Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Masonry & Christianity

7 views
Skip to first unread message

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 22, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/22/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: <mtzi...@webtv.net>
Newsgroups: soc.org.freemasonry
Sent: September 17, 1999 5:21 PM
Subject: Masonry & Christianity


> Bro.'s,
> Today, one of my co-workers who is also a Mason told me he was "getting
> out". He said he had started preaching and could not rightfully serve
> God and remain a mason. He feels masonry is a religon, (which I totally
> disagree with). He mentioned that it was against the rules of the lodge
> to mention the name Jesus. Now I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer,
> but this sounded silly to me. I have never heard such a thing in my
> lodge.
> I tried to reason with him but he was steadfast in his decision. He
> pulled his masonic knife out of his pocket, handed it to me and walked
> away. This man has been a member of the fraternity for five years. I
> guess I don't know what to make of it. He took me by surprise. I am firm
> in my convictions, and all of his "persuading" went in one ear and out
> the other.
> I guess to each his own.
>
> Bro. Darren Woods
> Mt. Zion #542
>
> Our Web Page:
> http://community-1.webtv.net/mtzion542/MTZIONLODGE542
>
>



Since your friend's expertise in what does and does not
constitute a religion is greater than your own (he is
a pastor), perhaps you should reconsider his advice to you.

Freemasonry is a religion, even the Plato of Freemasonry
Confederate General The "Illustrious" Albert Pike 33rd
Degree Founder and Grand Commander of the Supreme
Council 33rd Degree, Mother Council of the World said so.

Didn't you know that ?


"If you remain a Freemason your life will become more and
more of a lie. If you hang around with dogs don't be
suprised if you get flea's." - St. John the Sublime Reformer

Fraternally Yours,

St. John the Sublime Reformer
A Certain Point Within A Circle
Masonic Historian

Lafayettes Surprise - The Pentagram of Washington D.C.
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/chapter3/chapter3.htm

The Catholic Encyclopedia - FreeMasonry
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09771a.htm

Britains New Masonic Registry
http://news1.thls.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/politics/newsid_57000/57381.stm
http://news1.thls.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_57000/57463.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_353000/353412.stm

MasonInfo.com - Answering Chomsky's Challenge on JFK
http://www.crocker.com/~acacia/article.html

ManitobaGL.ca- Kabbalism & Freemasonry
Http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/3164/index.htm

====================================================
St. John the Sublime Reformer's logic is a peculiar form of morality,
veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbols. It is based on his three
grand principles - brotherly love, relief, and truth. So mote it be.




Glyn Davies

unread,
Sep 23, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/23/99
to
Freemasonry is not a religion. "You must believe in a Supreme Being"

My religion is Church Of Ireland not Freemasonry. I am free to practice my
religion in my lodge along with the other Brethren who practice theirs.

Keep trying.

G Davies

St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
news:006b01bf0560$5204aa60$04000005@oemcomputer...

whythis

unread,
Sep 23, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/23/99
to
My thanks to John the Sublime, I know that freemasonry is a
very evil cult and should be banned. I know when people
begin to wake up that a crackdown on freemasonry will start.
In article <006b01bf0560$5204aa60
$04000005@oemcomputer>, "St. John the Sublime Reformer"


* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


Glyn Davies

unread,
Sep 23, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/23/99
to
Yes we are evil, evil men and the fires of hell will rain on us for
evermore.

Oh I am a bad man *Whips back with thorn bush*


whythis <dannyboy...@radioray.screaming.net> wrote in message
news:0be81b46...@usw-ex0102-013.remarq.com...

Real Reformer

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/25/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Ed King <edk...@masonicinfo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
Sent: September 24, 1999 6:59 PM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity


> In article <7sf419$1...@felix.vcn.bc.ca>, Jim Bennie wrote:
>
> > > > I took part in an installation last night at another
> > > > Lodge where the only officers who are PMs are the Treasurer and
> > > > Historian (they have five Stewards). They've been busy with keen new
> > > > people joining (and we don't have that one-day stuff here).
> >
> > > Let's hope, Jim, that none of them were non-white immigrants!
> >
> > Well, a couple were from Quebec ;)


Racist remark.

>
> PHEW. What a relief.


Racist remark.


I hear these stories about a former prison up there in
> your neck of the woods being readied for use in holding immigrants. Home
> owners in Esquimalt (at least one, it appears) is all upset about that.


Many in fact "Ed King" but what do you really care you live in the
multi-cultural mecca of Maine.

More evidence of your racism no doubt.


>
> It's my understanding that some kind of political group is being headed up
> (single-handedly) to deal with this 'problem'.


Right.

I guess we can add a second subject which you know absolutely
nothing about to the list of topics which you pontificate on.

But don't get too smug oh chosen-one there are MILLLIONS of
Americans which are sickened by what is happening to their
country.

You might try the following American Groups if you care about
your country (not Isreal, the U.S.) which is doubtful (the U.S.,
not Isreal).

Numbers USA
http://numbersusa.com/home.html

Federation for American Immigration Reform (F.A.I.R.)
http://fairus.org/menu.htm

As far as I am concerned Freemasonry and Immigration
Reform are completely unconnected, although I suppose
if enough liberal and Illiberal extremists such as yourself
become active against Immigration Reform and identify
themselves as Freemasons that could change.

I have many interests as I am sure you do as well.

I am not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic and there
are a great many Jewish Amercian's & Canadians
concerned about their countries Immigration Policies.

It is only certain zeolots such as yourself and Brnai Brith
which seek to hijack the entire Jewish Community and
claim to be somehow it's official spokespersons when
in fact they certainly are anything but that, with their
Illiberal and extremist rhetoric.

Every ethnicity & group has it's assholes which can
bring people to hate the group in general rather than
the individual asshole himself. I suppose extremists
like you and Brnai Brith fall into that catagory. I would't
imagine many Freemasons in this n.g. appreaciate
your public political posturing on this issue from your
pulpit within organized Freemasonry.

There are always Illiberal persons in any society
which seek to stifle Freedom of Speech by
labeling those who they might disagree with as
racists or anti-semites.

You probably really don't want to bring this unconnected
issue into this forum King if you had thought about it
(which you evidently don't do very much of) but you have.

I'm certain there are many Masons in this n.g. who
are concerned about Immigration related matters
who are not.

Your harping on this matter and stalking of me
will only serve to cause them to question the true
motives of the Illiberal Bigots and
Zeolots who "run" this n.g. and appear to be connected
with rather narrow interests that are not representative
with the general population.


Keep Canada pure or something
> is their clarion call, it appears.
>
> Keep your eyes open for this group. They're probably going to be about as
> successful as the person who proclaimed during the summer that Freemasonry
> was now dead!


Oh I don't know King most Canadians are completely revolted about what
has been happening to their country. The Canadian Reform Party is now
the Official Opposition in Canada and I understand the American Reform
Party is going great guns as well. Both parties are strong advocates of
Immigration Reform and both have been attacked by IlLiberals such
as yourself as being racists or anti-semites. If you want to look at a real
racist or anti-semite immigration policy look at your own favoured
nation Isreal (Palestinians & Arabs are Semites) you can't have it both
ways King.


<snip>

, is it?
>
> > > It's my
> > > understanding that the "Saint" really is not too keen AT ALL on people
like
> > > 'that'. Perhaps *that's* part of the "Saint's" problem: we're FAR too
> > > universal for his liking - and his little world up there in B.C. is
> > > being overrun by 'undesirables'.
> >
> > This whole issue is pretty controversial as of late, Ed. Some of the
> > talk I hear (not in Lodge) reminds me of the cries of "Yellow Peril"
> > of the turn of the LAST century.
>
> Indeed! Some folks are *really* getting carried away about it, it would
> appear. It's my understanding that the Canadian government has indicated
> that a lot of the stuff is simply a front for racism, white supremacy,
> and the neo-nazi type of thing that Kennie supports.


Bullshit, the more creeps like you and the Brnai Brith attack immigration
reformers the more they discredit themselves. If you want to attack
Immigration Refom from you pulpit in Freemasonry so be it but I
thought Masonry was not supposed to be political. More Masonic
lies it seems.

I have often wondered on your ties to Brnai Brith King, you have a link
to one of their groups on your site. I guess your just a San Francisco
Democrat after all aren't you in addition to being a racist (your Quebec
comments).


I suspect there's
> another anti-Mason here who fronts for the same sort of thing - although
> he does the dance too.... ("Why do you say Jews are persecuted? They're
lying
> and the B'nai B'rith <which they consistently misspell> is fronting it.")
>
> Kinda scary....


The Jews AREN'T persecuted. Some extreme Illiberal elements in their
community (such as yourself and Brnai Brith) do however it seems persecute
anyone ho doesn't toe their politically correct new-age line (in addition to
Palestinians) like Immigration Reform advocates for example. I guess
the Sierra Club and population control and evironmental groups which
are now strong Immigration Reform Advocates are now anti-semites and
racists in your twisted politically correct Illiberal world view.

Your a creep King just another reason why American men should leave this
organization which appears to have an inordinate foreign influence.

I hope Patrick Buchanan kicks your Illiberal ass back where it came from.


> > Pirate radio? You mean he's not listening to my station any more?
> > I'd better warn management of the drop in ratings! They'll cut my
> > salary. There goes my twin Lexus purchase; I'll have to settle for one.
> > Woe, woe, woe!
>
> Maybe I misread things.... Guess there was some news story on a regular
> AM radio station....


Stay in the backwoods of Maine King the real world is becoming
a rather scary place.

By the way if you want to play this internet stalking game it
is really a two edged sword I am sure you are going to alienate
as many masons in this n.g. as you satisfy (the non Scwarzman,
Kivowitz, King variety).

Are you really this stupid King ?


>
> > > More details to follow!
> >
> > You're sure about that?
>
> OH, YES!!!!! <BWG>


Did it ever occur to you that it is possible for a person
to hate Freemasonry on religious or corruption grounds
and have a completely seperate interest in trying to
prevent their countries principal cities from
being turned into Third World Shitholes by advocating
immigration reform without being a racist or anti-semite ?

I guess not.

Ed King of Brnai Brith - UnAmerican.

So much for organized Freemasonry having no political
involvement.

Fraternally Yours,

St. John the Sublime Reformer
A Certain Point Within A Circle
Masonic Historian

Masoninfo.com - AntiMasonry Points of View
JFK'S MURDERER'S
http://www.crocker.com/~acacia/article.html

Lafayettes Surprise - The Pentagram of Washington D.C.
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/chapter3/chapter3.htm

The Catholic Encyclopedia - FreeMasonry
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09771a.htm

Britains New Masonic Registry

ManitobaGL.ca- Kabbalism & MAHABONE
Http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/3164/index.htm

====================================================
St. John the Sublime Reformer's logic is a peculiar form of morality,
veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbols. It is based on his three
grand principles - brotherly love, relief, and truth. So mote it be.

>
> Fraternally,
> Ed King
> http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View
>
> Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 1999. All rights reserved.
>
>


Ed King

unread,
Sep 25, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/25/99
to
In article <003301bf0727$ca1117a0$04000005@oemcomputer>, Real Reformer wrote:

<snippage of the "Saint" claiming Jim Bennie's remarks were racist.
What a chuckle....>

<snippage of the "Saint" arguing that because a person doesn't live
in a particular place, he's not entitled to know anything about what
goes on there - and claiming that it's racism if one does!>

<snippage of ranting about immigration issues.>

> As far as I am concerned Freemasonry and Immigration
> Reform are completely unconnected, although I suppose
> if enough liberal and Illiberal extremists such as yourself
> become active against Immigration Reform and identify
> themselves as Freemasons that could change.

Ah, but isn't *that* the issue you had the problem with a politician over?
You know, the politician who just happened to be a Mason....???
And from which you decided Freemasonry was evil and that you'd destroy it?

Have you also been bent on destroying that individual's religion?
And his favorite supermarket?
And perhaps his chosen breed of dogs?



> I have many interests as I am sure you do as well.

That's quite clear; too bad you can't approach any of them with rationality.


> I am not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic and there
> are a great many Jewish Amercian's & Canadians
> concerned about their countries Immigration Policies.

When one looks at your other defenses, one thinks thou dost protest too
much. As Roger Firestone has pointed out: "Scratch an anti-Mason; find an
anti-Semite."



> It is only certain zeolots such as yourself and Brnai Brith
> which seek to hijack the entire Jewish Community and
> claim to be somehow it's official spokespersons when
> in fact they certainly are anything but that, with their
> Illiberal and extremist rhetoric.

So you don't like the B'nai B'rith (which you don't seem to be
able to spell) either, eh? Seems that every time there's something
involving anti-Semitism, the anti-Semite likes to whack Jewish
organizations saying they're not representative. How curious....



> Every ethnicity & group has it's assholes which can
> bring people to hate the group in general rather than
> the individual asshole himself.

Excuse me: weren't you the person who claimed they never swore in
messages? Is this just a colloquialism up there in BC? Do you talk
like that when having dinner with your mother?

> I suppose extremists like you and Brnai Brith fall into that catagory.

Uh-huh! Your pink slip is showing....

> I would't imagine many Freemasons in this n.g. appreaciate
> your public political posturing on this issue from your
> pulpit within organized Freemasonry.

Actually, I've taken no position at all. When you put up your "I
hate immigrants" (a hate web site, if one wishes to characterize),
I became immediately aware of it. You do need to fix that Java script
on the front page, though: it's all fouled up! I notice that you don't
have the courage of even THAT conviction, though, to identify yourself.

How very odd....



> There are always Illiberal persons in any society
> which seek to stifle Freedom of Speech by
> labeling those who they might disagree with as
> racists or anti-semites.

<Chuckle>


> You probably really don't want to bring this unconnected
> issue into this forum King if you had thought about it
> (which you evidently don't do very much of) but you have.

Oh, I think it's instructive for folks here to know you're an
equal-opportunity hater. You hate Masons, immigrants, and what else?



> I'm certain there are many Masons in this n.g. who
> are concerned about Immigration related matters who are not.

You are SO repetitious sometimes....


> Your harping on this matter and stalking of me
> will only serve to cause them to question the true
> motives of the Illiberal Bigots and Zeolots who "run" this n.g.
> and appear to be connected with rather narrow interests that are
> not representative with the general population.

"Stalking"? Hmmmm.... You put up a public web site to which you
call attention and then you complain that someone has gone there?

What a peculiar brand of logic you have....



> > Keep Canada pure or something
> > is their clarion call, it appears.
> >
> > Keep your eyes open for this group. They're probably going to be about as
> > successful as the person who proclaimed during the summer that Freemasonry
> > was now dead!
>
> Oh I don't know King most Canadians are completely revolted about what
> has been happening to their country. The Canadian Reform Party is now
> the Official Opposition in Canada and I understand the American Reform
> Party is going great guns as well. Both parties are strong advocates of
> Immigration Reform and both have been attacked by IlLiberals such
> as yourself as being racists or anti-semites. If you want to look at a real
> racist or anti-semite immigration policy look at your own favoured
> nation Isreal (Palestinians & Arabs are Semites) you can't have it both
> ways King.

And didn't the civilian intelligence oversight committee (SIRC) appointed by
your Parliament warn that racists are trying to mainstream their message of
hate by coopting the immigration and refugee issues? You wouldn't happen
to be one of those racists, would you?

> > Indeed! Some folks are *really* getting carried away about it, it would
> > appear. It's my understanding that the Canadian government has indicated
> > that a lot of the stuff is simply a front for racism, white supremacy,
> > and the neo-nazi type of thing that Kennie supports.
>
> Bullshit, the more creeps like you and the Brnai Brith attack immigration
> reformers the more they discredit themselves. If you want to attack
> Immigration Refom from you pulpit in Freemasonry so be it but I
> thought Masonry was not supposed to be political. More Masonic lies it seems.

Well, there's LOTS to comment on in that paragraph starting with the profanity
which you assert that you never use. Then there's the condemnation of the
B'nai B'rith - what is *that* all about, anyway? And, of course, I've taken
no position whatsoever on Immigration Reform (and SURE wouldn't be supporting
YOUR brand of building walls) but, of course, the final stupidity is your
confusion of one person's comments with the fact that Masonry has somehow
adopted a position on Immigration. How utterly simple can you be?



> I have often wondered on your ties to Brnai Brith King, you have a link
> to one of their groups on your site. I guess your just a San Francisco
> Democrat after all aren't you in addition to being a racist (your Quebec
> comments).

Pay attention, child. The "Quebec comments" were made by Jim Bennie and
were not in the slightest way racist. I have links to LOTS of groups on
my site including, but not limited to, the Kook's Museum and people like
your apparent idol, Ernst Zundel and friends. You can wonder about my
'ties' all you wish; I have a closet with many! <chuckle>



> > I suspect there's another anti-Mason here who fronts for the same sort
> > of thing - although he does the dance too.... ("Why do you say Jews are
> > persecuted? They're lying
> > and the B'nai B'rith <which they consistently misspell> is fronting it.")
> >
> > Kinda scary....
>
> The Jews AREN'T persecuted. Some extreme Illiberal elements in their
> community (such as yourself and Brnai Brith) do however it seems persecute
> anyone ho doesn't toe their politically correct new-age line (in addition to
> Palestinians) like Immigration Reform advocates for example. I guess
> the Sierra Club and population control and evironmental groups which
> are now strong Immigration Reform Advocates are now anti-semites and
> racists in your twisted politically correct Illiberal world view.

Well, there ya go! From the mouths of babes....

Gee: in just one message, you've managed to remove all doubt about your
anti-Semitic motivations. Wanna tell the folks how you feel about people
of colors other than yourself?

Oh, are your ancestors native Canadian Indians?



> Your a creep King just another reason why American men should leave this
> organization which appears to have an inordinate foreign influence.

Now *there's* a comment for ya!


> I hope Patrick Buchanan kicks your Illiberal ass back where it came from.

<Guffaw> SO! Supporting the anti-Mason and anti-Semite fellow who thinks
Hitler wasn't such a bad guy after all, huh? How typical.



> Stay in the backwoods of Maine King the real world is becoming
> a rather scary place.

Only to the paranoid like yourself.


> By the way if you want to play this internet stalking game it
> is really a two edged sword I am sure you are going to alienate
> as many masons in this n.g. as you satisfy (the non Scwarzman,
> Kivowitz, King variety).

Oh, threatening now, are we? Do you define "internet stalking" as
the reading of a publicly advertised web site? What a strange
definition you have.

Are you embarrassed to have people know about your other interests?
How curious. You seemed to want to publicize them in other venues....

Are you going to tell the folks interested in immigration all about us
evil Masons while you're about it?

What other hatreds hide in your little closet?



> Are you really this stupid King ?

Poor Saint..... Poor, poor Saint.....


> Did it ever occur to you that it is possible for a person
> to hate Freemasonry on religious or corruption grounds
> and have a completely seperate interest in trying to
> prevent their countries principal cities from
> being turned into Third World Shitholes by advocating
> immigration reform without being a racist or anti-semite ?
>
> I guess not.

Actually, it did occur to me. Their hatred of Freemasonry on
such grounds, however, would be entirely irrational - and that
irrationality would likely transfer to their other "interests" as
well. Do leopards change their spots, "Saint".... errr.... "Reformer"....
errrr..... "Savior"..... errrrr.... "Hater"......



> Ed King of Brnai Brith - UnAmerican.

So much for rationality.


> So much for organized Freemasonry having no political involvement.

Ed King: the spokesperson for organized Freemasonry. From henceforth,
all Masons will not be allowed to think or have opinions unless I clear
them first. Pay attention people! <BBBBBBBG>

Oh, and for those who were looking to check out the Saint's web site
that just went live this past Wednesday (good internet intelligence, eh?)
you can simply head off to
http://www.freeyellow.com/members6/savecanada/index.html

And say, "Saint", are you going to be changing your name as often there
as you do here? Just to make people think you're cute???? <chuckle>

POOF! Another anti-Mason racist down in flames!

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 27, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/27/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Ed King <edk...@masonicinfo.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
art-bell
Sent: September 25, 1999 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity

> In article <003301bf0727$ca1117a0$04000005@oemcomputer>, Real Reformer
wrote:
>
> <snippage of the "Saint" claiming Jim Bennie's remarks were racist.
> What a chuckle....>


Right he implies French Canadians are not white and that is not racist.


>
> <snippage of the "Saint" arguing that because a person doesn't live
> in a particular place, he's not entitled to know anything about what
> goes on there - and claiming that it's racism if one does!>


You reinforce Mr. Bennie a Grand Steward in the Grand Lodge of
British Columbia that French Canadians are not white then agree
with him and add your own chuckle remark - and that is not racist
also.

Your a liar, a fraud, and a racist "Ed King" - go back to B'rnai B'rith
for more instructions.


>
> <snippage of ranting about immigration issues.>


You're the one who brought it up after stalking me on the internet
like you do to anyone who publically denounces Freemasonry.

Your quite simply not just UnAmerican but Anti-American.

