The simple fact is that the eye in the pyramid is not now nor has it ever been a Masonic symbol.
Edward L. King
http://www.masonicinfo.com -- Anti-Masonry: Points of View
|
Introduction by, 'Craftworker' Master Mason Alt.Freemasonry Usenet Posting Subject: Edward L. King
Just making a point. But out of curiousity, why don't you jump on the
others when they get out of line? It's ok for the people you "know"
to be masons to be rude, and so forth? So very disappointing.
From: Craftworker ([email protected]) Subject: On Being Ed King View this article only Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry Date: 2004-12-12 10:39:49 PST On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 16:47:08 GMT, Ed King [email protected] wrote: >In article [email protected], >Norwood Holden wrote: >> The pulling of Ed's hate site, >> You know it makes sense . . . >> >> ;-] > >You aren't holding your breath yet, Chris: will you PLEASE do so? > > Ed King Oh Edward, it truly doesn't even cross your mind that what you're doing is morally and ethically wrong, does it? You take people who oppose an *institution*, and then attack them as individuals. Rather than explaining why their arguments are invalid, you instead claim they have mental problems, personal issues, and seek to embarrass them personally on a global scale. Funny, Ed, we survived the Templar Supression, the Catholic persecution, the Anti-Masonic Party and a million other challenges....do you really think we need someone sitting in a shack in Maine defaming people to "save masonry"? It is dishonorable. It is unethical. It is beneath us, and runs contrary to what we stand for. And is this the sort of thing you would like done to you, Ed? For example, in a recent posting your wife's name was listed as Carol....I seem to recall your wife's name being Brandy..... Were you divorced recently? Would you be uncomfortable if someone who disagreed with you posted copies of your divorce proceedings to the web? Or pictures of your kids? Or interviewed your neighbors? Or posted your home lodge contact info? I would hazard a guess that there are several elements of your life you would like to keep private and sacred, as anyone would. But you refuse to respect that basic right for all the people you harm on your hate pages. Are you so lost and full of yourself that you cannot see how you are failing your obligations to your fraternity and to your fellow man? Crafty (no cheers for you) --- In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted material in this message is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. From: Craftworker ([email protected]) Subject: Re: On Being Ed King - Summary View: Complete Thread (4 articles) Original Format Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry Date: 2004-12-12 19:28:58 PST On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:32:09 GMT, Ed King [email protected] wrote: >Like SO many anti-Masons, you make spurious and vague charges. When called upon >to prove your point, you dodge the issue and divert the discourse. You attempt >to threaten and when your threats fall on deaf ears, you move to some other >attack. Oh Edward, I can't thank you more for that exchange, you have proven all my points for the home audience so eloquently. To begin, you still label me as an anti-mason, yet were not able to provide even a single instance of my attacking the fraternity...only posts where I call your friends idiots, which, the last time I checked the Blue Book for my jurisdiction, was not a masonic offense. Second, you asked for examples of other people wrongly slandered on your site, and I offered Worshipful Brother Hugh McFarland. You did not address your slander, and apparently stand by it. The problem, Edward, is you aspire to hold a position of truth and honor, yet value neither. I offered the hypothetical situation of your personal information being posted, and that was morphed by you into me *threatening* you. I did no such thing, and anyone who read my original post will come to that conclusion; but you will run with it anyway, as absolute "proof". These are not facts you are posting about people, Edward, these are just your fantasies and opinions regurgitated as "fact". Not the same thing, sweetie. And what you are writing is hurting people and tarnishing our reputation in the process. And let's be clear: you don't like the Ed King treatment directed at you, do you? Not a pleasant sensation? You don't want your family discussed, any more than you want your lodge affiliations posted. For whatever reason, you do not want to share that information, and squirm like a worm on a hook every time I ask for your bona fides. Yes, Ed, I already know the answer, and if you ask me to I will post them here as proof. But barring that, I will not post them, because as much as it turns my stomach in your case, I have taken an obligation to protect you and your secrets, communicated to me as such. How unfortunate that you have forgotten that same obligation. So, after this little exercise, do you still think posting personal information on your "enemies" is a kosher way of conducting business? You say you just report the facts, so is it ok if someone reports yours? Quid pro quo and all that? Or perhaps you could consider pulling yourself out of the moral gutter, and remove your slander pages? Perhaps stick to doing what is useful and good, like spreading truth and light, rather than casting a dark shadow across the internet? How unfortunate that you disregard all our teachings of brotherly love, relief, and TRUTH. How you also forget the Christian teachings of humility, mercy, and forgiveness. What master do you serve, exactly? Crafty --- In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted material in this message is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. From: Craftworker ([email protected]) Subject: Re: On Being Ed