Page 3 of 5

Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:14 am
by Kryten
Being a Freemason myself i find it quite offensive ACE, by you linking this scumbag to Freemasons. Anyone with a criminal conviction, except motoring offences gets booted out of Freemasonary, and that goes for trying to influence other Masons to pervert the course of justice.
Please do not associate this scumbag with an great charitable organisation, that helps non-masons and masons alike.

Get your facts straight before slagging off something you know little about.



Kryten.


Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 6:24 am
by mart
"A great charitable organisation".....you must be joking.
Why is it necessary to wear silly aprons, white gloves and tawdry medals in order to do charitable work? The reason most, if not all, Freemasons join is because they think they are going to get something out of it.

Mart


Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:03 am
by Ace
Marts correct as I am Kryten. Masons look after their own first and foremost. Checking my facts isn't necessary for that post mate. We 'all' know the score.
As for their 'charitable work', they come 3rd after the Rotary Club and The Lions


Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 7:09 am
by Jonboy
Never third,Oxfan for Africa,St Bede Trust for homeless , The Little Sisters of the Poor Shelter for those who cannot look after themselves.The list goes on.Whenever you have a position for them well someone wll come along with another charity that does more for non members


Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:23 pm
by Kryten
Mart,

Please don't try and criticise something you know bugger all about.

Aprons because our traditions go back to ancient Stonemasons, gloves which were adopted after the first world war as a sign of respect for the war dead. They are not worn by all Masons however. Medals as a sign of respect for different levels of office, nothing more sinister than that, big bleedin' deal.

One of the cornerstones of Freemasonary is Charity. Not all Freemasons are good, we are a reflection of society. However some scumbag like Van Hoofsplaten or whatever, if he was EVER a member, i can assure would have been booted ages ago.

Kryten.

Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:28 pm
by jj
Freemasonry attracts suspicion precisely because of its secretiveness.
If all is above board, what's to hide?

Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 2:29 pm
by steve56
python did a sketch about the masons in 70.

Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:11 pm
by Kryten
It basically became secretive during WW2, Hitler persecuted Masons, as the organisation was seen as anti Nazi. Before then it was as much part of society as Rotary or Round Table. These days there is a big effort to become an integral part of society once again.

Many of the so called "secretive" bits are freely available for you to find on the Internet and in books, just they won't mean diddly to you. Much of the English used is VERY old fashioned and hardly used these days, but fascinating none the less.

Kryten.

Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:15 pm
by steve56
thought hitler just hated jews,commies,pros and evreybody else.

Re: Van Hoogstraten

Posted: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:17 pm
by jj
I know a bit of the long history of Masonry through an erstwhile interest in the occult, particularly Crowley (think OTO).
I have no problem with any group of individuals wanting privacy- except where influence is apparently exercised at significant levels of our public life.