>
> > As far as I am concerned Freemasonry and Immigration
> > Reform are completely unconnected, although I suppose
> > if enough liberal and Illiberal extremists such as yourself
> > become active against Immigration Reform and identify
> > themselves as Freemasons that could change.
>
> Ah, but isn't *that* the issue you had the problem with a politician over?


Nope, better get your little slimey spy's at B'rnai B'rith and International
Masonic Headquarters to bring their dissident list up to date, you
are completely off the mark.


> You know, the politician who just happened to be a Mason....???

Nope the politician wasn't a Mason just some of the supporters but
that really doesn't have anything to do with this discussion - the one
you started about me supposedly being a racist and anti-semite for
simply advocating reform of Canada's Immigration System in a
Canadian Usenet group.

Why don't you try reforming Israel's racist Immigration policy before
attacking regular Canadians and Americans who want to save
their countries from Mass Third World Immigration like the Sierra
Club, Zero Population Growth, the Federation of American Immigration
Reform, Numbers USA, the Reform Party of America, and Pat
Buchanan ?

I guess your masters at B'rnai B'rith don't really care about what
happens to America and Americans - just like you and a lot
of Freemasons it would seem.

But that isn't really much of a surprise, FreeMasonry and other Foreign
elements have been trying to undermine and destroy Christian
Civilization for a long time.


> And from which you decided Freemasonry was evil and that you'd destroy it?

Yes.

>
> Have you also been bent on destroying that individual's religion?


You've got your Anti-Masonic Subersives mixed up King, you'll have
to get on the phone to B'rnai B'rith in the morning and get some new
"intelligence" reports.

How many Christian Masons are your's and B'rnai B'riths subversive list
anyway ?

Your foreign scum - plain and simple.


> And his favorite supermarket?


Wrong subversive.


> And perhaps his chosen breed of dogs?


Wrong subversive.


>
> > I have many interests as I am sure you do as well.
>
> That's quite clear; too bad you can't approach any of them with
rationality.


Your the one who called me a anti-semite and racist for advocating some
reform to my countries Immigration Policy.

By your retarded logic the Sierra Club and other environmentalists and
Patriots are racists and anti-semites too.

I never once brought up anything about Jewish People and anyways the
label anti-semite is a complete swindle as Palestinians and other Arabs
are Semites too - as you are fully aware of.

Just shows how much of a liar you really are.


>
> > I am not anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic and there
> > are a great many Jewish Amercian's & Canadians
> > concerned about their countries Immigration Policies.
>
> When one looks at your other defenses, one thinks thou dost protest too
> much. As Roger Firestone has pointed out: "Scratch an anti-Mason; find an
> anti-Semite."


King, Firestone, Kivowitz, Scwarzman, B'rnai B'rith blah, blah, blah.

When you clowns aren't putting down Christians and Christianity you are
libeling anyone who objects to your perversions as being anti-semitic.

No wonder why you feel so comfortable as members of another Foreign
Body that is actively undermining Christian Civilization - Freemasonry.

>
> > It is only certain zeolots such as yourself and Brnai Brith
> > which seek to hijack the entire Jewish Community and
> > claim to be somehow it's official spokespersons when
> > in fact they certainly are anything but that, with their
> > Illiberal and extremist rhetoric.
>
> So you don't like the B'nai B'rith (which you don't seem to be
> able to spell) either, eh? Seems that every time there's something
> involving anti-Semitism, the anti-Semite likes to whack Jewish
> organizations saying they're not representative. How curious....


There bullies like you and organized Freemasonry.

Your the one who called me an anti-semite without cause, your
the one who has a link to their site on your stalker hate site, why
would their be anything curious at all ?

>
> > Every ethnicity & group has it's assholes which can
> > bring people to hate the group in general rather than
> > the individual asshole himself.
>
> Excuse me: weren't you the person who claimed they never swore in
> messages? Is this just a colloquialism up there in BC? Do you talk
> like that when having dinner with your mother?


No I never said I didn't swear in messages; and the line goes do
you kiss your mother with that mouth ?

You don't consider calling someone an anti-semite and a racist
to be swearing ?

Fuck-you and the foreign horse you rode in on.

>
> > I suppose extremists like you and Brnai Brith fall into that catagory.
>
> Uh-huh! Your pink slip is showing....


Your's showed long ago and by the way when the American
Government wrote and spoke about subversives they were speaking
about you and B'rnai B'rith not me and Reformers.

Didn't you know that ?


>


> > I would't imagine many Freemasons in this n.g. appreaciate
> > your public political posturing on this issue from your
> > pulpit within organized Freemasonry.
>
> Actually, I've taken no position at all. When you put up your "I
> hate immigrants" (a hate web site, if one wishes to characterize)


Doesn't exist, no web site by that name unlike your web site" I
hate Christians and Christian Civilization".


,


> I became immediately aware of it. You do need to fix that Java script
> on the front page, though: it's all fouled up!


You're full of it as usual.


I notice that you don't
> have the courage of even THAT conviction, though, to identify yourself.


You don't identify yourself "Ed King", what is your lodge affiliation
EXACTLY ?

>
> How very odd....
>
> > There are always Illiberal persons in any society
> > which seek to stifle Freedom of Speech by
> > labeling those who they might disagree with as
> > racists or anti-semites.
>
> <Chuckle>
>
> > You probably really don't want to bring this unconnected
> > issue into this forum King if you had thought about it
> > (which you evidently don't do very much of) but you have.
>
> Oh, I think it's instructive for folks here to know you're an
> equal-opportunity hater. You hate Masons, immigrants, and what else?


I don't hate Masons I hate Freemasonry.

I don't hate Immigrants or Immigration.

I hate Stalinists like you though.


>
> > I'm certain there are many Masons in this n.g. who
> > are concerned about Immigration related matters who are not.
>
> You are SO repetitious sometimes....


What is your position on the issue since you brought the topic
up, and I am not asking you to regurgitate the instructions from
your employer B'rnai B'rith which provides all the funding for
your anti-christian, anti-american stalker hate site.


>
> > Your harping on this matter and stalking of me
> > will only serve to cause them to question the true
> > motives of the Illiberal Bigots and Zeolots who "run" this n.g.
> > and appear to be connected with rather narrow interests that are
> > not representative with the general population.
>
> "Stalking"? Hmmmm.... You put up a public web site to which you
> call attention and then you complain that someone has gone there?


What web site are you talking about King Liar ?

>
> What a peculiar brand of logic you have....


King as a boot lick to an extremist ILLiberal Anti-American and
Anti-Canadian hate group such as B'rnai B'rith it is obvious
you have absolutely no interest in reforming Canada's or
the U.S.'s Immigration System.

What you are interested in however is attacking and libeling
anyone who advocates change as a racist so the general
populice will be somehow cowered into getting involved in
the issue.

Well it won't work anymore.

As for myself your only interest was using a post made on
a Canadian political newsgroup to attack me in this one
as you obviously are not prepared or able to do so based
on what your knowledge of Freemasonry - which is
apparent to all minimal at best.

You stalked me, just like you stalk anyone who posts against
Freemasonry by doing deja.com searches and using other
programs and co-conspirators in the internet industry to identify
the posters and intimidate them.

Intimidate away bozo.

> > > Keep Canada pure or something
> > > is their clarion call, it appears.
> > >
> > > Keep your eyes open for this group. They're probably going to be about
as
> > > successful as the person who proclaimed during the summer that
Freemasonry
> > > was now dead!
> >
> > Oh I don't know King most Canadians are completely revolted about what
> > has been happening to their country. The Canadian Reform Party is now
> > the Official Opposition in Canada and I understand the American Reform
> > Party is going great guns as well. Both parties are strong advocates of
> > Immigration Reform and both have been attacked by IlLiberals such
> > as yourself as being racists or anti-semites. If you want to look at a
real
> > racist or anti-semite immigration policy look at your own favoured
> > nation Isreal (Palestinians & Arabs are Semites) you can't have it both
> > ways King.
>
> And didn't the civilian intelligence oversight committee (SIRC) appointed
by
> your Parliament warn that racists are trying to mainstream their message
of
> hate by coopting the immigration and refugee issues? You wouldn't happen
> to be one of those racists, would you?


Oh probably in your's, B'rnai B'riths, Immigration Lawyers, and other
Foreign lobbyists minds who want to maintain mass immigration to the
U.S. and Canada. Fortunately real Canadians and real Americans have
seen through the lies and propagada of self-serving propagadists and
paid lobbyists such as yourself.

Don't believe me then try the following web sites:

Numbers U.S.A.
http://numbersusa.com/home.html

Federation for Amercian Immigration Reform
http://www.fairus.org/menu.htm

Negative Population Growth
http://www.newnation.org/oir/oir.html

American Patrol
http://www.americanpatrol.com/


> > > Indeed! Some folks are *really* getting carried away about it, it
would
> > > appear. It's my understanding that the Canadian government has
indicated
> > > that a lot of the stuff is simply a front for racism, white supremacy,
> > > and the neo-nazi type of thing that Kennie supports.
> >
> > Bullshit, the more creeps like you and the Brnai Brith attack
immigration
> > reformers the more they discredit themselves. If you want to attack
> > Immigration Refom from you pulpit in Freemasonry so be it but I
> > thought Masonry was not supposed to be political. More Masonic lies it
seems.
>
> Well, there's LOTS to comment on in that paragraph starting with the
profanity
> which you assert that you never use. Then there's the condemnation of the
> B'nai B'rith - what is *that* all about, anyway?

They are the funders and guidiing lights of your hate site.

And, of course, I've taken
> no position whatsoever on Immigration Reform


Yes you have, you called Immigration Reformers Racists and Anti-Semites.

You don't call that a position, just like you "missed" all the articles
in the New York Times about Freemasonry and the KKK in 1944.

You're a liar "Ed King" , plain and simple.

(and SURE wouldn't be supporting
> YOUR brand of building walls) but, of course, the final stupidity is your
> confusion of one person's comments with the fact that Masonry has somehow
> adopted a position on Immigration. How utterly simple can you be?

Your the one who brought it up Bozo in your attack on me calling me a racist
and an anti-semite for advocating reform to Canada's Immigration system
in a seperate newsgroup *completely unrelated to Freemasonry*.

Now your singing the blues.

You are part of organized Freemasonry and you are closely tied to
B'rnai B'rith (your website link to them says so) and you attack me
the same way B'rnai B'rith attacks anyone who advocates Immigratioin
Reform in Canada by dragging them before the ludicrous Star Chamber
of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal continually.

Freemasonry involvment in Politics revealed.

How utterly simple can you be?


>
> > I have often wondered on your ties to Brnai Brith King, you have a link
> > to one of their groups on your site. I guess your just a San Francisco
> > Democrat after all aren't you in addition to being a racist (your Quebec
> > comments).
>
> Pay attention, child. The "Quebec comments" were made by Jim Bennie and
> were not in the slightest way racist.


They were completely racist *child*.

French Canadians have long complained of having to suffer racist taunts
about "speak white" etc.

Bennie as a Canadian Journalist KNOWS THIS, and yet repeated it.

It is a French Canadian "nigger" joke - and Mr. Grand Steward told it
and you a resident next door to Quebec fully comprehended it also.

Stop being such a liar.

You had a little racist joke between you and got busted.


I have links to LOTS of groups on
> my site including, but not limited to, the Kook's Museum and people like
> your apparent idol, Ernst Zundel and friends. You can wonder about my
> 'ties' all you wish; I have a closet with many! <chuckle>


Your completely shooting in the dark, and completely parroting the
viscous hate mongering that extremists like B'rnai B'rith do against
anyone who advocates Immigration Reform.

Ed King B'rnai B'rith lick spittle

Ed King Anti Christian bigot.

Ed King Anti-European racist.

Ed King Anti-American.


>
> > > I suspect there's another anti-Mason here who fronts for the same sort
> > > of thing - although he does the dance too.... ("Why do you say Jews
are
> > > persecuted? They're lying
> > > and the B'nai B'rith <which they consistently misspell> is fronting
it.")
> > >
> > > Kinda scary....
> >
> > The Jews AREN'T persecuted. Some extreme Illiberal elements in their
> > community (such as yourself and Brnai Brith) do however it seems
persecute
> > anyone ho doesn't toe their politically correct new-age line (in
addition to
> > Palestinians) like Immigration Reform advocates for example. I guess
> > the Sierra Club and population control and evironmental groups which
> > are now strong Immigration Reform Advocates are now anti-semites and
> > racists in your twisted politically correct Illiberal world view.
>
> Well, there ya go! From the mouths of babes....
>
> Gee: in just one message, you've managed to remove all doubt about your
> anti-Semitic motivations. Wanna tell the folks how you feel about people
> of colors other than yourself?


The Jews AREN'T persecuted.

Christians ARE persecuted.

Israel ISN'T persecuted.

Palestinians ARE persecuted.

What is anti-semitic about those statements ?

It must be pretty uncomfortable for you living in Maine.


>
> Oh, are your ancestors native Canadian Indians?
>
> > Your a creep King just another reason why American men should leave this
> > organization which appears to have an inordinate foreign influence.
>
> Now *there's* a comment for ya!


Yep you only have to look at the anti-Christian and Anti-Christendom
statements
of Masonic enforcers in this newsgroup to know how true it is


>
> > I hope Patrick Buchanan kicks your Illiberal ass back where it came
from.
>
> <Guffaw> SO! Supporting the anti-Mason and anti-Semite fellow who thinks
> Hitler wasn't such a bad guy after all, huh? How typical.


He did pretty well on the Sunday Newsshows today.

I guess his big crime was pointing out the inordinate influence the Israeli
and Jewish Lobby has in Washington especially in regard to Foreign
Policy.

Someone finally let the cat out of the bag.

I didn't know he was an anti-mason though. I guess your concerned
about his membership in the Catholic Church.

Are you Masons and Foreigners going to Murder him just like you
Murdered President Kennedy ?

Might be a little more difficult, you don't have Meyer Lansky to help
organize it for you this time.

Oh well maybe you've lost your stuff after all.

Maybe that's why your all running so scared ...


>
> > Stay in the backwoods of Maine King the real world is becoming
> > a rather scary place.
>
> Only to the paranoid like yourself.


I guess you don't have any of your children in a big city public
school system so "it's not your problem".

How elitist of you.

Your a real patriot "Ed King", no doubt about it.


>
> > By the way if you want to play this internet stalking game it
> > is really a two edged sword I am sure you are going to alienate
> > as many masons in this n.g. as you satisfy (the non Scwarzman,
> > Kivowitz, King variety).
>
> Oh, threatening now, are we? Do you define "internet stalking" as
> the reading of a publicly advertised web site? What a strange
> definition you have.


You don't give a damm about Immigration Reform you are only
trying to attack me because I am helping to expose your little
criminal foreign controled conspiracy.

Your proto-deity George "skull & bones" Bush let the cat out of
the bag with his "New World Order" comments.

He screwed up just like he screwed up in the Bay of Pigs by
naming one of the landing craft after his wife and the penninsual
for the landings after his Oil Company.

More incompetant Freemasons sink International Freemasonry.

>
> Are you embarrassed to have people know about your other interests?
> How curious. You seemed to want to publicize them in other venues....


Obviously not King if I had I wouldn't have responded to your taunts.

You see it has actually worked out quite well, exposing your ties
to B'rinai B'rith and exposing your illiberal anti-American ,
Anti-Christendom agenda of treason and duplicity.

You lose.

>
> Are you going to tell the folks interested in immigration all about us
> evil Masons while you're about it?
>
> What other hatreds hide in your little closet?


You mean beside the ones for Stalinists like yourself ?


>
> > Are you really this stupid King ?
>
> Poor Saint..... Poor, poor Saint.....
>
> > Did it ever occur to you that it is possible for a person
> > to hate Freemasonry on religious or corruption grounds
> > and have a completely seperate interest in trying to
> > prevent their countries principal cities from
> > being turned into Third World Shitholes by advocating
> > immigration reform without being a racist or anti-semite ?
> >
> > I guess not.
>
> Actually, it did occur to me. Their hatred of Freemasonry on
> such grounds, however, would be entirely irrational - and that
> irrationality would likely transfer to their other "interests" as
> well. Do leopards change their spots, "Saint".... errr.... "Reformer"....
> errrr..... "Savior"..... errrrr.... "Hater"......


You seek the comfort of the pack Stalin with your parroting of the
extreme Illiberal Rhetoric of your stalker hate sites funders.

They say you should always follow the money trail, in your
case we now know where it leads.


>
> > Ed King of Brnai Brith - UnAmerican.
>
> So much for rationality.


Completely rational.

Your tied to B'rnai B'rith - your hate site says so.

Your tied to International Freemasonry - your hate site says so.

Both groups attack anyone who publically says America First,
or Canada First, or Christendom First.

You seek a new world order with yourselves at the head.

You're all nothing but a bunch of low life traitors.


>
> > So much for organized Freemasonry having no political involvement.
>
> Ed King: the spokesperson for organized Freemasonry. From henceforth,
> all Masons will not be allowed to think or have opinions unless I clear
> them first. Pay attention people! <BBBBBBBG>
>
> Oh, and for those who were looking to check out the Saint's web site
> that just went live this past Wednesday (good internet intelligence, eh?)
> you can simply head off to
> http://www.freeyellow.com/members6/savecanada/index.html


I understand that site has been "live" for almost a year, so much for
your "intelligence".

Why don't you try the other sites I listed in posts and this one that
specifically pertain to American Immigration Reform, they are much
better I think.

Not that you are interested in preserving or protecting your country
(America not Isreal or your New World Order or what ever you are
going to call it).


>
> And say, "Saint", are you going to be changing your name as often there
> as you do here? Just to make people think you're cute???? <chuckle>
>
> POOF! Another anti-Mason racist down in flames!


POOF! Another anti-Christian, Anti-American traitor down in flames!
<chuckle>


>
> Ed King
> http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View
>
> Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 1999. All rights reserved.
>
>

Fraternally Yours,

St. John the Sublime Reformer
A Certain Point Within A Circle
Masonic Historian

Masonicinfo.com - AntiMasonry Points of View

Dr. Roger M. Firestone

unread,
Sep 27, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/27/99
to
>I never once brought up anything about Jewish People and anyways the
>label anti-semite is a complete swindle as Palestinians and other Arabs
>are Semites too - as you are fully aware of.
>
>Just shows how much of a liar you really are.

The term "anti-Semite" has the specific dictionary definition of being
prejudiced against Jews and the Jewish religion. It has been used in
that way for a century or more. Claiming that it is a "swindle" because
there are other groups who speak a Semitic language is itself a
deception.

Perhaps you would be more comfortable being called an anti-Jewish bigot
instead, so that there would be no doubt whatever about what you are?
I'm sure we can accommodate you in that fashion. Just so you can't say
that because you have never made any remarks about Arabs, you aren't
therefore scum.

>King, Firestone, Kivowitz, Scwarzman, B'rnai B'rith blah, blah, blah.

It's spelled B'nai B'rith. There is no "r" in the first word. You are
also illiterate.

>When you clowns aren't putting down Christians and Christianity you are
>libeling anyone who objects to your perversions as being anti-semitic.

The truth hurts, doesn't it.

>No wonder why you feel so comfortable as members of another Foreign
>Body that is actively undermining Christian Civilization - Freemasonry.

Yeah, Christianity is about to disappear from the world. That's why the
most radical and fundamentalist churches are growing rapidly in the US
and elsewhere, and why, despite 70 years of suppression in the Soviet
Union, the Russian Orthodox Church is as strong as it was before the
Revolution.

Oh, I forgot: Your idea of "Christian Civilization" is one in which
Christians are free to suppress or exterminate anyone who doesn't accept
that religion...and once the world is "Judenrein" (and rid of everyone
else who doesn't conform), you can all turn on each other. I don't have
to make this up to "[put] down Christians and Christianity"; all I have
to do is recount the lessons of history, which invariably couple
excessive power held by religious authority with wholesale bloodshed:
The Crusades, the Inquisition, the Thirty Years' War, the
Cathars/Albigensians, the Anabaptists, the Huguenots, and how many
others? Even in relatively moderate England, there was no shortage of
persecution of Christians _by_ Christians: Read any history to learn
how Catholics and Dissenters (Methodists, Baptists, Quakers, etc.) were
treated by the state-sanctioned Anglican regime.

Your pitiful claim that "Christian Civilization" is under attack by Jews
and Freemasons shows nothing but a total ignorance of history and of
current events. Not to mention complete illogicality, in supposing that
groups composing less than 5% of the population can somehow determine
what happens to the vast majority. You suppose you are defending
Christianity; what everyone else knows is that you are _embarrassing_
it.

You call yourself a "sublime reformer." History has had its share of
those. Ever hear of the reformer Savonarola? He wanted to establish a
model Christian commonwealth in the republic of Florence, overthrowing
the corrupt Medicis, and strictly enforcing Biblical laws. Eventually,
despite his claim of prophetic gifts (although he didn't go as far as
self-appointed sainthood), he was excommunicated, charged with heresy,
convicted, and hanged. There may be a lesson here for those wise enough
to perceive it...