King (and undermedicated) This is the only article in this thread View: Original Format Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry Date: 2004-12-13 19:00:38 PST On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 01:40:24 GMT, Ed King [email protected] wrote: >You think that's what happened, huh? Remember, dear child: he and I were on the phone when >another of your little alt.freemasonry pseudonym was phoning here. He already knows the >games that are being played. Now Edward, and know I mean this in the kindest way, but are you aware that there are decaffienated blends just as tasty as the real thing? You are really losing your tenuous grip on reality if you think I am going to waste long distance charges on you. Your meltdown is giving people in China a tan. >> I am sure the local law enforcement personnel have >> nothing better to do then nurse your persecution complex. > >I dunno: I guess there have been FAR too many cases on the news where someone went to the >police complaining of staling and wound up dead soon thereafter with the police admitting >that yes, they HAD had complaints and they hadn't acted.... I reminded him of that the >first time around; not necessary this time! You may be a little out of touch with the way >it works these days. You make a threat, you become a 'subject of interest'.... Well, if I start making threats, I'll keep that in mind. I have never heard of anyone jailed for asking a question, though, at least not in this century. ;) >> Since your "mastery" of the english language does not allow you to tell the >> difference between a question and a threat, I am sure that President >> Bush will raise the national alert to "red" just for you. > >Backpedal all you wish. You have threatened me and my family. THOSE are the >facts, your pithy comments notwithstanding. What backpedaling? I stand by everything I have written, and the fact that the only "threats" here are the ones conjured in your theatrical hysterics. "Divert the discourse", right? Keep up the good work, Spinmaster! >Were you divorced recently? Would you be uncomfortable if >someone who disagreed with you posted copies of your divorce >proceedings to the web? Or pictures of your kids? Or interviewed your >neighbors? Or posted your home lodge contact info?>> > >Those are MORE than just questions, puppy! They are IMPLIED THREATS. Actually, the scientific term for it is "hypothetical question". It is a literary construct intended to help someone visualize a point you are trying to make. That fact that you refuse to acknowledge the point is not a surprise, however. >You CLEARLY have a fixation about me: of that there is simply NO doubt. You KNOW, you have a FUNNY way of writing MESSAGES. Your INEXPLICABLE LOVE of random CAPITALIZATION is almost HYPNOTIC Seriously though, I could care less about you as a person. I do, however, strongly object to your online behaviour. This episode is just a further indication of why you are bad for masonry. You are a fraud, a fake, and a liar. I am sure watching you mangle the truth here has been very educational for those in the group. You must not think much of these people, to assume they have so short an attention span to not see what you are trying to do here. >So are you going to provide any proof of my evil behavior or just make MORE threats? You're doing just fine on your own, Edward. I could not ask for a better display of your mental instability. Cheers! Crafty --- In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted material in this message is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. From: Craftworker ([email protected]) Subject: Re: On Being Ed King (Best Actor Nominee for 2004) This is the only article in this thread View: Original Format Newsgroups: alt.freemasonry Date: 2004-12-13 16:48:36 PST On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 00:19:40 GMT, Ed King [email protected] wrote: >I'll be talking this evening with the same Detective who handled the LAST person who >made threats against me. You'll note that he hasn't been around - AT ALL! - since that >time. He already understands the issues and the threats: he was VERY distraught that my >last stalker knew what kind of car I had so I imagine he's going to take some >particular interest in your asking about (non-existant) divorces, giving names of >people you presume are family members and threatening to put pictures of my children on >the internet. The more I think about it, the more it seems a direct, frontal threat - >and I will NOT stand for it! You do that, Edward. Be sure to give him a copy of the original post and stand back a few paces so he doesn't spew coffee on you when he busts out laughing. I am sure the local law enforcement personnel have nothing better to do then nurse your persecution complex. Since your "mastery" of the english language does not allow you to tell the difference between a question and a threat, I am sure that President Bush will raise the national alert to "red" just for you. Here's a hint to help you in the future: "How would you like it if someone threw a pie in your face?" (that was a question) "I am going to throw a pie in your face!" (that was threat) See how that works? AMAZING!! Now go back and read my original post to see if you can tell the difference. In the meantime, email me your "detective's" contact info, I'd love to tell him where the resident k00k lives so he can keep an eye on you. Further, it will be entertaining if your "friends" misuse their authority on your behalf, as I'll see they lose their jobs over it. Love you, don't change, Crafty P.S. And you better stop threatening me LOL --- In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted material in this message is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. |
I have striven not to laugh at human actions, not to weep at them, nor to hate them, but to understand them.
