In article <9meqt05qj86smrcmrp2dg0d9def46s4...@4ax.com>, Craftworker
wrote:

My belief, always (despite what you or others may believe), is that
actions speak louder than words. Accordingly, I would have otherwise
let my changes to the site show what I have done. However, since you
have specifically 'pinged' me, I'll respond to this.

Two points here:

The first I made in this thread AND have made all along: when a Mason
acts improperly - whether it be behavior such as the serial rapist
Bernardo or you calling people names (or, in your opinion, me writing
'bad' things) - others look at this and say, "I know {so-and-so} is a
Mason and he's done awful stuff. How come you tell us about George
Washington and not him? You're HIDING things." That is, I believe, a
legitimate charge. We have not sworn to protect Masons who violate
civil law nor do we have obligations to 'protect' those behaving
improperly.

Since I started my website, I've tried to NOT hide anything. Those
Masons who have made the news for their bad behavior were noted on my
site just as soon as I could. (The fellow whom the Boston Herald called
the biggest crook since Ponzi was placed there IMMEDIATELY upon the
Herald's publication, for example.) People ask about these things when
they write to me and if we stick our heads in the sand pretending this
stuff doesn't exist, we make ourselves hypocrites in the worst sense -
in MY opinion. Yours may differ - and there's nothing wrong (again, in
MY opinion) with a difference of opinion on this.

As I had mentioned here in the past, I had received a 'solicitation'
from the person you regularly refer to as "Worshipful" or "Past Master"
(without acknowledging, strangely, the MANY of us here hold that
honorific and more) McFarland. His reply to my questions was, to say
the least, less than Masonic. When I have a free weekend, I'm going to
check his book out though my library's e-book service and have a read.
We'll see after that.

I'm not meaning to have an argument here but I simply do not understand
how my noting the egregious behavior of Chris, for example, does
ANYTHING one way or another. Chris - under his two dozen pseudonyms -
can leave the casual observer thinking that there are all these people
posting against Freemasonry so SURELY there must be something afoot.
However, when replying to any of his ludicrous posts, a simple pointer
is made to a web page, it all becomes clear to that observer. Since you
claim to have been here for years before you started posting, SURELY
you know that Sam was an absolute.... Well, surely you know. It was HE
who made such a bid deal out of his medical history. It was HE who
wrote pages upon pages about how the Masons had been filling him with
drugs etc. What is so horribly wrong with pointing out those FACTS so
that others can understand and appreciate the 'whole picture'?

Beyond that, when I become the lightning rod for outbursts like that of
Chris and I maintain the 'high ground', it shows in sharp contrast who
wears the white hat! That's my take on it anyway.

I mean no disrespect in saying this but whether you present it quietly
and maturely or whether you call me names about it, I still see what
you're suggesting as somewhat akin to how the Japanese described World
War II for SO many years in their school lessons. (I hope you're
familiar with that because there IS a strong comparison here, IMO.)

As for Daryl, he was here before I was and gone when I arrived.
However, the idea of a porn film producer running around with a Masonic
ring makes me physically sick. Why on earth should I ignore that?
Somewhere, sometime, SOMEONE will write saying, "I knew this guy who
was a porn film maker who was a Mason...." and darn it, it's not so. If
*I* don't record that somewhere, who the heck will? Think they'll put
it on the website for the Grand Lodge of California? I don't
frankly....

Destruction is NEVER my intent. These folks have ALREADY done whatever
it is that they've done though. How can someone who lies about their
own lives (pretending to be wheelchair bound, for example) have any
legitimacy in what they say about Freemasonry? Why do they get to be
'taken at face value' whenever they walk into the room? (Again, and
again, and again....)

I'm not arguing; I'm simply trying to understand the logic here.

(LARRY Kunk). Again, I don't see the difference between the two.
Because SO many people 'live' on the internet these days, folks like
those you mention don't get half as many 'eyeballs' as someone like
"Watchy", for example. I'm oriented toward the internet stuff: Bros.
Morris and deHoyos have very amply addressed Carlson, for example.

No need to leave on my account. There are several who wish to provide
spelling lessons, review rare book matters, and/or plumb the depths of
Al Pike's publisher. And, as I've ALWAYS said, I'm open to
contributions at any time.

Oh, I do. And I certainly hope that Jeff will give us all the
opportunity to clarify the many questions that were raised when his
several organizations were being touted here. I think that could clear
up SO much.... While I personally wasn't interested, there seemed to be
a very strong groundswell for the type of group that (perhaps) was
envisioned. The obfuscation and threats (which, based on David's post,
seem to be continuing, sadly) caused MUCH concern though. Rather than
threaten and insult me, I hope for an open discussion involving not
only myself but others who can help mediate. Will you encourage Jeff in
this?

I want to clarify the issues which seem to be bothering Jeff: doing it
here with others seeing who's saying could certainly bring some closure
to this and allow everyone to move on in life. If I accepted the (only
NOW Jeff-confessed) LIES of other supposed Masons (seen then and never
seen here again, strangely) and made statements about his group(s)
based on those lies, I really don't understand why *I* should be
roasted but nevertheless I will happily apologize for being gullible in
thinking that those Masons were telling the truth.... <sigh>

Inappropriate Masonic behavior.

 Ed King

   http://www.masonicinfo.com  --  Anti-Masonry: Points of View

    Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 2005. All rights reserved.