Roger M. Firestone, 32 KCCH

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 27, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/27/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Roger M. Firestone <rf...@chele.cais.net>
Newsgroups:
alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
art-bell
Sent: September 27, 1999 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity

> >I never once brought up anything about Jewish People and anyways the
> >label anti-semite is a complete swindle as Palestinians and other Arabs
> >are Semites too - as you are fully aware of.
> >
> >Just shows how much of a liar you really are.
>

> The term "anti-Semite" has the specific dictionary definition of being
> prejudiced against Jews and the Jewish religion.


Dictionary definition perhaps but dictionaries mearly reflect words that
have been in common usuage for some time. And who libels and
throws around the term "anti-semite" thereby bringing into common
usuage ? Did the dictionary writers consult semitic peoples such
as arabs *many of whom are Christians* before giving the entire term
to a single sub-group so it could further their victimhood propagada
guilt trip ? NO.

Much like the use of the term "gentiles" which means non-believer
to apply to anyone who isn't a member of Judaism or the Jewish
ethnic group, or the term "goyim" applied in the same deceitful
fashion.

Much like the application of the term "Cowan" or "Profane" to
apply to Non-Freemasons.

And we haven't even got to the vitriolicly racist Talmud which
is used as a study tool even today unbelievably. If such
a "book" wasn't protected under religous freedom provisions
it would be banned in Canada today by hate legislation.

He who controls the present controls the past it would seem in
this case.

Palestinians ARE Semites so how could they be anti-semetic ?

Just because some publishing house in * NEW YORK CITY* says
something doesn't make it so.


It has been used in
> that way for a century or more.


Bullshit try 40 years, and only among propagandists and their victims.


Claiming that it is a "swindle" because
> there are other groups who speak a Semitic language is itself a
> deception.


They just don't "speak" a semitic tongue *they are semitic* you
and your special interest group know this as well and
yet continue your slander and lies.


>
> Perhaps you would be more comfortable being called an anti-Jewish bigot
> instead, so that there would be no doubt whatever about what you are?


In your rather narrow world consisting of brow beaten "gentiles" in
the United States that have suffered from 40 years of Hollywood,
New York Media and slick Washington lawyer control perhaps.

In the rest of the world (such as Canada, Britian, Australia, & Europe)
we are not in such awe or quite so suseptible to your special interest
groups bleating or bullying.

In short we are not afraid of you and think for ourselves. We quite
simply are Free, we are not under an inordinate *foreign* influence.

Yes the filth that Hollywood puts out does seep North or elsewhere but
it is tempered by OUR voice, the same goes true for OUR nations
foreign policy.

We cringe when we see or hear a slick, fast talking New York or
Hollywood type pop up on some current events program who has
obviously been inadequately assimilated (to OUR culture and
OUR ways).

I saw somewhere a list of key cabinet officials in Clinton's Administration
including key advisors etc. I think something like two thirds of them
belonged to your special interest group, a group that only constitutes
some 5 percent of the population.

Is this fair, is this just ?

You don't care Firestone if they might put their own groups loyaltys
especially in regard to foreign policy above that of the United States
population as a whole.

Fortunately we don't have that problem in Canada or Great Britain to
any significant extent.

Quite simply we are free, as the recent actions by the government
of Great Britain against Freemasonry has shown

Patrick Buchanan pointed this out this past week and was vilified
for it, and yet what he spoke was the truth.

Soon we will be free of your other insidious arm and invention -
international Freemasonry, just like we are free now of international
communism.

The truth sometimes hurts Firestone - but it's still the truth.

And by the way I am not anti-Jewish or anti-Jew either, I am
anti-subversive, a label which applies to only a very small
portion of your community, albiet a very vocal one.

If more of our political leaders were not afraid to speak
the truth a little more and stand up to the big money lobby
which is smothering Democracy and Christendom we
would already be free today.

Fraternally Yours,

St. John the Sublime Reformer
A Certain Point Within A Circle
Masonic Historian

Masonicinfo.com - AntiMasonry Points of View
JFK'S MURDERER'S
http://www.crocker.com/~acacia/article.html

Lafayettes Surprise - The Pentagram of Washington D.C.
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/chapter3/chapter3.htm

The Catholic Encyclopedia - FreeMasonry
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09771a.htm

ManitobaGL.ca- Kabbalism & MAHABONE
Http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/3164/index.htm

====================================================
St. John the Sublime Reformer's logic is a peculiar form of morality,
veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbols. It is based on his three
grand principles - brotherly love, relief, and truth. So mote it be.

it...

Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS]

unread,
Sep 28, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/28/99
to
Hiya St John


At the risk of sounding racist (who - ME?) I would simply observe what was
said by a character in the 'South park' movie:

"You Canadians - you're all the same, with your beady eyes and your flapping
heads..."


We here in Australia have a proud heritage of kow-towing to interest groups,
and particularly of importing American socialist/sociologist-isms, e.g.,
'dark purple' feminism, a culture of apologism by the Anglo-Saxon middle
class (especially heterosexual males). I am sure I speak for every 'right
minded' member of Australian society when I say this. (Of course I would not
pretend to do so - but that is the language that the apology industry uses).

Your point on the origin of the word 'Semite' is well taken, St John (note -
the contractions St, Mr and Dr have no full-stop; your 'free' Canadian
system did not prevent you from bastardising grammar like an American).

I might also disagree with the application of 'Semite' and 'Semitic' solely
to the Jewish community, however that is not the fault of the Jewish
community - the terms were ascribed to Jewry by external agencies.

The fact that the terms have found common usage stems largely from the fact
that most people I know feel uncomfortable calling anyone a 'Jew' (however I
am allowed to say it, so there). Just like you have to euphemise 'Black' to
'African American', and 'lesbian' to 'woman in comfortable footwear'. My
opinion is that the word (in the mouths of Gentiles) carried as much
vituperation as the word 'nigger' - possibly more - and I'm not anybody's
victim, I can assure you. Think 'Spain in the late 15th century', for
example.

Also, 'gentile' does NOT stem from a word which means 'non-believer'. It
stems from the Latin 'gentilis', the common usage of which denoted
'non-Roman', 'foreigner'. It was your 'Early Fathers' who translated goyim
as 'gentes' and then used 'gente' to denote non-Christian. non-Jewish folk;
the rest is your history, not mine....

Goyim means 'nations', and is taken to include all men who are not a party
to the Covenant with Avram. If that includes you, too bad.

And lo, the Talmud is racist - so is the Bible (the Old Testament in
particular - an interesting work, if rather derivative). You banning that in
Canada too? Maybe we could have a git-together, and set fire to anything
which might be considered a bit too racey. A good ol' book burnin'; I would
have thought you were a bit too far North to be thus inclined.

As you Canadians say, You aaaaht to git ooot more. (Apologies to my Canadian
chums, particularly Rob and Andrea Waschik - Shalom if you're reading, Rob).

Genuck already. Here's the handl, St John - you stop mit the utzing, and
being such a nudnick; that way we will all be a little less ferklempt at how
farbisine und farblondzhet you appear to be.

OK, so it's not perfect. So sue me.


Geoff.
_______________________

Geoffrey J. Transom
Centre of Policy Studies
Monash University
AUSTRALIA
_______________________

Glyn Davies

unread,
Sep 28, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/28/99
to
LOL. I like this one. Not only is the grammar poetry to me but it is
funny.

Thank you Brother

Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS] <Geoffrey...@BusEco.Monash.edu.au> wrote in
message news:7spkar$jjt$1...@towncrier.cc.monash.edu.au...

Dr. Roger M. Firestone

unread,
Sep 28, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/28/99
to
In article <002101bf0968$2396d700$04000005@oemcomputer>,

From the Jewish point of view, non-Jews are unbelievers. The term "goy"
means "nation." "Goyim" are the nations other than the Jews. How is
that "deceitful?"

For there to be deceit, someone must be deceived about the truth. Do
you really contend that there are people who are somehow deceived
because the term "anti-Semite" is used to mean "anti-Jewish bigot?"

>Much like the application of the term "Cowan" or "Profane" to
>apply to Non-Freemasons.

A "cowan" is someone who attempts to gain access to the secrets and
privileges of Freemasonry by imposture. It does not refer to all
non-Masons.

The term "profane" dates from early modern English. It acquired its
current negative meaning long after it had been used in its original
sense (someone who is not initiated into the temple of Freemasonry) in
Masonic speech. Only the utterly ignorant (like you) would persist in
supposing that the use of "profane" was intended as an insult.

>And we haven't even got to the vitriolicly racist Talmud which
>is used as a study tool even today unbelievably. If such
>a "book" wasn't protected under religous freedom provisions
>it would be banned in Canada today by hate legislation.

Well, as I said, you are a mad-dog anti-Jewish bigot. (Does that term
make you feel better than calling you an "anti-Semite?") The Talmud is
not racist; I doubt that you have ever read anything from it but a few
carefully selected passages--selected, in particular, by other mad-dog
anti-Jewish bigots who taught you to be a race- and religion-hater.

If you read the original, you will find that the Talmud doesn't even
mention other _races_ (such as the Negroid or Mongoloid) because they
were virtually unknown to the Gaonim and Tanaaim who wrote the Talmud.
if you were actually acquainted with the contents of the Talmud in any
way (and by the way, it is some 30,000 pages in length), you would know
that the negative references to non-Jews primarily are targeted at the
Roman oppressors who were idolaters and pagans, and who found sport in
suppressing the Jewish religion and casually murdering anyone who didn't
conform to the majority culture. They did the same thing to the early
Christians--for almost three centuries in fact. Are those the people
you are defending from the "racist" Talmud?

No, please don't quote the 12 sentences out of those 30,000 pages that
you think will "prove" that the Talmud is "racist." We've all seen them
already. Remember, we already know you are a mad-dog anti-Jewish bigot;
there's no need to verify your credentials.

>He who controls the present controls the past it would seem in
>this case.
>
>Palestinians ARE Semites so how could they be anti-semetic ?

Because the term "anti-Semitic" means "anti-Jewish bigot," you cretin.

>Just because some publishing house in * NEW YORK CITY* says
>something doesn't make it so.

No, but they have a reputation to defend, unlike you.

>It has been used in
>> that way for a century or more.
>
>
>Bullshit try 40 years, and only among propagandists and their victims.

Forty years ago, it was 1959. The term "anti-Semite" had been in use
for a very long time before that. According to my Webster's dictionary,
the first use dates from 1882. That is more than a century ago. The
movie "A Gentleman's Agreement" dates from 1947, and the term was in use
then. You can rent this movie and see for yourself. That is 52 years
ago.

You mad-dog anti-Jewish bigots will utter any lie to advance your case.

> Claiming that it is a "swindle" because
>> there are other groups who speak a Semitic language is itself a
>> deception.
>
>
>They just don't "speak" a semitic tongue *they are semitic* you
>and your special interest group know this as well and
>yet continue your slander and lies.

The definition of "Semitic" is that of speaking a Semitic language.
But the term "anti-Semitic" means hostility or bigotry toward Jews. Get
over it.

>> Perhaps you would be more comfortable being called an anti-Jewish bigot
>> instead, so that there would be no doubt whatever about what you are?
>
>In your rather narrow world consisting of brow beaten "gentiles" in
>the United States that have suffered from 40 years of Hollywood,
>New York Media and slick Washington lawyer control perhaps.
>
>In the rest of the world (such as Canada, Britian, Australia, & Europe)
>we are not in such awe or quite so suseptible to your special interest
>groups bleating or bullying.

Gee, I'm glad to hear that Canada, Britain, Australia, and Europe are
safe havens for mad-dog anti-Jewish bigotry. I'm sure that the
countries in question are glad to have you as a spokesman for their
beliefs. Sieg heil.

>In short we are not afraid of you and think for ourselves. We quite
>simply are Free, we are not under an inordinate *foreign* influence.

Yeah, I've heard about how sensitive Canadians are about "foreign"
influence from south of the border. Not to mention the French. And
other places whose politics make it difficult for them to compete with a
free-enterprise system.

Oh, but I suppose you think that the United States is under "foreign"
influence from the state of Israel. That _is_ what you mad-dog
anti-Jewish bigots think, isn't it? You've even got Pat Buchanan on
your side. And before there was a state of Israel, Jews were still
"foreigners" in their own country, weren't they? That _is_ what your
revered Fuehrer taught, isn't it?

>Yes the filth that Hollywood puts out does seep North or elsewhere but
>it is tempered by OUR voice, the same goes true for OUR nations
>foreign policy.

Filth? I'm sure you know filth when you see it, since you wallow in it
daily. Everyone who reads your messages knows exactly what you are--a
closet Nazi who is too cowardly to use his own name when he disseminates
his filth.

>We cringe when we see or hear a slick, fast talking New York or
>Hollywood type pop up on some current events program who has
>obviously been inadequately assimilated (to OUR culture and
>OUR ways).
>
>I saw somewhere a list of key cabinet officials in Clinton's Administration
>including key advisors etc. I think something like two thirds of them
>belonged to your special interest group, a group that only constitutes
>some 5 percent of the population.

Typical mad-dog anti-Jewish bigot lies. Why don't you list the names of
the Clinton Administration key cabinet officials and designate the ones
who are Jewish. Defense Secretary Cohen may have a Jewish name, but he
long since abandoned the Jewish faith. Secretary of State Madeline
Albright supposedly had no awareness of her Jewish forebears and is a
member of a Christian denomination. No, it is you Nazis who insist that
anyone with Jewish blood iss still Jewish, no matter what church he
might have joined. And you call the Talmud "racist!"

In fact, the only cabinet official (which ones are "key" and which ones
are not, I wonder?) I can think of who is Jewish is Dan Glickman,
Secretary of Agriculture. Yeah, the Agriculture Dept. is sure a "key"
part of the Administration.

And on what basis do I belong to a "special interest group?" How do
you know what political party I support or what my opinions are? Unlike
you Nazis who have to follow your Fuehrer or face the consequences, I am
free to think what I like.

>Is this fair, is this just ?

It isn't even true, so let's not argue about what is fair or just.

>You don't care Firestone if they might put their own groups loyaltys
>especially in regard to foreign policy above that of the United States
>population as a whole.

And your evidence of this is? Down here, we have been a lot more
concerned about influence exercised by the People's Republic of China
over this Administration directly than any concern over American Jews
having some kind of divided loyalty. That accusation has been one
typical of mad-dog bigots; it was used against John F. Kennedy (and Al
Smith before him) to assert that Catholics couldn't be both loyal to
their country and obedient to the Pope.

>Fortunately we don't have that problem in Canada or Great Britain to
>any significant extent.
>
>Quite simply we are free, as the recent actions by the government
>of Great Britain against Freemasonry has shown

No, it just shows that a few bigots can, as they did in Germany, foment
hatred among an ignorant population.

>Patrick Buchanan pointed this out this past week and was vilified
>for it, and yet what he spoke was the truth.

Patrick Buchanan was vilified for his brain-dead notions about European
history, and his anti-Semitic allegations which are identical to the
ones you repeat about "foreign" influence over American policy.

>Soon we will be free of your other insidious arm and invention -
>international Freemasonry, just like we are free now of international
>communism.

Freemasonry is run entirely on a local basis, not an international one.
The few "international" bodies do not even have power to exercise over
local jurisdictions but are ceremonial and service organizations only.
The officers of the General Grand Council and General Grand Chapter are
so dispersed geographically that it is unusual to find more than two of
them in one place between the once-every-three-years meetings. As 1998
Grand Master of Cryptic Masons in DC, no "international" body could tell
me what to do in DC. And they knew it.

>The truth sometimes hurts Firestone - but it's still the truth.

You wouldn't know what the truth was if it had its jaws clamped around
your leg. You've never uttered anything here but a stream of lies and
hate. We all still remember your lie about an article in the _New York
Times_ regarding the Grand Lodge of New York and the KKK.

>And by the way I am not anti-Jewish or anti-Jew either, I am
>anti-subversive, a label which applies to only a very small
>portion of your community, albiet a very vocal one.

Oh, we know you are a mad-dog anti-Jewish bigot. You demean the Talmud,
denounce the beliefs of a majority of the Jewish community, and then
claim you are only an "anti-subversive." Of course, it has always
turned out among the mad-dog anti-Jewish bigots that _all_ Jews really
are "subversives" or "foreigners" or "cosmopolitans." You just want to
hide behind some vague claim of not being biased so decent citizens
won't vilify you--if, of course, you ever had the courage to utter your
hatred under your real name. But mad-dog bigots are invariably cowards,
justifiably afraid of what decent society would do if they found out who
they are.

>If more of our political leaders were not afraid to speak
>the truth a little more and stand up to the big money lobby
>which is smothering Democracy and Christendom we
>would already be free today.

Oh, yeah. Christians are slaves. Sure they are. Maybe in the Sudan.
Not in Canada. Anyone who might have been taken in by your noise about
"foreign" influence can see that the Christian 95% of society is really
being oppressed by the Jews. Y'know, a lot of Canadians died in the war
against Hitler. I don't think their children are quite ready to
subscribe to your Nazi notions and thereby dishonor the memories of
their fathers.

Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS]

unread,
Sep 28, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/28/99
to

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 28, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/28/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS] <Geoffrey...@BUSeCO.monash.edu.au>
Newsgroups:
alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
art-bell
Sent: September 28, 1999 6:55 PM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity


>


> Hiya St John
>
>
> At the risk of sounding racist (who - ME?) I would simply observe what
was
> said by a character in the 'South park' movie:
>
> "You Canadians - you're all the same, with your beady eyes and your
> flapping
> heads..."
>
>
> We here in Australia have a proud heritage of kow-towing to interest
> groups,


he, he.


> and particularly of importing American socialist/sociologist-isms, e.g.,
> 'dark purple' feminism,


he, he, he


a culture of apologism by the Anglo-Saxon middle
> class (especially heterosexual males).

he, he, he, he


I am sure I speak for every 'right
> minded' member of Australian society when I say this. (Of course I would
> not
> pretend to do so - but that is the language that the apology industry
> uses).


I can see Dr. Firestone's and B'rnai B'riths face turning red
as they read these non-politically correct non kow-towing
words.

tsk, tsk, tsk.

>
> Your point on the origin of the word 'Semite' is well taken,


Thank-you although I STRONGLY suspect extremist radicals
and subversives of the Dr. Firestone and B'rnai B'rith mindset
would VITRIOLICALLY disagree with you and almost certainly
call you an anti-semite for even thinking such nasty thoughts.

They're going to want to send you to New York City or
Los Angelas for some re-indoctrination. Don't you know
that saying such things is evidence of your mad-dog, anti-jewish,
anti-semitic bigotry.

Shame Oz, shame.


St John
> (note -
> the contractions St, Mr and Dr have no full-stop; your 'free' Canadian
> system did not prevent you from bastardising grammar like an American).

Well what can I say, however on the plus side I never use an elevator
on the sabbath.


>
> I might also disagree with the application of 'Semite' and 'Semitic'
solely
> to the Jewish community, however that is not the fault of the Jewish
> community - the terms were ascribed to Jewry by external agencies.

Hmmm.

It seems to me they are the ones CONSTANTLY throwing the term
around which was likely picked up by the dictionaries.

You noticed Firestone tried to say that Palestinians and Arabs only
SPOKE a semitic tongue, implying they were not semites at all.

You see it is a clever way of shutting up debate on a topic much
like calling someone racist. If they said the person was anti-Jewish
or anti-Jew they would have to provide a little more detail but
with the use of the magic "anti-semite" debate and discussion
is curtailed completely as everyone else simply has to take
their word for it, because "they should know".


>
> The fact that the terms have found common usage stems largely from the
fact
> that most people I know feel uncomfortable calling anyone a 'Jew'
(however
> I
> am allowed to say it, so there).

Nasty Ozzie. I wouldn't be surprised if Dr. Fruitstone send you a couple
of blistering e-mails after you "untimely" comments.

Just like you have to euphemise 'Black' to
> 'African American', and 'lesbian' to 'woman in comfortable footwear'. My
> opinion is that the word (in the mouths of Gentiles) carried as much
> vituperation as the word 'nigger' - possibly more - and I'm not anybody's
> victim, I can assure you. Think 'Spain in the late 15th century', for
> example.

Well that is another story as the Sephardim sided with the Moorish
invaders and participated and assisted in the takeover. Given
the period it was fairly predictable that the Christian Spaniards
would give them the boot with the Moors, they were colluding
with their enemy after all. But extremists like Dr. Flakestone
don't like to mention that little historical tidbit - complicates the
propagada. Christians BAD, Jews GOOD, Moorish Spain
"enlightened", Christian Spain "backward". Around the
world in 6,000 years, where it will stop nobody knows.


>
> Also, 'gentile' does NOT stem from a word which means 'non-believer'. It
> stems from the Latin 'gentilis', the common usage of which denoted
> 'non-Roman', 'foreigner'.


Foreign to what ?