Baruch Spinoza
1632-1677, Philosopher and Theologian
A Motto seen on Masonicinfo.com - Anti-Masonry Points of View
Edward L. King, Publisher
|
Introduction
Subject: Edward L. King
|
|
In this thread King is admonished by a 'Brother' for
his continual remarks directed towards
and making light of those who suffer from mential
health issues. Where I specifically have a problem is with you, Ed King and other Masons making rude remarks about mental health issues. ("Take your meds.", "Narcotics Anonymous", "I hope you don't have children", "This from a man who spent -real- time in a mental institution", etc.) You and others who have no sensitivity about the stigma associated with mental health may find these remarks humorous or harmless -- just another put-down where the target is so deserving. Leaving aside for the moment the issue of whether Masons should respond to their opponents with name calling is the worse fact that when you use these type of comments to debunk someone's argument, it is the purest form of the ad homenim attack -- "This person is affected by mental illness so anything he says is without merit'. I find all of these remarks very painful, but more especially so when they come from Masons I seriously look up to like yourself and Ed. S&F, Steve .'. In this thread Mason Steve Hudson continues his call for King to stop belittling and stereotyping those with disabilities. King of course continues to ignore him. Later, if he follows his usual script he will contact Mr. Hudson's lodge Secretary in private to file a complaint about his "activities", or even file complaints with Mr. Hudson's internet service providers making accusations of "violations of terms of service" , as he has done to others on numerous occasions. "Ed King" [email protected] wrote in message news:[email protected]... > In article 8771ec65712afbf430 wrote: > > > > One day it is using the mentally ill to attack his critics, While his grammer was 'off' this particular criticism does stick to you Ed. You WILL use a persons mental health history to debunk his ideas instead of debunking them on their merits. Do you remember writing these? 8/14/01 18:50 "And you are listening to the ravings of a person who has spent time in a mental institution" 8/15/01 17:01 "And besides, this individual has spent _real_ time in a mental institution" The implications of these types of statement is that ANYONE who has spent time in a mental institution is not worth listening too. I'm not sure that's what you really meant to say, but it IS the impression statements like these mean to some (myself included). I think what you meant to say was something along the lines of: "According to information I recieved, S was diagnosed with paranoid schizophenia which may affect his perception of reality." which I for one would have no problem with, as a statement. But, in my sincere and honest opinion, making a BLANKET statement about individuals who've spent time in the hospital for mental health issues, especially to suggest that it invalidates ANYTHING they say, is deeply offensive, not to mention semantically inaccurate. Respectfully, Steven M. Hudson .'. Jerusalem Lodge No. 49 Ridgefield, CT, USA In this thread Steve Hudon responds to King attacking him through "private" e-mails for the recent criticism of him in alt.freemasonry over his bigotted personal remarks about mental health. It is a convincing denunciation of the tactics and methods of this self styled 'anti-masonry' enforcer "Ed King" [email protected] wrote in message news:[email protected]... > As Masons we are reminded to 'whisper good counsel' and had you done that first, I could have reviewed these items with you by now. Ed, I AM truly sorry Watch has chosen to immortalize our disagreement on his web page. And I'm also very sorry you feel 'attacked' rather than challenged. That was not my intent. However I strongly disagree that it is unMasonic to have discussed this in public. Your offensive comments were public. We also did, six months ago, have a similar discussion on a private back-channel. At that time, you may remember, I was standing up for a brother who was also feeling intimidated by the lack