, and his war crimes against civilians in the civil war, and is Lucifer writing?

Click to expand...

Well, for starters, I'd say, post a case for it and let's take a look at it. You and Axe really need to get a handle on this thing of learning how to support an accusation. Not that I don't already know exactly where the accusations come from on this one, let's just post something of substance if you really want dialogue.

I was sure you've already addressed the writngs of Albert Pike in support of Lucifer, in "morals and Dogma", the famous masonic book before, and didn't need evidence of it. Perhaps you need to attack the source, instead of explain about Lucifer being his light.
http://www.masonicinfo.com/lucifer.htm
About his rank in the KKK; http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/KKK.html
About his war crimes & treason trial;
http://www.freemasonrywatch.orgalbertpikeandkkk.html
Either Pike worships Lucifer wrongly, or the truth about Lucifer is hidden with the scriptures hid since the Inquisition seized them, while exterminating the Bogomils and Cathars. Which?

Click to expand...

I think you pretty well answered the question for us, by quoting for your "evidence" for the first one, the very website that REFUTES it. If you want the answer about the Lucifer question, I suggest you go to the first link you just posted, and this time actually READ the material, and you will have your answer.

As for anything further, I have no more comments on anything you post. You are doing nothing but quote-mining by trolling webpages for something to accuse. Don't bother denying it, because if you were not doing so, you would never have posted the masonicinfo link.

Such a method of finding "evidence" is not even worth dignifying by replying to it.

Why, yes, the masonicinfo site is pro masonic, yet does not DENY that Pike wrote calling Lucifer the light, while saying Lucifer is misuderstood.

Click to expand...

And yet you still did not READ what's on the page, or you wouldn't still be spouting this nonsense on this forum. The entire Lucifer thing about Pike was a hoax perpetrated by Leo Taxil, who later publicly acknowledged and confessed it.

As for what Pike said in Morals and Dogma, it was misinterpreted and deliberately mis-characterized, and out of context completely.

The whole accusation has been refuted over and over, keeps getting rehashed by those who are either ignorant of the discussions that shot it down completely, or just want to rant on about nonsense. There is nothing there with any credibility left in anything antimasons say about Pike. It's not worth the paper it was printed on then, and it's not worth the bandwidth now. Take it somewhere else if you expect anyone to believe it, it's been done and re-done so much at CF, most people don't even bother to go there anymore, and I certainly won't spend any more time on it myself.

You're ignoring the high rank of former top US freemason Pike in the KKK. Is that the face of freemasonry? KKK is his foundation. You didn't deny the former top US freemason was charged with treason and war crimes against civilians. He wrote about Lucifer briefly in Morals and Dogma...too briefly. Pike was no Christian is my point here, like freemason Mazzini, who founded the Italian mafia. Like grandmastermason Crowley, whose writings show he was a stickler about masonic rites being traditional, whether Grand Lodge of England recognized him or not. Ordo Templi Orientis still exists, a quasi-masonic branch, if not a door to 33rd°. Like the P2 Lodge, it exists & is allowed, whether officially part of the grand lodge of england or not

Click to expand...

Propaganda machine at its lowest depths, and you have bought it hook, liine, and sinker.