It was your 'Early Fathers' who translated goyim
> as 'gentes' and then used 'gente' to denote non-Christian. non-Jewish
folk;
> the rest is your history, not mine....


The only time I heard goyim used was as a put down and a slight
used by some Jews against Christians, as in "good enough for
the goyim".


>
> Goyim means 'nations', and is taken to include all men who are not a
party
> to the Covenant with Avram. If that includes you, too bad.


Avram - code for ABRAHAM. Didn't think I would figure it out, so you
and them don't think us poor goy's are part of Abraham's covenant.
If we are not part of the covenant then we are not part of the bible - right
?


>
> And lo, the Talmud is racist - so is the Bible (the Old Testament in
> particular - an interesting work, if rather derivative).


The Old Testament not the Christian New Testament.


You banning that
> in
> Canada too? Maybe we could have a git-together, and set fire to anything
> which might be considered a bit too racey. A good ol' book burnin'; I
would
> have thought you were a bit too far North to be thus inclined.


I'm not banning anything. I was just pointing out the illiberal extremists
such as B'rinai B'rith which foisted the ludicrous Star Chamber of the
Canadian Human Rights tribunal on us would *if not for the religious
waver*. An amazing an unbelivable selection of books is barred entry
to Canada. The number one entity which files complaints with this
tribunal is of course that stalwart of freedom and democracy, B'rnai B'rith.


>
> As you Canadians say, You aaaaht to git ooot more. (Apologies to my
> Canadian
> chums, particularly Rob and Andrea Waschik - Shalom if you're reading,
> Rob).


No problem eh.


>
> Genuck already. Here's the handl, St John - you stop mit the utzing, and
> being such a nudnick; that way we will all be a little less ferklempt at
> how
> farbisine und farblondzhet you appear to be.

I don't speak this particular foreign tongue, perhaps someday you
could translate it into a European language for me. Thanks.


>
> OK, so it's not perfect. So sue me.


Sorry no lawyers in the family.


>
>
> Geoff.
> _______________________
>
> Geoffrey J. Transom
> Centre of Policy Studies
> Monash University
> AUSTRALIA
> _______________________
>
>
>

Fraternally Yours,

St. John the Sublime Reformer

sfx66

unread,
Sep 28, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/28/99
to
And I might add don't be such a bulvon, and quit acting like a zhlub.
Jackie

Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS] <Geoffrey...@BusEco.Monash.edu.au> wrote in
message news:7spkar$jjt$1...@towncrier.cc.monash.edu.au...

> Hiya St John
>
>
> At the risk of sounding racist (who - ME?) I would simply observe what was
> said by a character in the 'South park' movie:
>
> "You Canadians - you're all the same, with your beady eyes and your
flapping
> heads..."
>
>
> We here in Australia have a proud heritage of kow-towing to interest
groups,

> and particularly of importing American socialist/sociologist-isms, e.g.,

> 'dark purple' feminism, a culture of apologism by the Anglo-Saxon middle
> class (especially heterosexual males). I am sure I speak for every 'right


> minded' member of Australian society when I say this. (Of course I would
not
> pretend to do so - but that is the language that the apology industry
uses).
>

> Your point on the origin of the word 'Semite' is well taken, St John


(note -
> the contractions St, Mr and Dr have no full-stop; your 'free' Canadian
> system did not prevent you from bastardising grammar like an American).
>

> I might also disagree with the application of 'Semite' and 'Semitic'
solely
> to the Jewish community, however that is not the fault of the Jewish
> community - the terms were ascribed to Jewry by external agencies.
>

> The fact that the terms have found common usage stems largely from the
fact
> that most people I know feel uncomfortable calling anyone a 'Jew' (however
I

> am allowed to say it, so there). Just like you have to euphemise 'Black'


to
> 'African American', and 'lesbian' to 'woman in comfortable footwear'. My
> opinion is that the word (in the mouths of Gentiles) carried as much
> vituperation as the word 'nigger' - possibly more - and I'm not anybody's
> victim, I can assure you. Think 'Spain in the late 15th century', for
> example.
>

> Also, 'gentile' does NOT stem from a word which means 'non-believer'. It
> stems from the Latin 'gentilis', the common usage of which denoted

> 'non-Roman', 'foreigner'. It was your 'Early Fathers' who translated goyim


> as 'gentes' and then used 'gente' to denote non-Christian. non-Jewish
folk;
> the rest is your history, not mine....
>

> Goyim means 'nations', and is taken to include all men who are not a party
> to the Covenant with Avram. If that includes you, too bad.
>

> And lo, the Talmud is racist - so is the Bible (the Old Testament in

> particular - an interesting work, if rather derivative). You banning that


in
> Canada too? Maybe we could have a git-together, and set fire to anything
> which might be considered a bit too racey. A good ol' book burnin'; I
would
> have thought you were a bit too far North to be thus inclined.
>

> As you Canadians say, You aaaaht to git ooot more. (Apologies to my
Canadian
> chums, particularly Rob and Andrea Waschik - Shalom if you're reading,
Rob).
>

> Genuck already. Here's the handl, St John - you stop mit the utzing, and
> being such a nudnick; that way we will all be a little less ferklempt at
how
> farbisine und farblondzhet you appear to be.
>

> OK, so it's not perfect. So sue me.
>
>

Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS]

unread,
Sep 29, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/29/99
to
Morning folks.

St John is too dumb to warrant such impassioned response - he is almost
certainly anti-Jewish, and likely a bigot also, but he is in no wise capable
of inflaming the popular imagination. He is not worth ulcerating over.

I used to get hot under the collar when responding to people who tried to
give a veneer of intellectualism to their anti-Jewish propaganda - now I
just make fun of them, and throw in the odd incendiary remark about anything
that I infer about their prejudices (e.g., Kansan's declared Biblical
Literalist stance is a source of much mirth - I commend Exodus 15:3 to his
nimble senses; "The Lord is a MAN of WAR; The Lord is his name." hmmmm. God
is a man - apparently not even divine!).

My change in attitude came from an acceptance that racism/sectarianism is
not a Gentile->Jew thing, or a phenomenon restricted solely to morons of
whatever creed; it is a human thing. Folks hate folks; lower class whites
who have failed to climb social and economic ladders might have a special
deep hate for the 'darkie' whose progress since Emancipation has been a
model of human achievement in the face of grudging acceptance (until they
developed their 'victim' industry and started saying arrant nonsense like
'Tutankhamen was a negroid'...). But the 'white trash' hatred for their
tawnier brethren is only subtly deeper than their hatred for their caucasian
economic and social betters.

I think that American Jews get the slightest anti-Semitism (in its modern
accepted usage, i.e., anti-Jewishness) imaginable; think back to the 19th
and early 20th century on the Continent - the Dreyfus case, the hysteria
stirred up by the 'Protocols', and eventually, National Socialism in
Germany. The ghettos in Warsaw predated German occupation, and in Austria
they ('Christians') STILL parade the mummified corpse of a four year old boy
whose blood was allegedly drunk by Jews in the 15th century! At least there
is not a national newspaper in the U.S. called "l'Anti-Juif", like there was
in Paris at the turn of the century.

American Jews can wear a yarmulke without getting looked at funny - most
Australian Jews don't wear them (and for some - who annoy the hell out of
me - a baseball cap worn backwards is a suitable substitute).

But back to my central proposition - that sectarianism exists everywhere
(even WITHIN communities - "I am more pious than you..."). Hasidim and
Lubavitchim might not HATE secular Jews, but they sure as hell don't LIKE
them. And the death of Yitzak Rabin shows that sectarian violence is not out
of the question.

Everyone chooses a set of people to which they belong (which I call 'me'),
and everyone else can go to hell - the question becomes one of how large the
set 'me' is. In the limiting case, where survival is threatened, 'me' does
not include all offspring - and certainly does not include anyone outside
the immediate family unit. It may even get to the point (e.g., famine which
is understood to be temporary) where one would devour one's own spouse IF it
would prolong life sufficiently until the ability to glean sufficient
nutrition from the environment returned. Economic prosperity reduces the
relative price of compassion, and so if things are going well, we can all
afford to be progressively nicer to one another. But as a wise man once
said, we are only ever three meals away from revolution.

The counterpoint on 'racism' in the Talmud is taken - it is likely that the
ethnicity of the people mentioned is the same as that of the authors. Ditto
for the Old Testament story of the genocide (or at the very least 'ethnic
cleansing') of the Hivite, the Jebusite, the Perizzite, the Amorite, the
Canaanite by God's hornet stormtroopers; they are all descended from Canaan,
after all.

This thread is good fun - even if the 'Christian' anti-Masonic contributors
have by and large been flaunting their lack of understanding of both the
tenets of the religion to which they purport to subscribe, and of the
'conflict' between those tenets and Freemasonic principles.

I must get back to work now.... Cheers,

Geoff.

Geoffrey J. Transom
MM, St Clair Lodge #43, UGL of Victoria, Australia
EMM, Public Schools RA Chapter #66, Victoria, Australia
MMM, Naval and Military Mark Lodge #57, Victoria, Australia (as of last
night - what fun it was!!)

Quote of the Day (from Lionel Boxer, a fellow who has been twisting peoples'
arms to join the Ark Mariners) comes from the South last night during a
raffle:

"It's a Green ticket - D 45. Congratulations Brother - your prize is that
you have to join Ark Mariners... ".

Ed King

unread,
Sep 29, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/29/99
to
In article <7srqf5$q2s$1...@towncrier.cc.monash.edu.au>, Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS] wrote:

> Morning folks.
>
> St John is too dumb to warrant such impassioned response -

On the other hand, there are those who watch to see what's said in
response. If we allow the hatred and racism to go unchallenged, it's
entirely possible that lurkers might conclude that it's acceptable
to Freemasons.

And it's quite humorous that he seems to think you're his 'soul mate'
in reading his response to your earlier post! <BWG>

> he is almost certainly anti-Jewish, and likely a bigot also,

I note he's totally ignored the question of his own heritage as he
attempts to show how pure Canada should be kept.

> but he is in no wise capable of inflaming the popular imagination.

He proudly declared that Freemasonry was dead last summer; Freemasonry,
notwithstanding, continues. I suspect that his little efforts towards
immigration will meet with similar success.

Curious too that - for all of his posturing about his 'native land' -
that he fails to note how many Prime Ministers of his proud country were
.... TA DA..... FREEMASONS!!!!!!!!!! That must keep the poor boy up
at night, eh? Things were SO much better back then than now - back then
when the Masons ran his country! <chuckle>

> He is not worth ulcerating over.

Oh, I don't think anyone does. It's just that there's SO much filth around
after his barfing that it's difficult to deal with....



> I used to get hot under the collar when responding to people who tried to
> give a veneer of intellectualism to their anti-Jewish propaganda - now I
> just make fun of them, and throw in the odd incendiary remark about anything
> that I infer about their prejudices (e.g., Kansan's declared Biblical
> Literalist stance is a source of much mirth - I commend Exodus 15:3 to his
> nimble senses; "The Lord is a MAN of WAR; The Lord is his name." hmmmm. God
> is a man - apparently not even divine!).

He really does have a burr under his blanket about the B'nai B'rith, doesn't
he? Wonder if he wanted *them* to support some cause of his as well....

> My change in attitude came from an acceptance that racism/sectarianism is
> not a Gentile->Jew thing, or a phenomenon restricted solely to morons of
> whatever creed; it is a human thing. Folks hate folks; lower class whites
> who have failed to climb social and economic ladders might have a special
> deep hate for the 'darkie' whose progress since Emancipation has been a
> model of human achievement in the face of grudging acceptance (until they
> developed their 'victim' industry and started saying arrant nonsense like
> 'Tutankhamen was a negroid'...). But the 'white trash' hatred for their
> tawnier brethren is only subtly deeper than their hatred for their caucasian
> economic and social betters.

Class warfare is certainly alive and well in some places. It seems it's VERY
alive in a certain section of British Columbia.... Gotta keep those Asians
and others in their place.



> I think that American Jews get the slightest anti-Semitism (in its modern
> accepted usage, i.e., anti-Jewishness) imaginable; think back to the 19th
> and early 20th century on the Continent - the Dreyfus case, the hysteria
> stirred up by the 'Protocols', and eventually, National Socialism in
> Germany. The ghettos in Warsaw predated German occupation, and in Austria
> they ('Christians') STILL parade the mummified corpse of a four year old boy
> whose blood was allegedly drunk by Jews in the 15th century! At least there
> is not a national newspaper in the U.S. called "l'Anti-Juif", like there was
> in Paris at the turn of the century.

Interesting Public Broadcasting Service program on Pope Paul II which has some
very harsh statements about this sort of thing. If you ever get a chance to
catch it there, do!



> American Jews can wear a yarmulke without getting looked at funny - most
> Australian Jews don't wear them (and for some - who annoy the hell out of
> me - a baseball cap worn backwards is a suitable substitute).

Interesting. I see there's a pretty active "Christian" fundamentalist crowd
there too....

<snip of balance of comments; well stated things to think about>

Fraternally,
Ed King
who was once mentioned in the HMAS Hobart Newsletter! <g>

Jouni Hiltunen

unread,
Sep 29, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/29/99
to

Ed King wrote:

> In article <7srqf5$q2s$1...@towncrier.cc.monash.edu.au>, Geoffrey J. Transom [COPS] wrote:
>
> > he is almost certainly anti-Jewish, and likely a bigot also,
>
> I note he's totally ignored the question of his own heritage as he
> attempts to show how pure Canada should be kept.

You know, Torquemada, Richard Heydrich and even old Adi Hitler himself were partly jewish.
It seems that most raving bigots have somewhat errrm.. "contaminated bloodlines" if the
jewis participants of this NG excuse me for using that expression. Could it be?....

--
Jouni Hiltunen
==============
Member of Dogberts New Ruling Class, once he conquers this planet
we'll make the rest of you our domestic servants.

Dr. Roger M. Firestone

unread,
Sep 29, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/29/99
to
>It seems to me they are the ones CONSTANTLY throwing the term
>around which was likely picked up by the dictionaries.

And your proof of this would be? As I pointed out, the term
"anti-Semitism" dates from 1882 at least. There being no particular
number of Jewish organizations other than synagogues around, and the
Jewish population in English-speaking countries being then quite small
(the immigration from Eastern Europe having not yet begun), exactly
_who_ was "constantly throwing the term around?"

>You noticed Firestone tried to say that Palestinians and Arabs only
>SPOKE a semitic tongue, implying they were not semites at all.

On the contrary. I pointed out that the definition of Semite (which
takes a capital letter, you ignoramus) is, for modern times, someone who
is a native speaker of a Semitic language. Since the Arabs (which
includes the Palestinians, you ignoramus) speak Arabic, that makes them
Semites.

>You see it is a clever way of shutting up debate on a topic much
>like calling someone racist. If they said the person was anti-Jewish
>or anti-Jew they would have to provide a little more detail but
>with the use of the magic "anti-semite" debate and discussion
>is curtailed completely as everyone else simply has to take
>their word for it, because "they should know".

What is a Semite? According to the dictionary, it is either one of the
ancient peoples of the Middle East (the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews,
etc.) or their descendants (aren't any of those left, identifiably), or
someone who speaks a Semitic language (Arabic, Hebrew, etc.)

Semitism, according to the dictionary, is either the study of Semitic
languages and the people who speak them, or (second definition) the
Judaism and Jewry.

Anti-Semitism has only one definition: prejudice or bias against and
opposition to Judaism and the Jewish people. I really can't imagine
what anti-Semites think they are accomplishing by complaining that they
aren't "anti-Semites" because they aren't bigoted about Arabs. We know
what they are; everyone knows what they are; they don't generally deny
what they are (although of course, our local mad-dog anti-Jewish bigot
claims he's only against "foreign" influence in Canadian affairs...as if
Jews were puppets of the state of Israel--does anyone remember how
frustrated many American Jews were when Likud was the governing party in
Israel?--and as if there were no such thing as anti-Semitism [pardon me,
mad-dog anti-Jewish bigotry] before the founding of the modern state of
Israel to create "foreign" influence).

There is no need to provide any more detail when we call you a mad-dog
anti-Jewish bigot than when we call you an anti-Semite. There is
nothing to "debate." There is nothing to discuss. You have nothing to
offer except mad-dog bigotry and hatred. Oh, yes, and lies. Decent
people don't "debate" or "discuss" things with sewer-dwellers like you;
they just keep pressing the flush lever until you aren't around any
more.

j Dolan

unread,
Sep 29, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/29/99
to
St. John the Sublime Reformer wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dr. Roger M. Firestone <rf...@chele.cais.net>
> Newsgroups:
> alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
> christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
> art-bell
> Sent: September 27, 1999 7:41 AM
> Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity
>
> > >I never once brought up anything about Jewish People and anyways the
> > >label anti-semite is a complete swindle as Palestinians and other Arabs
> > >are Semites too - as you are fully aware of.
> > >
> > >Just shows how much of a liar you really are.
> >
> > The term "anti-Semite" has the specific dictionary definition of being
> > prejudiced against Jews and the Jewish religion.
>
> Dictionary definition perhaps but dictionaries mearly reflect words that
> have been in common usuage for some time. ......

--> Bigotry excluded

Why don't you look up the word 'dictionary' in your dictionary?
My goodness, you have to contort language to support your hatred, don't you?

jim MM
White River #90
Bethel, Vt.

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Roger M. Firestone <rf...@chele.cais.net>
Newsgroups:
alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
art-bell
Sent: September 29, 1999 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity

> >It seems to me they are the ones CONSTANTLY throwing the term
> >around which was likely picked up by the dictionaries.
>

> And your proof of this would be


Duh.

> >You noticed Firestone tried to say that Palestinians and Arabs only
> >SPOKE a semitic tongue, implying they were not semites at all.
>

> On the contrary. I pointed out that the definition of Semite (which
> takes a capital letter, you ignoramus) is, for modern times, someone who
> is a native speaker of a Semitic language.

Nope you just said semites where people who spoke a semitic tongue.


Since the Arabs (which
> includes the Palestinians, you ignoramus) speak Arabic, that makes them
> Semites.


Nope, you didn't say that. You just said semites are people who speak
a semitic tongue. You didn't say anything about Arabs/Palestinians
being ethnically semitic.

Stop lying Dr. Firestone.


>
> >You see it is a clever way of shutting up debate on a topic much
> >like calling someone racist. If they said the person was anti-Jewish
> >or anti-Jew they would have to provide a little more detail but
> >with the use of the magic "anti-semite" debate and discussion
> >is curtailed completely as everyone else simply has to take
> >their word for it, because "they should know".
>

> What is a Semite? According to the dictionary, it is either one of the
> ancient peoples of the Middle East (the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews,
> etc.) or their descendants (aren't any of those left, identifiably), or
> someone who speaks a Semitic language (Arabic, Hebrew, etc.)


No the dictionary doesn't say that at all Dr. Firestone. A Semite
is someone who is a member of an ethnically Semitic Nationality,
it is not someone who speaks a Semitic Tongue. If that were
the case any Scotsman who studies Hebrew Linguistics would
suddenly classify as Semites using your foolish and slippery
logic.

Quite simply you lied and tried to imply that Palestinians only
spoke a Semitic tongue and were not semitic themselves so
you could preserve the use of the Stalinist libel of Anti-Semite
for your own special interest groups agenda.


>
> Semitism, according to the dictionary, is either the study of Semitic
> languages and the people who speak them, or (second definition) the
> Judaism and Jewry.


Nonsense again Dr. SpinMeister.

There are several ethnic groups on the planet, Hametic, Semitic, etc.

So now someone who merely studies a language spoken by Semitic
peoples is a Semite ?

Your hopeless.


>
> Anti-Semitism has only one definition:


According to Jewish Chauvenist Extremists like yourself.


prejudice or bias against and
> opposition to Judaism and the Jewish people.


The opposite of light is dark, the opposite of up is down.

If Semites are anyone belonging to a Semitic ethnicity then
an anti-semite HAS to be someone who is against someone
of the Semitic ethnicity.

If Palestines are Semitic then they can not be anti-semitic, period.

If a Palestinian didn't like Jews very much then he would be simply
anti-Jew or anti-Jewish, he could NEVER be anti-semitic or an
anti-semite.

In the same vein if a person was against all Semitic peoples,
Jews, Palestinians, Syrians etc AND he/she WAS NOT a
semitic person themselves then indeed he/she would be an
anti-semite. On the other hand if that non-semitic person
was only against Jews and not Palestinians, Syrians etc
that person would simply be anti-Jewish, he/she COULD NOT
be an ant-semite, period.


a I really can't imagine


> what anti-Semites think they are accomplishing by complaining that they
> aren't "anti-Semites" because they aren't bigoted about Arabs.


Trying to correct some historical wrongs, which Jewish Chauvenists
clearly are not interested in correcting themselves because it serves
their own agenda.