of compassion some alt.freemasonry brothers had shown with regards to mental health issues and was concerned about the injunction to 'not make a madman a Mason'. Your response was the same as Manny's most recent one. "We didn't mean any harm to YOU brother -- its just those darned antis that sometimes deserve it. Besides, depression isn't _really_ mental illness." I also mentioned at that time that I found this response less than satisfying. I tried at that time to get you to understand that this is NOT some campaign of mine to 'lick an old wound' or cry 'poor me', but an honest heart-felt belief that these kinds of remarks are inappropriate. I was apparently unsuccessful at that as well since in your recent private email to me you referred to my recent public attempts to get these types of remarks reduced as, and I quote, -- "self-flaggelation". This is the very type of attitude I am trying very hard to challenge. I am truly sorry that my handling of this issue may have ended our somewhat uneasy friendship. As I told 'Watchy', I don't judge the whole person by one or two elements of their behavior and I don't intend to start with you. I often enjoy your humor, I deeply respect your Masonic scholarship, I admire your devotion to the fraternity, I strongly applaud your level of work and effort in the 'masonicinfo' pages. The fact that I find your tone and level of derision of your opponents often too strong for my particular tastes does not and has not made me any less proud to call you my brother. I have wanted to make a public appeal to the brothers of alt.freemasonry to stop these types of comments for some time. Perhaps I should have made a more general appeal that didn't identify any specific examples of the types of remarks I found offensive so that all could save face. Believe me, I was very dismayed and heartsick that 'Watchy' chose to spin my annoyance into some form of villification of you, which it certainly is NOT, though I can certainly understand you anger that 'Watchy' now has one more example of someone disagreeing with you on something. But, as you have seldom hesitated to 'hold back' with your opponents, Mason or otherwise, I figured (incorrectly I guess) that these were your 'rules of the game' here on alt.freemasonry. This discussion has now turned into something I never intended, though, as you have strongly suggested, perhaps I should have known better. I AM truly and deeply sorry 'Watchy' will use my disagreement with you as a stick to beat you with, but I do stand by my remarks -- I strongly feel that debunking your opponents ideas by ridiculing them for their mental health history is ad-hominem and inappropriate. Sincerely, Steven M. Hudson .'. Jerusalem Lodge No. 49 |
|
The 'Examination of a Visitor' portion of this page
was posted in January of 2001 by someone in the usenet newsgroup
alt.freemasonry and received the following veiled threat of
bodily and deadly injury towards the webmaster of this site
in a post by the Freemason 'SSG Russo'.
Just another unbelievable example of the violent temper, "zeal for the fraternity"
- and mindlessness - of "Active" Freemasonry.
The Google Cache is here.
From: SSG Russo ([email protected])
The foolish and ignorant anti who produced this is in error. A due examination
includes more than grips and words. You must walk the Tilers sword and pass
HIS examination.
As you have so denoted, many of the secrets of Masonry have been divulged,
therefore the examinations are more stringent, being necessary to weed out
those unworthy professing to be Masons.
May the GAOTU exact due retribution upon your soul for divulging Masonic
information in such a manner, and for the sole purpose of being mean spirited.
May you find yourself paying due penance in the afterlife, as one unworthy to
enter the gates of Heaven.
May your inability to hold your tongue leave you without one, where it shall be
buried in the sands of the sea, between low and high tides--an unholy place
preventing future repentance and entrance into heaven.
May your heart be eaten by buzzards, and other predatory birds. May the
remainder of your viscera be taken and burned and scattered over vast
distances.