We know
> what they are; everyone knows what they are; they don't generally deny
> what they are (although of course, our local mad-dog anti-Jewish bigot
> claims he's only against "foreign" influence in Canadian affairs...as if
> Jews were puppets of the state of Israel--


What is the name of that fellow doing 50 years in the slammer in
the U.S. for selling state secrets to Isreal from his job at the C.I.A.
which according to the U.S. Government caused irreperable
harm to American National Security ? Walker wasn't it ? I think
he rationized his treason by saying that as a Jew he was only
protecting Jewish interests, something Jewish Groups such
as Brnai Brith are also claiming in their bid to get Walker released
back into the custody of Mossad and Isreal.

The modern day version of the Rosenberg Case it would seem,
you remember them too Firestone, don't you ?


does anyone remember how
> frustrated many American Jews were when Likud was the governing party in
> Israel?--and as if there were no such thing as anti-Semitism [pardon me,
> mad-dog anti-Jewish bigotry] before the founding of the modern state of
> Israel to create "foreign" influence).


No I don't remember that.

Do you remember the one where the head of a Jewish Party in
Isreal a Rabbi something or other said Arabs are dogs and have
no right to life ?


>
> There is no need to provide any more detail when we call you a mad-dog
> anti-Jewish bigot than when we call you an anti-Semite.


By "we" I assume you are referring to youself and other Jewish Chauvenist
Extremists who are continually brow beating the "Goyim" into
submission by their never ending guilt trip.

He who controls the present controls the past, and he who controls the
past controls the future seems to be the title of your agenda.


There is
> nothing to "debate."


Dr. Roger M. Firestone, totalitarian.


There is nothing to discuss.


Dr. Roger M. Firestone, Stalinist.


You have nothing to
> offer except mad-dog bigotry and hatred.


Anyone who disagrees with radical Jewish Chauvinists
is a "mad-dog bigot".

Should normal people really care what the same narrow
segment of Jewish people say, the very same segment
which inflicted such suffering on humanity via their
ideological "thinking" and creations - Marxism, Leninism,
Stalinism, Communism, & Politically Correctism ?

I ask you ?


> Oh, yes, and lies.


Yes, lies.


Decent
> people don't "debate" or "discuss" things with sewer-dwellers like you;
> they just keep pressing the flush lever until you aren't around any
> more.


Yes, you certainly do have a strange concept of decent people - Beria,
Engels,
Marx, Trotsky, etc, etc.


> Roger M. Firestone, 32 KCCH


Roger M. Firestone, Stalinist

Roger M. Firestone, UnAmerican

Roger M. Firestone, AntiChristian

Roger M. Firestone, Subversive

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: SClarke505 <sclar...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
Sent: September 30, 1999 6:26 AM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity


> Psssst! Psssst! Shhhhh. St. John, keep it low, just between you and me
while no
> one else is listening. I am looking at a "Websters Desk Dictionary" under
the
> hyphenated word "anti-Semite" it reads......"a person who is hostile to
Jews".


I realize that but I *and others* do not accept that definition.

The reason for not accepting it as I stated is that by and large
dictionaries
mearly reflect words that are in common usuage.

In the case of the term anti-semite the reason that it is in usuage is
because that Jewish People are using it to describe persons who
may at times get in a discourse that could portray the actions
of Jews in a somewhat less than flattering light.

I simply do not accept the term as applying to someone because:

1. It is thrown around too loosely.

2. The term does not clarify but obscures.

3. As Jewish people are only one of many groups who are
of Semitic Origin they can not claim the entire monicker of
Semite soley for themselves.

4. Palestinians, Syrians, and many others are Semites, they
can NEVER be anti-semitic or anti-semites, it is a logical
impossibility - period.

5. If a semitic person had a problem with Jews in General,
that is a blanket generalizaton, a blanket condemnation,
that individual would still only be anti-Jewish or anti-Jew.

6. If a non-semitic person had a problem with Jews in General,
that is a blanket generalization, a blanket condemnation and
NOT did not hold similar views for other Semitic groups
such as Palestinians etc that person would NOT be a
Anti-Semite, merely anti-jewish or anti-jew.

7. If you are trying to make your point by quoting a Dictionary
which merely took the predominant usuage of the phrase,
a phrase which is used predominately by Jews against their
opponents or those they simply want to silence you might
as well take the say-so of the vitriolicaly racist and quite
frankly anti-human Talmud which says among other things
that only Jews are human, all Christians should be
exterminated, It is acceptable for a Jew to defraud a
Christian etc, etc. as Jews and especially Rabbi's consider
the Talmud takes precedence only not over dictionaries but
the Torah as well (Old Testament).


> There is no other interpretation given, that's it, only one, uno. Between
you
> and me now, is it just possible that the good Dr. Firestone is right?


He said among other things that Palestinians and all Arabs only spoke a
Semitic language they weren't actually Semites.

As I said he or you could state that the definition in this or that
dictionary
said anti-semite said such but that would not change my view that
it is an unfair term for the reasons I stated. Dictionaries change with
times as words and phrases go in and out of usuage. There is no
logic to a phrase that denies most Semitic peoples the defacto
right to be called Semites. It is a logical impossiblity for a Semitic
person to be an anti-semite for merely holding views against only
one of the Semitic sub groups. A semite can never be a anti-semite.

Your
> argument with him is starting to look like David and Goliath except this
time
> the giant is the good guy and crushes the little guy under his foot.


You think a Stalinist like Firestone is a good guy ?

So you are agreeing with the logic that Palestinians who are Semites
who actively oppose Jewish occupation of their land and make
nasty generalizations about Jews *much worse than I have said* are
Anti-Semites themselves ? How can Palestinians who are Semites,
be Anti-Semite ? Is this same definition of Anti-Semite appearing
in Semite dictionaries keeping in mind most Semites are Arabs ?

Oh I live
> happy endings. Speaking of happy endings, I was wondering, how is your
in-depth
> research coming on that 1944 New York Times article.


1. There is no "in-depth" search.

2. I did not make up, lie, forge any article in the New York times in 1944.

3. I said that I read an article/announcement in the 1944 New York Times
around the
time of the D-Day Landings that appeared beneath some other announcement
by the Grand Lodge of New York regarding there withdrawal of recognition of
the KKK as an appendant body of Masonry AND I DID READ SUCH AN ARTICLE.

4. After being challenged on the point by "Ed King" who said he THOROUGHLY
went through the NYT for the month of June 44 and found only one article
about
the KKK regarding an upsurge of activity in Indiana, and only ONE article
about Freemasonry regarding meeting of the Knights Templar at the Waldorf
Astoria he promptly declared me a liar etc, etc.

5. I then went to my local library to try and relocate the article, an
article I said
I had read a couple of years previously when looking for some original
D-Day maps etc and found reams and reams of articles about the KKK and
Freemasonry in the June 1944 NYT - articles that "Ed King" said did not
exist.

6. I read those supplemental articles for the first time one of which
included
a list of all the appoinments by the new Grand Master for the State of NY
something "Ed King" said was an impossibility in the month of June because
the announcement would have taken place in May, and a very large series
of articles that included the announcment that the KKK was disbanding -
which "Ed King" also said did not exist. Both of these major articles were
on June 5th a date "King" repeatedly stated he went though very thoroughly
which he used for his justification *to this date* to label me a liar and
which
all of the Masonic Parrots in this N.G. have repeated ad-naseum

7. It is evident that if "Ed King" said he went through the NYT for June and
especially around D-Day ( scheduled for the 5th, occured on 6th) and
he missed the large articles about the KKK disbanding and the appointments
by the new G.L. G.M. of NY he plainly could not have gone through the
paper thoroughly, and his claims that because of this thoroughness I was
therefore lieing are meaningless.

8. The additional articles that I read about the KKK and the Gl of NY
was not the article that I said I had saw, however it certainly does
reinforce my statement that I did in fact see the one about the KKK
being de-recognized by the Gl of NY - it is simply too much of a
coincidence to think otherwise.

9. The article exists, I haven't been back to go through the NYT again,
I know I read the article because it shocked me deeply when I read it.
If someone in the NY area could contact the NYT archive service and
ask them to do a search for 1944 "around" D-Day on the keywords of
KKK, or Masonry, or GL of NY etc they will DEFIDENTLY find the
article. I say around D-Day because I can't be more exact than that
as I was interested in WW 2 and not this subject matter.

10. I have a sneaking suspicion that "Ed King" did find the article but
won't admit it because I showed that he lied about his statement of
going through the NYT around D-day "thoroughly". Also as this
is a rather explosive topic I feel that if there are some GL officials
around who are aware of it (which is not likely as it happend 55 years
ago) they would likely suppress the information to not cause embarassment
in these politically correct or Stalinist times.

11. If the matter is so important to Freemasons in this n.g. then they
should
try and find it instead of taking a questionable figure like "Ed Kings" word
for it. If they used the NYT archive service instead of going cross-eyed
reading a microfiche record it would entail very little expenditure of time.

Fraternally Yours,

St. John the Sublime Reformer
A Certain Point Within A Circle
Masonic Historian

Masonicinfo.com - AntiMasonry Points of View
JFK'S MURDERER'S
http://www.crocker.com/~acacia/article.html

Lafayettes Surprise - The Pentagram of Washington D.C.
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/chapter3/chapter3.htm

The Catholic Encyclopedia - FreeMasonry
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09771a.htm

ManitobaGL.ca- Kabbalism & MAHABONE
Http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/3164/index.htm

====================================================
St. John the Sublime Reformer's logic is a peculiar form of morality,
veiled in allegory, and illustrated by symbols. It is based on his three
grand principles - brotherly love, relief, and truth. So mote it be.


> Fraternally,
>
> V.'.W.'.Sam Schwarzman, PM
>
> Guiding Light/Olympia F&AM #808
> South Bay F&AM #1145
> Freeport LI Chapter # 302 RAM
> Holy Land Chapter #8 RAM (Israel)
> Mort Weitman Post # 50 Masonic War Vets
> 1st Nassau Dist., AGL
> GLNY


St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Marty Brockman <mar...@fruitman.on.ca>
Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
Sent: September 30, 1999 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity


>
>
> "St. John the Sublime Reformer" wrote:
>
> > 9. The article exists, I haven't been back to go through the NYT again,
> > I know I read the article because it shocked me deeply when I read it.
> > If someone in the NY area could contact the NYT archive service and
> > ask them to do a search for 1944 "around" D-Day on the keywords of
> > KKK, or Masonry, or GL of NY etc they will DEFIDENTLY find the
> > article. I say around D-Day because I can't be more exact than that
> > as I was interested in WW 2 and not this subject matter.
> >

> If as you say the article exists, why then didn's your photocopy the
> article and print it here on this NG. ???????

It was a few years ago, before I started looking into Freemasonry.


Why is it none of you Freemasons have taken "Ed King" to task
for lieing when he said he thoroughly went through the June 1944
NYT especially around D-Day ?

You know that was a lie because he "missed" the two large
articles on June 5th one on the KKK disbanding as a National
Body to avoid turning it's membership lists over to the Roosevelt
Administration controlled IRS after a ruling by the Supreme Court
denying them Charitable Status and the other on the new GL
of NY GM a Supreme Court Justice heavily involved in the
Roosevelt Administratiions attack on the KKK's list of appointments ?

I guess that "cable tow" of yours prevents you from criticizing a
"brother" Mason - at least that is what your oaths say, unless that
Mason criticized Freemasonry of course then it's no holds barred.

Dr. Roger M. Firestone

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
The mad-dog anti-Jewish bigot wrote:

>In the same vein if a person was against all Semitic peoples,
>Jews, Palestinians, Syrians etc AND he/she WAS NOT a
>semitic person themselves then indeed he/she would be an
>anti-semite. On the other hand if that non-semitic person
>was only against Jews and not Palestinians, Syrians etc
>that person would simply be anti-Jewish, he/she COULD NOT
>be an ant-semite, period.

Except for the fact that "anti-Semite" means "anti-Jewish." It has no
other meaning. There is no point to arguing who is a Semite or that
various Arabs are Semites or whatever. That is not relevant to what the
word means. At least to everyone in the world but neo-Nazis, who share
with the Communists a fondness for distorting language to obscure their
meanings and deceive the unwary.

As for my supposedly "lying" about what a Semite is, obviously
syllogistic reasoning or _modus ponens_ is beyond the intelligence of
the Sublime Nazi (well, no one would be a Nazi if he had any
intelligence, would he?). Let's put it in simple terms:

1. Semites are people who speak a Semitic language.
2. Arabs speak a Semitic language.
3. Ergo, Arabs are a Semitic people.

I'm not sure where the "lie" is there. Maybe in the Fuehrer's
Dictionary that the Sublime Nazi uses...

> Decent
>> people don't "debate" or "discuss" things with sewer-dwellers like
>you;
>> they just keep pressing the flush lever until you aren't around any
>> more.
>
>
>Yes, you certainly do have a strange concept of decent people - Beria,
>Engels,
>Marx, Trotsky, etc, etc.
>
>
>> Roger M. Firestone, 32 KCCH
>
>
>Roger M. Firestone, Stalinist

Anyone who knows _anything_ about my politics would have a hearty laugh
at the notion of linking me with Stalin, Engels, Marx, Trotsky, and
other Communists. For St. John the Sublime Nazi to do so is a typical
mad-dog lie of his. He simply makes these things up. Anyone can go
back over my entire message database and note that I have never written
a single word complimentary of Beria, Engels, Marx, Trotsky, or Stalin.
Indeed, I have never mentioned most of them in this newsgroup, ever.

He would like to suppose that I would defend the Rosenbergs or Pollard
(not Walker, you illiterate buffoon) because they are Jewish. Of
course, anyone who has actually _read_ anything I have written about the
Rosenbergs or Pollard--and I haven't been shy about that, although it
has not appeared on _this_ newsgroup--would know that I believe that
these traitors got what was coming to them...although maybe the evidence
indicates that Ethel Rosenberg should have been given a life sentence
instead of execution, since apparently she was not a fully active member
of the conspiracy. The Sublime neo-Nazi just makes things up. Over and
over again.

>Roger M. Firestone, UnAmerican

As for my being unAmerican, well, that depends on your definition of
"unAmerican." I think most of us Americans would prefer not to have
that definition coming from a Canadian neo-Nazi, though. Some people do
define "American" as being white Anglo-Saxon Protestant (and not just
any Protestant denomination will do). I can't find that definition in
the law or other traditional documents. The American franchise was once
limited to male property-owners, but that's about it. The Constitution
explicitly prohibits any religious test from being used for
qualification to hold office in the United States, while the First
Amendment to it protects free exercise of religion. So there goes that
"Protestant" thing. The Constitution nowhere mentions race (it doesn't
even mention slavery--the phrase used was "importation of certain
persons" of no specific race). So I guess "white" isn't part of the
definition of "American." And lots of people of French and Portuguese
extraction in New England would have kind of raised a fuss if there had
been any kind of limitation of "American" to mean "Anglo-Saxon descent"
at the time the Constitution was adopted. So there goes that
qualification. Guess I'm an American after all. Perhaps the Sublime
neo-Nazi can tell us what _he_ means by "unAmerican?" (I think we know;
it doesn't include Jews, or Muslims, or any "foreign" religions. BTW,
Catholics and Mormons, you're next...)

>Roger M. Firestone, AntiChristian

As for "AntiChristian," well, I'm a _non_-Christian. Some Christians
think those are synonymous. Perhaps it's anti-Christian to expose the
hypocrisy of someone calling himself a "Christian," but being in fact so
full of hatred that Jesus wouldn't recognize him as a follower. Deal
with it.

>Roger M. Firestone, Subversive

And I'd kind of like to know who I am supposed to be subverting, if I am
"subversive." I guess the Sublime neo-Nazi thinks it's "subversive" to
use the word anti-Semite with its dictionary definition, rather than to
mean "anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian." Those poor Arabs over there in
the Middle East. And North Africa. Hundreds of millions of them,
sitting on top of all the oil in the world, in a dozen independent
countries. All being persecuted by the 12 million Jews scattered
throughout the world, insisting that "anti-Semitism" means only bias
against the Jews. Boy, the Arabs sure suffer from that. It couldn't be
the long history of Arab dictatorships, the internecine warfare, the
political intrigue, the suppression of free thought by clerical
fascists, and all the other follies that have held back people in every
ethnic group and every part of the world where such conditions persist
that is the cause of their misfortune. No, if there were no state of
Israel--a few hundred square miles--there would be such prosperity as
has never been known in the Arab world. Sell me a bridge.

Dr. Roger M. Firestone

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
The Sublime neo-Nazi wrote:

>...you might as well take the say-so of the vitriolicaly racist and


>quite frankly anti-human Talmud which says among other things that only
>Jews are human, all Christians should be exterminated, It is acceptable
>for a Jew to defraud a Christian etc, etc. as Jews and especially
>Rabbi's consider the Talmud takes precedence only not over dictionaries
>but the Torah as well (Old Testament).

Actually, you show complete ignorance of the Talmud. Obviously, your
neo-Nazi hate-group friends have provided you with a few quotations out
of context (the context is some 30,000 pages--how much of it have you
read?) that purport to show what you claim.

1. The Talmud is a book of interpretation, primarily legalistic. Like
US Supreme Court reports, it contains both majority and minority
opinions. Both sides of an issue are reported. Which side
prevailed is not always clear from the direct material. One must
also read Rashi and the other commentators.

E.g. a passage could conceivably read: Is it permissible to do
thus-and-so. Rabbi A, son of B, says it is. Rabbi C, son of D,
says it is not. Rabbi E, son of F, explains, citing the passage X.

OK, which is it? Permissible or not? I have omitted the marginalia
and commentary.

2. The Talmud does _not_ "take precedence" over the Torah. It is an
explanation of the laws of the Torah and a book of further law
itself. The Torah is the equivalent of the US Constitution and
Federal Code; the Talmud is the body of judicial decisions based on
that.

3. The Talmud is not racist, since no races are mentioned in it.

4. Perhaps you can quote the exact tractate and reference page in which
it is stated that only Jews are human, or where it is said that the
extermination of all Christians is permissible? There is a uniform
citation method for the Talmud, so you must be able to give the
citations if you claim these portions exist. Or were they printed
in the 1944 June New York Times?

5. Yeah, there are some bitter remarks in the Talmud about non-Jewish
groups, specifically the Roman government around the first and
second century. They weren't Christian then. In fact, they were
busy persecuting both Christians and Jews. There was a good bit of
anti-Roman sentiment in early Christian thought; it got cleaned out
when the Romans started adopting Christianity, but scholars can
still point to it. I mean, wasn't it a Roman legionary who stuck a
lance into Jesus while he was on the cross? And didn't another give
Jesus a vinegar-soaked sponge to drink from? Nice guys, eh? And
you feel that the Talmud was kind of hard on them, though?

6. The Torah is not the "Old Testament." The Torah is the first five
books of the Jewish Scriptures, which comprise 39 books in total.
The "Old Testament" is the Christian re-ordering of the books in the
Jewish Scriptures, setting them in some (mistaken) historical
sequence, rather than grouping them into the Law, Prophets, and
Writings as was originally done. Something to do with ignorant and
arrogant mediaeval scholars.

7. It seems completely to escape you that the Jewish religion is far
from homogeneous, but is composed of four main divisions, of which
three pay only limited attention to the Talmud. The largest branch,
Reform Judaism, seldom mentions any part of it but Pirke Avot
(Ethics of the Fathers), which are brief philosophical homilies and
one of the few parts of the Talmud accessible to the casual reader.
The Talmud has only the most minimal impact on Judaism as it is
practiced by the majority of Jews today. Your notion that Jews are
taught by their religion to practice hatred is but a strawman, set
up to justify your practice of bigotry and endless vilification. If
Jews have learned hatred at all, it is from the behavior of our
enemies, starting with Amalek and running right up to you
present-day Nazis.

Roger M. Firestone, 32 KCCH

PS. Aren't you spending a lot of time posting this? Shouldn't you be
polishing your jackboots for the next inspection by your Fuehrer?

Dr. Roger M. Firestone

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
The Sublime Nazi frothed:

>I had read a couple of years previously when looking for some original
>D-Day maps etc and found reams and reams of articles about the KKK and
>Freemasonry in the June 1944 NYT - articles that "Ed King" said did not
>exist.

Anatomy of a lie: Note the phrase "reams and reams of articles about
the KKK and Freemasonry." This is written to imply that the articles
concerned both the KKK and Freemasonry, which thereby implies a link
between the organizations. But of course, what articles Ed King found
were about one _or_ the other, but not both together. Because, of
course, there _is_ no connection between them...

Glyn Davies

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
Yes we do take them to task but they are more reasonable when they are
questioned about something and admit fault. You on the other hand appear
to have Papal Infallibility.


St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message

news:001101bf0b6c$29261b80$04000005@oemcomputer...


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Marty Brockman <mar...@fruitman.on.ca>
> Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
> Sent: September 30, 1999 11:13 AM
> Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity
>
>
> >
> >
> > "St. John the Sublime Reformer" wrote:
> >
> > > 9. The article exists, I haven't been back to go through the NYT
again,
> > > I know I read the article because it shocked me deeply when I read it.
> > > If someone in the NY area could contact the NYT archive service and
> > > ask them to do a search for 1944 "around" D-Day on the keywords of
> > > KKK, or Masonry, or GL of NY etc they will DEFIDENTLY find the
> > > article. I say around D-Day because I can't be more exact than that
> > > as I was interested in WW 2 and not this subject matter.
> > >

> > If as you say the article exists, why then didn's your photocopy the
> > article and print it here on this NG. ???????
>
>
>
> It was a few years ago, before I started looking into Freemasonry.
>
>
> Why is it none of you Freemasons have taken "Ed King" to task
> for lieing when he said he thoroughly went through the June 1944
> NYT especially around D-Day ?
>
> You know that was a lie because he "missed" the two large
> articles on June 5th one on the KKK disbanding as a National
> Body to avoid turning it's membership lists over to the Roosevelt
> Administration controlled IRS after a ruling by the Supreme Court
> denying them Charitable Status and the other on the new GL
> of NY GM a Supreme Court Justice heavily involved in the
> Roosevelt Administratiions attack on the KKK's list of appointments ?
>
> I guess that "cable tow" of yours prevents you from criticizing a
> "brother" Mason - at least that is what your oaths say, unless that
> Mason criticized Freemasonry of course then it's no holds barred.
>
>
>

Glyn Davies

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to

St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
news:000f01bf0b4f$ed497740$04000005@oemcomputer...

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: SClarke505 <sclar...@aol.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
> Sent: September 30, 1999 6:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity
>
>
> > Psssst! Psssst! Shhhhh. St. John, keep it low, just between you and me
> while no
> > one else is listening. I am looking at a "Websters Desk Dictionary"
under
> the
> > hyphenated word "anti-Semite" it reads......"a person who is hostile to
> Jews".
>
>
> I realize that but I *and others* do not accept that definition.
>
> The reason for not accepting it as I stated is that by and large
> dictionaries
> mearly reflect words that are in common usuage.
>
,snip.

Last week you said that dictionaries did not include words which were in
common usage.

Make up your mind.


joeschmu...@kill.spamford.wallace.now

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 19:55:41 GMT, rf...@chele.cais.net (Dr. Roger M. Firestone)
wrote:

>The Sublime Nazi frothed:


>
>>I had read a couple of years previously when looking for some original
>>D-Day maps etc and found reams and reams of articles about the KKK and
>>Freemasonry in the June 1944 NYT - articles that "Ed King" said did not
>>exist.
>

>Anatomy of a lie: Note the phrase "reams and reams of articles about
>the KKK and Freemasonry." This is written to imply that the articles
>concerned both the KKK and Freemasonry, which thereby implies a link
>between the organizations.

Forgive my ailing memory, but wasn't the article in question alleged to have
been published in the *May* 1944 NYT? And subsequently sliced and diced by the
general populace because D-Day occurred in June? Now he's saying the article
was published in June. How convenient.


-------------------------------------------------+-------------------
"One World; One Web; One Program." -- Microsoft | OS/2 Warp
| Solid like Linux
"Ein Volk; Ein Reich; Ein Fuhrer." -- Hitler | Easy like Windows
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Roger M. Firestone <rf...@chele.cais.net>
Newsgroups:
alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
art-bell
Sent: September 30, 1999 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity


> The Sublime neo-Nazi wrote:
>
> >...you might as well take the say-so of the vitriolicaly racist and


> >quite frankly anti-human Talmud which says among other things that only
> >Jews are human, all Christians should be exterminated, It is acceptable
> >for a Jew to defraud a Christian etc, etc. as Jews and especially
> >Rabbi's consider the Talmud takes precedence only not over dictionaries
> >but the Torah as well (Old Testament).
>

> Actually, you show complete ignorance of the Talmud. Obviously, your
> neo-Nazi hate-group friends have provided you with a few quotations out
> of context (the context is some 30,000 pages--how much of it have you
> read?) that purport to show what you claim.

Exactly what is the context of "Christians Should Be Exterminated",
"Only Jews Are Human", "It is acceptable to lie with your lips if
you are not lieing in your heart", "it is acceptable for a Jew to
Lie to a Christian", "it is acceptable for a Jew to Defraud a
Christian", "Jews should never accept Christian Governance,
they should always work to undermine and destroy it" etc, etc,
etc ?


>
> 1. The Talmud is a book of interpretation, primarily legalistic. Like
> US Supreme Court reports, it contains both majority and minority
> opinions. Both sides of an issue are reported. Which side
> prevailed is not always clear from the direct material. One must
> also read Rashi and the other commentators.

Interpretation ?

What a pathetic answer !!!

>
> E.g. a passage could conceivably read: Is it permissible to do
> thus-and-so. Rabbi A, son of B, says it is. Rabbi C, son of D,
> says it is not. Rabbi E, son of F, explains, citing the passage X.
>
> OK, which is it? Permissible or not? I have omitted the marginalia
> and commentary.

Is this, or is this not the book that all Rabbi's and Students learn from ?

If there was a Christian Priestly Manual which said such things about
the Jews what would Bnai Brith have to say about it ? Probably why
Jews want to keep what their Talmud says about Christians and
others as "quiet" as possible.

>
> 2. The Talmud does _not_ "take precedence" over the Torah. It is an
> explanation of the laws of the Torah and a book of further law
> itself. The Torah is the equivalent of the US Constitution and
> Federal Code; the Talmud is the body of judicial decisions based on
> that.

That is not what the Talmud says.


>
> 3. The Talmud is not racist, since no races are mentioned in it.

Jews are a race. Christians are not Jews. The Talmud says all
Christians should be EXTERMINATED.

What kind of a lowlife are you Fuckstone ?


>
> 4. Perhaps you can quote the exact tractate and reference page in which
> it is stated that only Jews are human, or where it is said that the
> extermination of all Christians is permissible? There is a uniform
> citation method for the Talmud, so you must be able to give the
> citations if you claim these portions exist. Or were they printed
> in the 1944 June New York Times?


Try "The Talmud Concerning Christianity" written by a Jewish person
and posted on the Radio Islam site - it's all there.

http://abbc.com/talmud/talmudi.htm

Or "The Talmud Documented & Exposed"

http://abbc.com/islam/english/toread/talmud.htm

> 5. Yeah, there are some bitter remarks in the Talmud about non-Jewish
> groups, specifically the Roman government around the first and
> second century. They weren't Christian then. In fact, they were
> busy persecuting both Christians and Jews.


The Talmud specifically mentions Chrisitians - many times and always
in the most brutal, unhuman terms. You are either lieing (like many Jews)
when you say such despicable words are not in Talmud or you haven't
read it.

Your trying to defend the indefensible.

You really don't care what Christians and others think do you ?


There was a good bit of
> anti-Roman sentiment in early Christian thought; it got cleaned out
> when the Romans started adopting Christianity, but scholars can
> still point to it. I mean, wasn't it a Roman legionary who stuck a
> lance into Jesus while he was on the cross? And didn't another give
> Jesus a vinegar-soaked sponge to drink from? Nice guys, eh? And
> you feel that the Talmud was kind of hard on them, though?

The Talmud says it was the Jews which had "Jesus the @!#$%&*" hanged,
it takes full credit for it many many times, obviously something they are
quite proud of.

>
> 6. The Torah is not the "Old Testament." The Torah is the first five
> books of the Jewish Scriptures, which comprise 39 books in total.
> The "Old Testament" is the Christian re-ordering of the books in the
> Jewish Scriptures, setting them in some (mistaken) historical
> sequence, rather than grouping them into the Law, Prophets, and
> Writings as was originally done. Something to do with ignorant and
> arrogant mediaeval scholars.

The Talmud says it takes precedence over Torah, maybe you should
try familiarizing yourself with the "real" bible of Judaism.

>
> 7. It seems completely to escape you that the Jewish religion is far
> from homogeneous, but is composed of four main divisions, of which
> three pay only limited attention to the Talmud.

But they still accept it and pay attention to it right ?

It is still the book that is used to train Rabbi's, right ?


The largest branch,
> Reform Judaism, seldom mentions any part of it but Pirke Avot
> (Ethics of the Fathers), which are brief philosophical homilies and
> one of the few parts of the Talmud accessible to the casual reader.

Reform Judaism is not accepted in Isreal Officially, right ?

But they still use the Talmud to train their Rabbi's, right ?


> The Talmud has only the most minimal impact on Judaism as it is
> practiced by the majority of Jews today. Your notion that Jews are
> taught by their religion to practice hatred is but a strawman, set
> up to justify your practice of bigotry and endless vilification. If
> Jews have learned hatred at all, it is from the behavior of our
> enemies, starting with Amalek and running right up to you
> present-day Nazis.

Right a straw-man.

The Talmud Says only Jews are Human and all Christians should
be exterminated.

A straw-man.

You're a piece of shit Firestone.


>
> Roger M. Firestone, 32 KCCH
>

> PS. Aren't you spending a lot of time posting this? Shouldn't you be
> polishing your jackboots for the next inspection by your Fuehrer?

My Fuehrer is Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

What is your Fuehrer, you little pig ?

Ed King

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
In article <000f01bf0b4f$ed497740$04000005@oemcomputer>, St. John the Sublime Reformer wrote:

> I realize that but I *and others* do not accept that definition.

OK - So when do we get to look at the "St. John Dictionary" so we'll
know what the heck you're ranting about?

Funny: you were perfectly willing to accept dictionary definitions when
they suited you. What changed?



> The reason for not accepting it as I stated is that by and large
> dictionaries mearly reflect words that are in common usuage.

<shaking head>


> In the case of the term anti-semite the reason that it is in usuage is
> because that Jewish People are using it to describe persons who
> may at times get in a discourse that could portray the actions
> of Jews in a somewhat less than flattering light.

Uh-huh. You tell 'em, Nazi-boy!


> I simply do not accept the term as applying to someone because:

<snip a whole bunch of blatant, racist rationalization
ala Ernst Zundel whom is suspected of being a great
idol of the "Saint" here....>

> > There is no other interpretation given, that's it, only one, uno.
> > Between you and me now, is it just possible that the good Dr.
> > Firestone is right?

Expecting the "Sublime Saint" to admit someone else was EVER right
is an exercise in futility.



> He said among other things that Palestinians and all Arabs only spoke a
> Semitic language they weren't actually Semites.

<Snore.....>


> As I said he or you could state that the definition in this or that
> dictionary said anti-semite said such but that would not change my view that
> it is an unfair term for the reasons I stated.

Of course, we could argue that the big blue thing overhead was the sky but
- knowing from the past how you demand your right to your "beliefs and
opinions" - you could claim with righteous indignation that it's a Chevrolet!

And there are days when I suspect you might.... Fact is, though: that don't
change a darn thing!

> Dictionaries change with times as words and phrases go in and out of usuage.
> There is no logic to a phrase that denies most Semitic peoples the defacto
> right to be called Semites. It is a logical impossiblity for a Semitic
> person to be an anti-semite for merely holding views against only
> one of the Semitic sub groups. A semite can never be a anti-semite.

Just amazing.... Wherever can such logic be learned?

> > Your argument with him is starting to look like David and Goliath except
> > this time the giant is the good guy and crushes the little guy under his foot.
>
> You think a Stalinist like Firestone is a good guy ?

We'd first have to have your "beliefs and opinions" of what a Stalinist is!

Might be a person who sells Stals for all we know....


> So you are agreeing with the logic that Palestinians who are Semites
> who actively oppose Jewish occupation of their land and make
> nasty generalizations about Jews *much worse than I have said* are
> Anti-Semites themselves ? How can Palestinians who are Semites,
> be Anti-Semite ? Is this same definition of Anti-Semite appearing
> in Semite dictionaries keeping in mind most Semites are Arabs ?

How can it be that a person who keeps saying that he's not a racist
because he's such a "Saint" actually be a racist?



> > Oh I live happy endings. Speaking of happy endings, I was wondering,
> > how is your in-depth research coming on that 1944 New York Times article.
>
> 1. There is no "in-depth" search.

He didn't ask you about a _search_; he asked you about "research". See: here
again is an example of your faulty understanding. And yet you want to throw
away the dictionaries because they aren't accurate, huh? Good.....



> 2. I did not make up, lie, forge any article in the New York times in 1944.

So, then....


> 3. I said that I read an article/announcement in the 1944 New York Times
> around the time of the D-Day Landings that appeared beneath some other
> announcement by the Grand Lodge of New York regarding there withdrawal
> of recognition of the KKK as an appendant body of Masonry AND I DID
> READ SUCH AN ARTICLE.

But yet, surprisingly, no one else has ever read such an article - AND
whatsmore, you can't find it today. So what happened to it? Did the
Masons run around and change all the microfilm throughout the world to
avoid embarrassment?



> 4. After being challenged on the point by "Ed King" who said he THOROUGHLY
> went through the NYT for the month of June 44 and found only one article
> about the KKK regarding an upsurge of activity in Indiana, and only ONE article
> about Freemasonry regarding meeting of the Knights Templar at the Waldorf
> Astoria he promptly declared me a liar etc, etc.

I said that I found _an_ article of each kind - not that they were the ONLY
articles on the subject. HOWEVER - and let's be VERY clear about this - there
was NO combination of articles as you cited in your message, a copy of which
appears at http://www.masonicinfo.com/thesaint.htm (for easy reference for
all).

> 5. I then went to my local library to try and relocate the article, an

> article I said. I had read a couple of years previously when looking for

> some original D-Day maps etc and found reams and reams of articles about
> the KKK and Freemasonry in the June 1944 NYT - articles that "Ed King"
> said did not exist.

Fact the first: The listing you provided (and I'll add that to my web
site if you want) included articles from MAY and JULY (both of which
are NOT in the "middle of June".

Fact the second: Even during that entire time, there weren't "reams of
articles" about "the KKK and Freemasonry". There were THREE articles
about Freemasonry. There were perhaps (during the THREE MONTH PERIOD YOU
CITED) perhaps a dozen about the KKK. There were NONE - REPEAT: NONE -
which had both organizations mentioned in the same article and there
was NONE - REPEAT: NONE - which indicated that the Grand Lodge of New
York had broken your imaginary affiliation with the KKK.

Fact the third: You continually want to point out that because I didn't
list every single article that I found as evidence of my 'lying'. If I
am lying about there NOT being an article of the type you describe, then
you have had ample opportunity to cite the date and page on which said
article was printed.



> 6. I read those supplemental articles for the first time one of which
> included a list of all the appoinments by the new Grand Master for the
> State of NY something "Ed King" said was an impossibility in the month of
> June because the announcement would have taken place in May,

And yet, on July 24th, you wrote:

> The following items which appeared in the New York Times in 1944 PROVE
> that when "Ed King" said he had "thorougly looked through Junes papers" and
> "But *nothing* at all!" he was telling a LIE.
>
> NYT May 4 Page 21
>
> "Supreme Court Justice Charles Froesel elected GM by state masons"
> (picture of C. Froesel included)

Now could you PLEASE explain to us all why YOU reported this as being in May
yet - for some strange reason - now say that it appeared in June? How curious...



> and a very large series of articles that included the announcment that the
> KKK was disbanding - which "Ed King" also said did not exist.

What Ed King said - for the record and reprinted from his message was:

(The "Saint" is quoted in the double indent here)
> > Start looking through the michrofiched paper from just after
> > D-Day (June 6), look for a notice from the Grand Lodge of
> > New York State (you'll have to go through a few editions because
> > I can't remember the exact date it was in when I read it, although
> > I believe it was within two weeks of D-Day). The first part of the
> > notice is an announcement on the election of the new Grand Master for
> > the Grand Lodge of the State of New York giving his name and
> > particulars. The second part of the Grand Lodge of New Yorks notice is
> > a small article/annoucement stating from that date forward the Grand
> > Lodge of New York will no longer RECOGNIZE the KLU KLUX KLAN
> > as a MASONIC body.

And then appears my message:
> Even though I should have known better and that "St. John" will now say
> that perhaps he 'misremembered' things, I meandered by my public library
> just to take a peek at the microfilm there.
>
> Guess what? NO ARTICLE. I went all the way to June 20th, scanning each
> page and what I did find were:
>
> -- lots of articles about the war;
> -- that photograph of John F. Kennedy in his Naval Uniform which we've
> all seen many times. There was a report (in the edition of the 12th, I
> believe) that he was going to be honored for his heroism with PT109.
> Quite interesting seeing the original article.
> -- the New York Stock Exchange traded about 700,000 shares a day;
> -- that Admiral Bill Halsey (not referred to as 'Bull' in the article)
> was to take over the Third Fleet;
> -- and a lot more.
>
> On the subject of Masonry: that the Knights Templars were holding a big
> meeting in New York.
>
> On the subject of the KKK: that there was some sort of reported
> resurgence in Indiana.
>
> On the issue of an 'announcement/article' by the Grand Lodge of New York?
>
> This probably won't come as a surprise to anyone: NOTHING!!!

> Both of these major articles were on June 5th a date "King" repeatedly
> stated he went though very thoroughly which he used for his justification
> *to this date* to label me a liar and which all of the Masonic Parrots in
> this N.G. have repeated ad-naseum

BUT THERE IS NO ARTICLE LIKE THE ONE YOU CLAIMED. NONE. NONE. NONE.

There is TRULY none so blind as he who can not see....



> 7. It is evident that if "Ed King" said he went through the NYT for June and
> especially around D-Day ( scheduled for the 5th, occured on 6th) and
> he missed the large articles about the KKK disbanding and the appointments
> by the new G.L. G.M. of NY he plainly could not have gone through the
> paper thoroughly, and his claims that because of this thoroughness I was
> therefore lieing are meaningless.

So WHERE IS THE ARTICLE THAT YOU CLAIM? IT DOESN'T EXIST.

Stop trying to divert the discussion....



> 8. The additional articles that I read about the KKK and the Gl of NY
> was not the article that I said I had saw, however it certainly does
> reinforce my statement that I did in fact see the one about the KKK
> being de-recognized by the Gl of NY - it is simply too much of a
> coincidence to think otherwise.

Really? So WHERE IS THE ARTICLE??????? You read it but now it doesn't
exist? Wake up and smell the coffee....



> 9. The article exists, I haven't been back to go through the NYT again,
> I know I read the article because it shocked me deeply when I read it.
> If someone in the NY area could contact the NYT archive service and
> ask them to do a search for 1944 "around" D-Day on the keywords of
> KKK, or Masonry, or GL of NY etc they will DEFIDENTLY find the
> article. I say around D-Day because I can't be more exact than that
> as I was interested in WW 2 and not this subject matter.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... And the moon is made of green cheese too. This
little interchange occurred in July; it'll be October in a few hours. Need
some more time?



> 10. I have a sneaking suspicion that "Ed King" did find the article but
> won't admit it because I showed that he lied about his statement of
> going through the NYT around D-day "thoroughly". Also as this
> is a rather explosive topic I feel that if there are some GL officials
> around who are aware of it (which is not likely as it happend 55 years
> ago) they would likely suppress the information to not cause embarassment
> in these politically correct or Stalinist times.

Yet YOU went to the library, quoted all sorts of articles from May through July
and YOU couldn't find it. How come? Was my secret eyeball fogifier working that
day?



> 11. If the matter is so important to Freemasons in this n.g. then they
> should try and find it instead of taking a questionable figure like "Ed Kings"
> word for it. If they used the NYT archive service instead of going cross-eyed
> reading a microfiche record it would entail very little expenditure of time.

I'd suggest that Freemasons might more profitably spend their time by looking
for that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow!

In reality, they'll spend their time helping humanity rather than spouting lies
like yourself.

Poor child: can't admit a loss ever, can you? Saving Canada, demolishing Freemasonry.... What a busy, busy life you lead.

Ed King
Webmaster and Owner of

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

The web site even a rabid anti-Mason (and self-created "Saint")
recommends by using it as part of his signature.

Ed King

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
In article <001101bf0b6c$29261b80$04000005@oemcomputer>, St. John the Sublime Reformer wrote:

> It was a few years ago, before I started looking into Freemasonry.

How ironic you can't find it now....


> Why is it none of you Freemasons have taken "Ed King" to task
> for lieing when he said he thoroughly went through the June 1944
> NYT especially around D-Day ?

Perhaps they read my original post....

> You know that was a lie because he "missed" the two large
> articles on June 5th one on the KKK disbanding as a National
> Body to avoid turning it's membership lists over to the Roosevelt
> Administration controlled IRS after a ruling by the Supreme Court
> denying them Charitable Status

Which had NOTHING to do with your claim that the KKK was related
to the Grand Lodge of New York as an appendant body....

> and the other on the new GL of NY GM a Supreme Court Justice heavily
> involved in the Roosevelt Administratiions attack on the KKK's list
> of appointments ?

The KKK's list of appointments? Looks to me like you've begun to get
a little frenetic here child.

Oh, and wasn't the list of appointments in the June *5th* New York Times?

Was that after D-Day? I seem to forget....

After all, you were quite specific about looking AFTER D-Day and in my
dictionary it appears as June 6th. But then again, you don't believe in
dictionaries when it isn't convenient so I guess June 5th must be after\
D-Day for your convenience now, eh?



> I guess that "cable tow" of yours prevents you from criticizing a
> "brother" Mason - at least that is what your oaths say, unless that
> Mason criticized Freemasonry of course then it's no holds barred.

No, the fact is that had your initial slanderous charge been provable, everyone
would have been aghast. No one wanted to waste their time looking up things that
were clearly lies fabricated by you. I had some time to spare and knowing that
you'd bluster and continue to lie even when proven wrong. I was right - and
the funny thing is that everyone can see that except YOU!

You're a joke - and each of these messages makes you even more of a laughing
stock.... NOTHING you write can be considered as having any credibility
whatsoever. It's plain for all to see....

Ed King
Webmaster and Owner of
http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View

The web site a rabid anti-Mason (and self-created "Saint")

jruble

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to

Glyn Davies <glyn.d...@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:7t0gld$i03$1...@nclient13-gui.server.virgin.net...

>
> St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
> news:000f01bf0b4f$ed497740$04000005@oemcomputer...
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: SClarke505 <sclar...@aol.com>
> > Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
> > Sent: September 30, 1999 6:26 AM
> > Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity
> >
> >
> > > Psssst! Psssst! Shhhhh. St. John, keep it low, just between you and me
> > while no
> > > one else is listening. I am looking at a "Websters Desk Dictionary"
> under
> > the
> > > hyphenated word "anti-Semite" it reads......"a person who is hostile
to
> > Jews".
> >
> >
> > I realize that but I *and others* do not accept that definition.
> >
> > The reason for not accepting it as I stated is that by and large
> > dictionaries
> > mearly reflect words that are in common usuage.
> >
> ,snip.
>
> Last week you said that dictionaries did not include words which were in
> common usage.
>
> Make up your mind.

Brother Glyn

I don't know if he can even make up a bed, much less something he doesn't
have.

Please don't confuse him with facts.

Just like trying to teach a pig to sing.

SCOTTY

jruble

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to

St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
news:005801bf0b2b$c5112e40$04000005@oemcomputer...

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dr. Roger M. Firestone <rf...@chele.cais.net>
> Newsgroups:
>
alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
>
christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
> art-bell
> Sent: September 29, 1999 8:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity
My Brothers, I am going to cut a bunch of this to get to my points. But,
then, most of the anti's are a lot better at cut and paste than I am.

I just want to conserve band width, the same excuse they would give.

>

> Duh.

The response that most of us would give to the St (in his own mind) John's
posts.

>
>
>
>
> Nope, you didn't say that. You just said semites are people who speak
> a semitic tongue. You didn't say anything about Arabs/Palestinians
> being ethnically semitic.
>
> Stop lying Dr. Firestone.
>

Advice best followed by st John


> >
> Nonsense again Dr. SpinMeister.
>
> There are several ethnic groups on the planet, Hametic, Semitic, etc.
>
> So now someone who merely studies a language spoken by Semitic
> peoples is a Semite ?
>
> Your hopeless.

I would say that he is hopeful. He believes in the GAOTU (his own religious
belief) and obviously follows HIS teachings. Incidently, if I am correct
about my Brother Dr Firestone, we agree on who GOD is, we only disagree on
who his descendent is.

>
> >
> > Anti-Semitism has only one definition:

True, it is racist.

I snipped the following tirade, because it was too long, and it didn't make
sense to me. JMHO


>
>
>
>
>
> There is nothing to discuss.

There really isn't, because the "esteemed st john cannot conduct a real
discussion.

And, I left all of this in, so that you "gentle reader" can judge for
yourselves the verasity of the "esteemed" st (in his own mind) john.

As if you were in a jury panal, use your own best judgement.

SCOTTY


Ed King

unread,
Sep 30, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM9/30/99
to
In article <37f3cce2...@nntp.cts.com>, wrote:

> Forgive my ailing memory, but wasn't the article in question alleged to have
> been published in the *May* 1944 NYT? And subsequently sliced and diced by the
> general populace because D-Day occurred in June? Now he's saying the article
> was published in June. How convenient.

No, actually he's maintained that the article was in the New York Times a few days
after D-Day in June, 1944. He has cited as "proof" an article which did NOT meet
the description (in content or tone) of his fantasy claims which was published on
May 5th.

It would appear that he believes May 5th was in the middle of June during 1944.

He also steadfastly maintains that the article exists despite his inability
to find it (and you KNOW he would have LOVED to rub my nose in it if he'd been
able to support his ludicrous claim).

You can see in his recent profanity-laden, Jew-hating post in response to one
of Roger Firestone exactly what kind of material this so-called 'man' is made
of. The elephant dung in Brooklyn seems more appealing than he is....

Regards,


Ed King
Webmaster and Owner of
http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View

The web site even a rabid anti-Mason (and self-created "Saint")

Glyn Davies

unread,
Oct 1, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/1/99
to

St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
news:002001bf0b86$7fc4f280$04000005@oemcomputer...
<snip>

These are the ravings of a sick mind

Jan Eaton

unread,
Oct 1, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/1/99
to
John...

St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
news:005801bf0b2b$c5112e40$04000005@oemcomputer...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> In the same vein if a person was against all Semitic peoples,
> Jews, Palestinians, Syrians etc AND he/she WAS NOT a
> semitic person themselves then indeed he/she would be an
> anti-semite. On the other hand if that non-semitic person
> was only against Jews and not Palestinians, Syrians etc
> that person would simply be anti-Jewish, he/she COULD NOT
> be an ant-semite, period.

God forbid but let us assume by some strange quirk that what you
say is true. My question to you is: If a person was against all Semitic
peoples, Jews, Palestinians, Syrians etc AND he/she WAS a Semitic person
themselves then would that person indeed be an anti-Semite?


Jan Eaton

unread,
Oct 1, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/1/99
to
John...
St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
news:000f01bf0b4f$ed497740$04000005@oemcomputer...

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: SClarke505 <sclar...@aol.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
> Sent: September 30, 1999 6:26 AM
> Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity
>
>
> > Psssst! Psssst! Shhhhh. St. John, keep it low, just between you and me
> > while no one else is listening. I am looking at a "Websters Desk
Dictionary" >>under the hyphenated word "anti-Semite" it reads......"a
person who is hostile to
>> Jews".
>
>
> I realize that but I *and others* do not accept that definition.

Ah, so it's a case of you defining words as you see fit as opposed
to the 'commonly used definition' of said words...

> 1. It is thrown around too loosely.

Hmmm...sounds like 'commonly used'...

>
> 3. As Jewish people are only one of many groups who are
> of Semitic Origin they can not claim the entire monicker of
> Semite soley for themselves.

I don't believe *anyone* here has claimed that the Jewish people
have claimed the 'entire monicker of Semite soley <sic> for themselves...'

> 4. Palestinians, Syrians, and many others are Semites, they
> can NEVER be anti-semitic or anti-semites, it is a logical
> impossibility - period.

My friend, you have not explained how 'it is a logical
impossibility - period...' What would you call a Palestinian, a Syrian or
any of the 'many other' Semites who hates *all* Semites? I would call that
"anti-semitic or anti-semites" <sic> and I would also say that it refutes
your statement.

> So you are agreeing with the logic that Palestinians who are Semites
> who actively oppose Jewish occupation of their land and make

Lands that originally belonged to Isreal that the Palestinians took
over and were finally returned to Isreal.

> nasty generalizations about Jews *much worse than I have said* are

So you finally admit to your anti-Jewish/Semitic bigotry! Good for
you. It's about time you were honest with yourself!

> Anti-Semites themselves ? How can Palestinians who are Semites,
> be Anti-Semite ?

Are ye dense, laddie...if they hate Semites wouldn't that make them
an "Anti-Semite"???

> St. John the Sublime Reformer
> A Certain Point Within A Circle
> Masonic Historian
>

> http://www.masonicinfo.com - AntiMasonry Points of View

NM

unread,
Oct 1, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/1/99
to
Anthropologically, linguistically, and culturally semitic peoples
include Arabs as well as Jews. It's a fact. Move on.

NM


Glyn Davies

unread,
Oct 2, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/2/99
to
It's still a pig LOL

jruble <jru...@excelonline.com> wrote in message
news:rva810...@corp.supernews.com...


>
> Glyn Davies <glyn.d...@virgin.net> wrote in message
> news:7t0gld$i03$1...@nclient13-gui.server.virgin.net...
> >

> > St. John the Sublime Reformer <2B1_L...@deja.com> wrote in message
> > news:000f01bf0b4f$ed497740$04000005@oemcomputer...
> > >

> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: SClarke505 <sclar...@aol.com>
> > > Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
> > > Sent: September 30, 1999 6:26 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity
> > >
> > >
> > > > Psssst! Psssst! Shhhhh. St. John, keep it low, just between you and
me
> > > while no
> > > > one else is listening. I am looking at a "Websters Desk Dictionary"
> > under
> > > the
> > > > hyphenated word "anti-Semite" it reads......"a person who is hostile
> to
> > > Jews".
> > >
> > >
> > > I realize that but I *and others* do not accept that definition.
> > >
> > > The reason for not accepting it as I stated is that by and large
> > > dictionaries
> > > mearly reflect words that are in common usuage.
> > >

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Oct 2, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/2/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: MasonTruth <mason...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry
Sent: October 1, 1999 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity


> >Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity

> >From: "St. John the Sublime Reformer" 2B1_L...@deja.com
> >Date: Thu, 30 September 1999 10:27 AM EDT
> >Message-id: <000f01bf0b4f$ed497740$04000005@oemcomputer>
> >
>
> (Cut out to save space)
>
> St John, you are really a man that is full of hate.


Not in the least.

I hold no hatred to Freemasons, just Freemasonry.

I hold no hatred to Jews or Juduaism.

I hold no hatred to non-whites, immigration or immigrants.

I hold no hatred to semites.

I hold hatred to liars, and lies and hatred however (as I am
sure most do).


Bottom line is that your
> reply and in fact all your replies are directed against the Jewish people.


Hardly this thread started off after continually slander by "Ed King"
requoting some saying of Dr. Roger Firestone 32 KCCH that
"scratch an anti-mason, find an anti-semite".

"Ed King" then graduated from this to calling me a racist and anti-semite
for calling for a reform of Canada's Immigration and Refugee System on
a seperate newsgroup during the wave of Illegal Chinese Migrant boats
that were washing up on the Coast of B.C. this year and the horrendous
cost they were causing the Canadian Taxpayer.

"Ed King" did this after continually stalking me on the internet trying
to find anything he could "get" on me, as he does to anyone who
posts viewpoints contrary to his own.

My first response to his slander was to simple state that I was not
an anti-semite and in fact I had never made any post regarding
Jews or Judaism it was simply another one of his canards.

Dr. Firestone them stepped in (or more likely took over as part of'
theire pre-arranged ambush) and started calling me a nazi, anti-semite
etc, ad naseum.

Only then did I respond by saying I was not, that the greatest threat
to freedom was actually certain extreme activist groups like
Brnai Brith (which King specifcally has links and endorsements from
on his stalker hate site) and pointing out that the use of the term
anti-semite as applying solely to anti-Jewish sentiment was erroneous
as most Semites are Arabs and a semite can never be an anti-semite.

Interestingly a Christian Mason in Australia and a University Professor
Dr. Geoffrey Transom agreed with me on that point.

For this simply somewhat obtuse arguement I was making Dr. Firestone
went ballistic and started calling me (among others) a "mad-dog
anti-jewish bigot", "nazi-boy", "fuerher worshipper" etc.

It was only after he dropped "his gloves" to paraphrase Jim Bennie
that I "dropped" mine as well.

I have still not made a SINGLE anti-"semitic", anti-Jewish, anti-Jew,
or anti-Judiasm statement.

Even the simply posting of this weeks Macleans Magazine
article by Barbara Amiel on this very subject was greeted by
insane howling by Dr. Firestone.

Dr. Firestone is clearly a man lacking any reason, ration, or
proportion on this issue.

Why do you take his say-so that I am a "mad-dog, anti-Jewish
bigot ?

Why don't you ask him to provide a single example of this
"mad-dog" anti-Jewish Bigotry instead of repeating his
unspecific generalizations and slander against me -
a fellow Christian ?

For
> all practical purposes we should use the Dictionary version of
anti-Semetic,
> unless you have wriiten your own version..


Do you think it is fair that Palestians *many of whom are Christians*, who
have suffered under a genocidal policy of Isreal for 50 years are
according to the "dictionary" definition to be considered anti-semites
WHEN THEY ARE SEMITES THEMSELVES ?

>
> It is a shame that there are people so full of hate for others. That is a
> benefit of Masonry, it matters not what a man is or where he is from. I
won't
> say it is perfect but over all it is a wonderful group of people who are
> dedicated to doing good.. Even with all your attacks on Judaism you will
notice
> that the Masons that are Jewish have not attacked Christianity.


Actually I have made no attacks on Judaism - NONE.

Actually many, many Jewish Masons in this newsgroup continually
attack Christianity.

There attacks are always of a mocking, obtuse, "knowing with a wink
and nod" nature, but they are real attacks none-the less.

Perhaps you should review some of the posts of Schwarzman,
Firestone and others they are CLEARLY anti-christian.

I see that this
> is one of your and Kansan's objectives. It will not work. I also find it
> despicable that people would use Christianity or any Religion as a means
to
> spread hatred and lies..shame on you Sir..


I have done nothing of the sort.

I mearly pointed out Dr. Firestones "contradistictions" on the matter
of religous hatred and bigotry by directing him to his own religions
Rabbinical manual and "bible" the Talmud which is repleat with
vile anti-christian statements. Statements such as "only Jews
are Humans", "it is acceptable to lie to a Christian", "it is
acceptable to defraud a Christian", "it is acceptable to
lie with your lips if you are not lieing in your heart", "Jesus
was a fool", "Mary was a whore", "Jesus had Esau's
soul", "Jesus was Esau" (Esau is the Devil/Satan/Opponent),
"Christians are animals", "Christians are dogs", and
last but not least "all Christians should be exterminated".

The truth can never be an "ism", it is merely the truth.

These hateful bigoted words and phrased ARE in
the Talmud and the Talmud is not just some old
dusty,disregarded document - it is the living
breathing "bible" of Judasm.

The references are not to "Romans" as Dr. Firestone
and others would like you to believe as they
were written in the eleventh century, a thousand
years after the fall of the Roman empire. They
refer to us Christians whose most important
city and head of our faith (for most) was in Rome.

Don't believe them Manny they are lieing.

They are lieing about me and they are lieing about
what their own books say about us.

I provided two reference sites where you and others
could go to verify my statement but they deleted
them in their "replies".

The Talmud Documented and Exposed
http://abbc.com/islam/english/toread/talmud.htm

The Talmud's teaching on Christians
http://abbc.com/talmud/talmudi.htm

The Statement of Professor Isreal Shahak (a Jewish
Professor in Isreal) on the Jewish hatred towards
Christianity (Professor Shahak has also written
a book on the subject which has a forward by
Gore Vidal who is also Jewish).

http://abbc.com/islam/english/toread/shahak.htm

They brought the subject up Manny not I, I am only
responding to their lies.

> The time will come that your kind will have to answer to a higher calling.
When
> that time comes little plays on words will not help you..

I have already answered to a higher calling Manny, that is why I am
posting on this newsgroup and trying to warn people like yourself.


>
> Regretfully
> MasonTruth
> Bro. Manny Blanco (Junior Warden)
> Moreno Valley Lodge # 804
> Moreno Valley, CA

St. John the Sublime Reformer

unread,
Oct 2, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/2/99
to

----- Original Message -----
From: Ed King <edk...@masonicinfo.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.freemasonry,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.religion,alt.religion.
christian,alt.politics,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.
art-bell
Sent: September 30, 1999 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: Masonry & Christianity

> In article <37f3cce2...@nntp.cts.com>, wrote:
>
> > Forgive my ailing memory, but wasn't the article in question alleged to
have
> > been published in the *May* 1944 NYT? And subsequently sliced and diced
by the
> > general populace because D-Day occurred in June? Now he's saying the
article
> > was published in June. How convenient.
>
> No, actually he's maintained that the article was in the New York Times a
few days
> after D-Day in June, 1944. He has cited as "proof" an article which did
NOT meet
> the description (in content or tone) of his fantasy claims which was
published on
> May 5th.


Nope all I EVER said was that it was "around" the time of D-Day as that
was why I came across the article in the first place.

I told you that I could not remember the specific date as it was several
years before when I read it.

You obviosly do not consider June 5th to be "around" D-Day.

Shows how much of a house of cards your arguement really is...


>
> It would appear that he believes May 5th was in the middle of June during
1944.


I don't know anything about May 5th - where do you get that date from.

I PROVED to you that the annoucement by the new Grand Master of the
Grand Lodge of NY, Supreme Court Justice Froesel occured on JUNE 5th,
the same day the article about the KKK disbanding as a National body
to avoid turning it's membership lists over to the IRS after a Supreme Court
Ruling.

You then responded "that's curious" in your reply.

Later you denied completely ever making the statement that
1: It was impossible and illogical for Froesel to make the list
of his appoinments known in June.
2. That the only two articles about Freemasonry and the KKK
were the ones you mentioned and there certainly was none
about the GL of NY's list of appointments on June 5.

When I reposted your previous post of making these statements
you delted them entirely and did not respond (as is your normal
tactic when confronted by arguements you have no response to).

In your recent addition to you stalker hate site about me you
unbelievabley reverse your stance about never making the
statements and revert back to your original lie that the only
two articles that appeared were the Indiana and Templar
one and it would be impossible for the GL one to occur
in June EVEN AFTER I POSTED IT FOR YOU IN TOTO.

Your lie this week is that the GL of NY article occured on
May 5th instead of June 5th 1944.

What kind of a dumbnik are you anyways ?


>
> He also steadfastly maintains that the article exists despite his
inability
> to find it (and you KNOW he would have LOVED to rub my nose in it if he'd
been
> able to support his ludicrous claim).


Haven't been back to look for it that's why beyond my one hour
visit in which I found all the other articles about the KKK and
Freemasonry AROUND D-day - articles which you said
did not exist proving your "thoroughness" and consituting
the sole basis for your allegation that I fabricated the article
and announcment I saw about the GL of NY withdrawing
recognition of the KKK as a Masonic Concordant Body.

But since you brought it up, thanks for reminding me.


>
> You can see in his recent profanity-laden, Jew-hating post in response to
one
> of Roger Firestone exactly what kind of material this so-called 'man' is
made
> of. The elephant dung in Brooklyn seems more appealing than he is....


Only respond with "profanity" in kind - sort of like the Military and Police
policy of firing in self-defense only.

No Jew hating posts, nadda.

Care to repost a single example of a "Jew-Hating" post I have
made ?

So your familar with Brooklyn Dung, doesn't suprise me really...

>
> Regards,
> Ed King
> Webmaster and Owner of


OOOeee, your're a real entrepreurial Superstar "Ed King",
no doubt about it. <chuckle>

> http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View
>
> The web site even a rabid anti-Mason (and self-created "Saint")
> recommends by using it as part of his signature.


Thanks for the free plug. <G>

>
> Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 1999. All rights r
>

Ed King

unread,
Oct 2, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/2/99
to
In article <005b01bf0ccf$0b3d6600$04000005@oemcomputer>, St. John the Sublime Reformer wrote:

> > No, actually he's maintained that the article was in the New York Times a
> > few days after D-Day in June, 1944. He has cited as "proof" an article which
> > did NOT meet the description (in content or tone) of his fantasy claims
> > which was published on May 5th.
>
> Nope all I EVER said was that it was "around" the time of D-Day as that
> was why I came across the article in the first place.

Let me refresh your memory, then. Point your favorite browser to
http://www.masonicinfo.com/thesaint.htm and you'll find the quote. It's been
posted here before - including these statements made by you:

<<Start looking through the michrofiched paper from just after
D-Day (June 6), look for a notice from the Grand Lodge of
New York State (you'll have to go through a few editions because
I can't remember the exact date it was in when I read it, although
I believe it was within two weeks of D-Day). The first part of the
notice is an announcement on the election of the new Grand Master for
the Grand Lodge of the State of New York giving his name and
particulars. The second part of the Grand Lodge of New Yorks notice is
a small article/annoucement stating from that date forward the Grand
Lodge of New York will no longer RECOGNIZE the KLU KLUX KLAN
as a MASONIC body.>>

Can you see where it says *JUST AFTER D-DAY (June 6)*? Want the Deja
News reference for this post?

Or how about when you wrote:

<<An announcement on the New Grand Master for the Grand Lodge of
New York appeared in the New York Times of mid June 1944. Beneath
this announcement by G.L. N.Y. was an additional announcement that
forthwith the G.L. of N.Y. would cease to recognize the KKK as
a masonic body. You may verify this for yourself King by going
into any public library and asking to use the Microfiche file
for the N.Y. Times (the newspaper of record).>>

So is mid-June now May 5th? How very curious.

But - as has been often pointed out - this has NOTHING to do with whether
there was EVER such an announcement.

AND THERE WASN'T!!!!!! You - in your continued lying and deceit - simply
are not man enough to admit that you were wrong. It'd be the first in
your entire house of cards to fall....

> I told you that I could not remember the specific date as it was several
> years before when I read it.

As pressure on you to produce your imagined announcement mounted, you began
to vacillate. Your initial posts on the matter were quite clear. You've
been lying and you won't admit it.



> You obviosly do not consider June 5th to be "around" D-Day.

But we're not really talking about that, are we? We're talking about whether
your imagined article really existed. You claim that it does yet you went
through papers from May through July and couldn't find it.

WHERE IS THAT ARTICLE????? PLEASE PROVIDE PROOF THAT THE GRAND LODGE OF
NEW YORK SEVERED AN APPENDANT BODY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE KKK AS YOU HAVE
VIGOROUSLY CLAIMED!!!!!!

FAILING THAT, ADMIT THAT YOU'VE LIED!!!!!



> Shows how much of a house of cards your arguement really is...

Each and every post of yours shows you to be the one with the house of
cards. If your accusation was correct, you would have produced your
imagined article long before now.



> > It would appear that he believes May 5th was in the middle of June during
> > 1944.
>
> I don't know anything about May 5th - where do you get that date from.

It was among the list of dates YOU provided wherein the New York Times mentioned
issues of racism.


> I PROVED to you that the annoucement by the new Grand Master of the
> Grand Lodge of NY, Supreme Court Justice Froesel occured on JUNE 5th,
> the same day the article about the KKK disbanding as a National body
> to avoid turning it's membership lists over to the IRS after a Supreme Court
> Ruling.

Same day, different page, no connection. What part of NO don't you understand.


> You then responded "that's curious" in your reply.

Please cite that reply in full, without your usual alterations.


> Later you denied completely ever making the statement that
> 1: It was impossible and illogical for Froesel to make the list
> of his appoinments known in June.
> 2. That the only two articles about Freemasonry and the KKK
> were the ones you mentioned and there certainly was none
> about the GL of NY's list of appointments on June 5.

Previously answered - and irrelevant to the issue of whether or not
the article you claimed to have read ever really existed or whether
it was just a fantasy of yours, concocted for the purpose of defaming
Freemasonry.

You can keep attempting to divert the discourse as often as you want,
arguing about who said what when. Facts prevail, however. There was
no article of the type you claimed.



> When I reposted your previous post of making these statements
> you delted them entirely and did not respond (as is your normal
> tactic when confronted by arguements you have no response to).

You're still evading. Please cite the date and page on which your
alleged article occurs.



> In your recent addition to you stalker hate site about me you
> unbelievabley reverse your stance about never making the
> statements and revert back to your original lie that the only
> two articles that appeared were the Indiana and Templar
> one and it would be impossible for the GL one to occur
> in June EVEN AFTER I POSTED IT FOR YOU IN TOTO.

You're still evading. Please cite the date and page on which your
alleged article occurs.



> Your lie this week is that the GL of NY article occured on
> May 5th instead of June 5th 1944.
>
> What kind of a dumbnik are you anyways ?

You're still evading. Please cite the date and page on which your
alleged article occurs.

And I'm not the kind of "dumbnik" who keeps trying to sneak out of
responsibility by arguing about inconsequentials - like you!



> > He also steadfastly maintains that the article exists despite his
> > inability to find it (and you KNOW he would have LOVED to rub my nose
> > in it if he'd been able to support his ludicrous claim).
>
> Haven't been back to look for it that's why beyond my one hour
> visit in which I found all the other articles about the KKK and
> Freemasonry AROUND D-day - articles which you said
> did not exist proving your "thoroughness" and consituting
> the sole basis for your allegation that I fabricated the article
> and announcment I saw about the GL of NY withdrawing
> recognition of the KKK as a Masonic Concordant Body.

Yes, I'm sure you've been very busy saving Canada from the immigration
peril by non-whites like you.

First it was summer hours and now it's just that you haven't had the time?

Gee whiz: aren't you interested in rubbing my nose in this instead of just
being seen as a total liar?



> But since you brought it up, thanks for reminding me.

Golly gee: guess this was the first reminder you've had since July, eh?

Well, glad to provide it. Your reading must be pretty odd, though: you've
already answered dozens upon dozens of posts over the past two intervening
months that have mentioned it. How odd you needed a reminder now.

I'll mark my calendar - and I'll remind you at least a couple of times a
week until you provide the article for us.



> > You can see in his recent profanity-laden, Jew-hating post in response to
> > one of Roger Firestone exactly what kind of material this so-called 'man' is
> > made of. The elephant dung in Brooklyn seems more appealing than he is....
>
> Only respond with "profanity" in kind - sort of like the Military and Police
> policy of firing in self-defense only.

Oh, yes: very valid excuse. "Moral high ground" is obviously a phrase with
which you have ZERO understanding.



> No Jew hating posts, nadda.
>
> Care to repost a single example of a "Jew-Hating" post I have
> made ?

Dr. Firestone has handled this sufficiently.


> So your familar with Brooklyn Dung, doesn't suprise me really...

Unlike yourself, I stay abreast of the daily news. Too bad you didn't
have such a grip on reality.

Oh, by the way: REMINDER!!!!! We're waiting for that New York Times
Article!



> OOOeee, your're a real entrepreurial Superstar "Ed King",
> no doubt about it. <chuckle>

Facts talk; liars walk!

> > http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View
> >
> > The web site even a rabid anti-Mason (and self-created "Saint")
> > recommends by using it as part of his signature.
>
> Thanks for the free plug. <G>

You're welcome. Sure does make you look stupid - although you're the only
one that doesn't see it. Did you thank your buddies in school when they
pinned those "Kick Me" signs on your back too? Probably....



Ed King
Webmaster and Owner of

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

The web site even a rabid anti-Mason (and self-created "Saint")
recommends by using it as part of his signature.

Internet newsgroup posting. Copyright 1999. All rights reserved.


Ed King

unread,
Oct 2, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/2/99
to
In article <001b01bf0cbf$46ca1980$04000005@oemcomputer>, St. John the Sublime
Reformer using a phoney address and cross-posting to a bunch of groups who
could care less wrote:

> > (Cut out to save space)
> >
> > St John, you are really a man that is full of hate.
>
>
> Not in the least.

No, of course not. You're just one happy, fun-lovin' guy!


> I hold no hatred to Freemasons, just Freemasonry.

But how can you hate the organization and not its members? Gee whiz:
based on the names you've called some of us in alt.freemasonry, we
begin to doubt your veracity.



> I hold no hatred to Jews or Juduaism.

No, of course not. You're such a benevolent individual. Strange, though,
how your signature line contains material from those who do - and you
seem to get a LOT of your information from those who do....



> I hold no hatred to non-whites, immigration or immigrants.

No, of course not. And that's why you want to shut off all legal
immigration into your country, Canada: to "save" it.... Hmmmm....



> I hold no hatred to semites.

Too bad you don't know the definition 'cause you don't want to believe
a dictionary now that it's inconvenient.



> I hold hatred to liars, and lies and hatred however (as I am
> sure most do).

Most do - and, in fact, that's why most posters to alt.freemasonry
keep asking you about that phony New York Times article you concocted to
defame Freemasonry and which you continue to lie about regularly.

Details can be found at http://www.masonicinfo.com/thesaint.htm

> > Bottom line is that your
> > reply and in fact all your replies are directed against the Jewish people.
>
> Hardly this thread started off after continually slander by "Ed King"
> requoting some saying of Dr. Roger Firestone 32 KCCH that
> "scratch an anti-mason, find an anti-semite".

Oh, that's slander is it? Well, poor baby: doesn't like the truth, eh?


> "Ed King" then graduated from this to calling me a racist and anti-semite
> for calling for a reform of Canada's Immigration and Refugee System on
> a seperate newsgroup during the wave of Illegal Chinese Migrant boats
> that were washing up on the Coast of B.C. this year and the horrendous
> cost they were causing the Canadian Taxpayer.

Actually, it's also because of your activities here. You show your colors
wherever you go, don't you?



> "Ed King" did this after continually stalking me on the internet trying
> to find anything he could "get" on me, as he does to anyone who
> posts viewpoints contrary to his own.

I just live to find your dalliances, poor boy. Do you *really* think that
I've got nothing better than you in my life? Seems to me you're developing
a "Restivo" (NOT Restovo) complex.



> My first response to his slander was to simple state that I was not
> an anti-semite and in fact I had never made any post regarding
> Jews or Judaism it was simply another one of his canards.

Uh-huh.


> Dr. Firestone them stepped in (or more likely took over as part of'
> theire pre-arranged ambush) and started calling me a nazi, anti-semite
> etc, ad naseum.

Of course, it's convenient to leave out what ACTUALLY was written in these
interchanges, isn't it? That's ok: it's all a matter of public record until
you delete your posts.



> Only then did I respond by saying I was not, that the greatest threat
> to freedom was actually certain extreme activist groups like Brnai Brith

Don't you think a person of your intellectual capacity could learn to spell
the organization which you so despise?

> (which King specifcally has links

I've got links to nearly every anti-Masonic site in existence. I've got links
to lots of great Masonic charities as well. B'nai B'rith link occurs in the
page on that organization in which I describe the assumed historic association
between that organization and Freemasonry - and debunk the source of that as a
"Tall Tale".

> and endorsements from

There is NO endorsement from the B'nai B'rith (or the Brnai Brith whoever they
are) on my site or anywhere else on the web that I'm aware of. I would, however,
be proud if they felt my site worthy of their approval. I'd also be proud to
be recognized by places like the Southern Poverty Law Center and other groups
which monitor online hatred of the kind you espouse. To date, however, none of
them has endorsed my web site.

But you know that, don't you? And you - the person who supposedly hates liars -
is just lying yourself! We've all thought you hated yourself - and herein lies
the absolute proof.

> on his stalker hate site) and pointing out that the use of the term
> anti-semite as applying solely to anti-Jewish sentiment was erroneous
> as most Semites are Arabs and a semite can never be an anti-semite.

Roger Firestone has your 'number'; it's plain to see by your angry retorts
and the need you feel to spoof posts from him.



> Interestingly a Christian Mason in Australia and a University Professor
> Dr. Geoffrey Transom agreed with me on that point.

Pay attention, child. He MOCKED you. Are you the only one so truly simple
that you couldn't see that? <Chuckle>



> For this simply somewhat obtuse arguement I was making Dr. Firestone
> went ballistic and started calling me (among others) a "mad-dog
> anti-jewish bigot", "nazi-boy", "fuerher worshipper" etc.

Appropriate titles, for sure.


> It was only after he dropped "his gloves" to paraphrase Jim Bennie
> that I "dropped" mine as well.

Ah, yes: the "It's ok 'cause they did it first." routine again. Uh-huh!

You provoke and prod and when someone reacts, you think it's ok to call
them names, forge posts, use profanity, etc. etc. Great role-model.



> I have still not made a SINGLE anti-"semitic", anti-Jewish, anti-Jew,
> or anti-Judiasm statement.

Uh-huh.


> Even the simply posting of this weeks Macleans Magazine
> article by Barbara Amiel on this very subject was greeted by
> insane howling by Dr. Firestone.

Uh-huh.


> Dr. Firestone is clearly a man lacking any reason, ration, or
> proportion on this issue.

Uh-huh.


> Why do you take his say-so that I am a "mad-dog, anti-Jewish
> bigot ?

It's quite plain to see by all, actually.


> Why don't you ask him to provide a single example of this
> "mad-dog" anti-Jewish Bigotry instead of repeating his
> unspecific generalizations and slander against me -
> a fellow Christian ?

WAIT, WAIT!!!!! Back a few months ago, you claimed that you HAD NO
religion. NOW, you want to conveniently claim to be a Christian?

Please tell us what denomination you belong to and when you became
such. PLEASE!!!!!

Oh, and could you also explain why you disclaimed any religious
affiliation earlier this year?

> > For all practical purposes we should use the Dictionary version of
> > anti-Semetic, unless you have wriiten your own version..
>
> Do you think it is fair that Palestians *many of whom are Christians*, who
> have suffered under a genocidal policy of Isreal for 50 years are
> according to the "dictionary" definition to be considered anti-semites
> WHEN THEY ARE SEMITES THEMSELVES ?

I'm sure you're WELL-VERSED on these issues. Perhaps you could put up a web
site to tell us all about them, eh?

> Actually I have made no attacks on Judaism - NONE.

Yeah, right!


> Actually many, many Jewish Masons in this newsgroup continually
> attack Christianity.

Liar, liar, pants on fire!


> There attacks are always of a mocking, obtuse, "knowing with a wink
> and nod" nature, but they are real attacks none-the less.

Oh, yes: you're well versed in revisionist history, it's plain to see.


> Perhaps you should review some of the posts of Schwarzman,
> Firestone and others they are CLEARLY anti-christian.

Uh-huh. Perhaps you should try a mirror which _works_.


> > I see that this is one of your and Kansan's objectives. It will not work.
> > I also find it despicable that people would use Christianity or any
> > Religion as a means to spread hatred and lies..shame on you Sir..
>
> I have done nothing of the sort.

Of course you have - but there is none so blind as he who will not see.


> I mearly pointed out Dr. Firestones "contradistictions" on the matter
> of religous hatred and bigotry by directing him to his own religions
> Rabbinical manual and "bible" the Talmud which is repleat with
> vile anti-christian statements. Statements such as "only Jews
> are Humans", "it is acceptable to lie to a Christian", "it is
> acceptable to defraud a Christian", "it is acceptable to
> lie with your lips if you are not lieing in your heart", "Jesus
> was a fool", "Mary was a whore", "Jesus had Esau's
> soul", "Jesus was Esau" (Esau is the Devil/Satan/Opponent),
> "Christians are animals", "Christians are dogs", and
> last but not least "all Christians should be exterminated".

Which, conveniently, you've obtained from yet another person who you're
now going to hold up as a scholar. Funny, but your buddy Michael Hoffman
really thinks a lot of that guy too. Wonder what the connection there is.

Oh, and could you explain why it is that Israel Shahak is the ONLY Jew to
have written such material? Did the millions of other ones (you know: the
ones who got away from the folks like you in Nazi Germany) just somehow
_miss it_? Is it a big conspiracy that only some Islamic web site (and your
buddy Hoffman) take such great stock in this person?



> The truth can never be an "ism", it is merely the truth.

And the truth is: YOU ARE A LIAR!


> These hateful bigoted words and phrased ARE in
> the Talmud and the Talmud is not just some old
> dusty,disregarded document - it is the living
> breathing "bible" of Judasm.

Your learning is SO pitiful.


> The references are not to "Romans" as Dr. Firestone
> and others would like you to believe as they
> were written in the eleventh century, a thousand
> years after the fall of the Roman empire. They
> refer to us Christians whose most important
> city and head of our faith (for most) was in Rome.

Your such a Talmudic scholar, we're all going to accept that without
further question.

Oh, and when you have a minute, would you find that New York Times
article we've mentioned to you? Being a "researcher" and all, we'd
think you'd be able to get around to that - when you're not busy
keeping all the Orientals away from your precious house!



> Don't believe them Manny they are lieing.

Sure. On your say-so.


> They are lieing about me and they are lieing about
> what their own books say about us.

That's right, Nazi-boy. It's all a big lie. You tell 'em!


> I provided two reference sites where you and others
> could go to verify my statement but they deleted
> them in their "replies".
>
> The Talmud Documented and Exposed
> http://abbc.com/islam/english/toread/talmud.htm
>
> The Talmud's teaching on Christians
> http://abbc.com/talmud/talmudi.htm

Because they're crap - just like you, actually. You're so
intent on having your every word reposted but yet, when they're
showing you a buffoon, you conveniently overlook them. What's up
with that, anyway?



> The Statement of Professor Isreal Shahak (a Jewish
> Professor in Isreal) on the Jewish hatred towards
> Christianity (Professor Shahak has also written
> a book on the subject which has a forward by Gore Vidal who
> is also Jewish).
>
> http://abbc.com/islam/english/toread/shahak.htm

So, you like Gore Vidal, eh? Is he _close_ to you, perhaps? How very
interesting. This is a side of you we haven't seen before....



> They brought the subject up Manny not I, I am only
> responding to their lies.

Replaying the who-posted-what first game is fruitless with you. But
for the lurking audience, if you want to believe a racist, anti-Jew
then you'll believe others attacked him for being that before he EVER
proved it in his messages.



> > The time will come that your kind will have to answer to a higher calling.
> > When that time comes little plays on words will not help you..
>
> I have already answered to a higher calling Manny, that is why I am
> posting on this newsgroup and trying to warn people like yourself.

You're dead? WOW!!!! Oh, wait: you probably define a "higher calling"
differently than the rest of us or than Manny did in that sentence....

We understand: your own dictionary and all....

So when are you going to post a web site of warning about this subject?

Hopefully you'll stay away from the stupid Java applets that you can't get
to work properly.

Bill Maddox

unread,
Oct 2, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/2/99
to
Back in the days before SJ got kicked off deja-news he posted, at least according to deja-news (http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=493119077&fmt=text)

> Go into your University or local city library and go the
> Microfiche area. Ask the librarian (or if you are able to
> access the Microfiche catalogue yourself) to pull out the
> copies of the New York Times for June - July 1944.


>
> Start looking through the michrofiched paper from just after
> D-Day (June 6), look for a notice from the Grand Lodge of
> New York State (you'll have to go through a few editions because
> I can't remember the exact date it was in when I read it, although
> I believe it was within two weeks of D-Day). The first part of the
> notice is an announcement on the election of the new Grand Master for
> the Grand Lodge of the State of New York giving his name and
> particulars. The second part of the Grand Lodge of New Yorks notice is
> a small article/annoucement stating from that date forward the Grand
> Lodge of New York will no longer RECOGNIZE the KLU KLUX KLAN
> as a MASONIC body.
>

"St. John the Sublime Reformer" wrote:

> Nope all I EVER said was that it was "around" the time of D-Day as that
> was why I came across the article in the first place.
>
> I told you that I could not remember the specific date as it was several
> years before when I read it.

<snipping>

> I don't know anything about May 5th - where do you get that date from.
>
> I PROVED to you that the annoucement by the new Grand Master of the
> Grand Lodge of NY, Supreme Court Justice Froesel occured on JUNE 5th,
> the same day the article about the KKK disbanding as a National body
> to avoid turning it's membership lists over to the IRS after a Supreme Court
> Ruling.

Oh, same day article means what?

<snip snip>


> Haven't been back to look for it that's why beyond my one hour
> visit in which I found all the other articles about the KKK and
> Freemasonry AROUND D-day - articles which you said
> did not exist proving your "thoroughness" and consituting
> the sole basis for your allegation that I fabricated the article
> and announcment I saw about the GL of NY withdrawing
> recognition of the KKK as a Masonic Concordant Body.
>
> But since you brought it up, thanks for reminding me.

Does this mean you are finally going to go find the article we have been asking for?

Sincerely, and to some, fraternally - Bill Maddox
--
Visit my website and get a FREE demonstration of an online, interactive tutorial.
http://www.handtech.com/maddox and choose "The Learning Center" then "Try a demo"
Choose a course:
Exchange Server 5.5:7 Troubleshooting
HTML:6 Using JavaScript for Interactivity
Windows 98: What's New in Windows.
Subscribe for the over 290 courses now available.

gugliotta

unread,
Oct 3, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/3/99
to

>> Go into your University or local city library and go the
>> Microfiche area. Ask the librarian (or if you are able to
>> access the Microfiche catalogue yourself) to pull out the
>> copies of the New York Times for June - July 1944.


Will this help me masturbate better?

Joe Long

unread,
Oct 3, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/3/99
to

gugliotta wrote:

Only if you post as gugliotta and you "really get off" on history...
Now go... get a hold of yourself!!!


--
Alex Trebek:
"and the answer is...
checks and balances and no one is above the law"
Joe rings in:
"What is the formula for freedom"
Alex: "Oh sorry Joe - it was "terms the government has
long ago forgotten" sorry, that'll cost you $1000 Joe."
--
jgl
they're coming for our guns.
they won't succeed, but they will come.
.
In A Gif:
http://www.bainbridge.net/members/joelong/
Searcher:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shire/1840/
Joe's World:
http://surf.to/joelong

DrPostman

unread,
Oct 3, 1999, 3:00:00ā€ÆAM10/3/99
to
gbur...@databasix.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote:

>for i in databasix.com ntrnet.net primenet.com ; do ; gburnore@$i ; done

Huh?


--

Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
High Counselor of the New Usenet Order & Existentialist Philosophos
Addicted to Art Bell? http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/1282
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULTĀ® member #15-51506-253.
Yahoo Messenger "dr_postman", ICQ#50141648
You can email me at: jamiemps(at)mindspring.com
"It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man."
-- Jack Handy

0 new messages