Such is the holy and noble curse I may place upon you. May your nightmares
come true.
Jason C. Russo |
|
Is Freemasonry a Cult?
Organized Freemasonry has never tolerated public criticism.
|
|
Introduction Masonic Enforcer: Edward L. King This masonic enforcer and propagandist operates out of the state of Maine. He conceals his masonic affiliations in a vain attempt to hide his associations, but he must be under the control of the masonic grand lodge of the state in which he lives and runs his business. Typically, the grand lodge denies all information about him and is unresponsive regarding complaints about the libel from his professional propaganda business under the auspices of freemasonry. The grand lodge of Maine thus protects their internet propagandist and encourages him to continue his libellous work, believing that they and their professional hate operative are beyond reproach of law or public sentiment. As I live in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, civil complaints are ineffective across international boarders. Notice however the absence of hate web sites in Toronto against Restivo. Such mirror sites could easily be established, but their authors would be brought to justice at once. They and their fellow anti-Restivo hate promoters could face U.S. and Canadian federal criminal chages of hate defamation against my religion, being Christian and Roman Catholic, which traditionally is anti-freemasonic. The cult masons' animosity to Roman Catholicism is projected a fortieri towards Restivo in a years' long business of public libelous defamation. Some day they will be brought to federal justice for their hate crimes. In the interim and thereafter, an informed public is a forearmed public against cult mason subversion. |
|
In this alt.freemasonry Usenet thread King makes light of a "brother" who was seriously
abused and physically injured during his Shriner initiation and who went on to publically
sue the Shrine for degradation and injuries he suffered.
Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:56 PM |
Hatred, for the man who is not engaged in it, is a little like the odor of garlic for one who hasn�t eaten any.
Jean Rostand (1894�1977), French biologist, writer.
A Motto seen on Masonicinfo.com - Anti-Masonry: Points of View
Edward L. King, Publisher
|
The Rainbow Swastika |
We welcome the opinions of those who visit this site, be they complimentary or not. We will not, however, suffer fools gladly nor will we subject ourselves to a barrage of e-mails or fits of obscene hysteria simply because someone doesn't like what we've written. As a result, we caution our correspondents to use appropriate 'netiquette' when contacting us. We can understand and appreciate that we may have burst a balloon or said something you're angry about: that's no reason, though, to engage in name-calling or profanity or multiple mailings.
We thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Abuse Policy
Masonicinfo.com - Anti-Masonry: Points of View
Edward L. King, Publisher
|
In this thread King defends Alice Bailey, and tries to
play cute about whether I was referring to her husband
the 33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemason and prominent
Occult writer, or his wife the Eastern Star Mason and
founder of Lucifer Trust whose writings were used by the
Nazi's. |
With a background of hate - and the Nazi activities are just one such example - is it any wonder that Freemasons watching the irrational and deadly actions of those who oppose political and social issues, become concerned?
A Motto seen on Masonicinfo.com - Anti-Masonry: Points of View
Edward L. King, Publisher
|
In this thread King rejoins his attack against Hannah Newman
and the Rainbow Swastika and throws in a general anti-semitic
libel about "the Jewish Press". |
|
|
In response to several requests (including taunts from anti-Masons) to identify those groups which object to Freemasonry. We'll shortly outline objections raised by the Catholic Church, a few Southern Baptists, and others. Trying to write in a way which is honest and unbiased does take time: we ask you to bear with us....
Motto and "Under Construction" sign seen on the otherwise blank 'Groups Opposed' section of Masonicinfo.com for the last thirty months.
Responding to groups who have attacked Freemasonry such as the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Synod, the Lutherans, the Baptists, the Presbeterians, the Italian Government, the French Government, or the British Government would be an admission and acknowledgment of the existance of their true position criticizing The Order.
Divert the Discourse...
And this proves that the Roman Catholic Church, the Church of England, the Methodist Church, the Baptist Church, the ACLU, the Bill of Rights, Tony Brown, the BBC, National Public Radio, recent legislation passed by the British, French, Italian, Egyptian, and Welsh Parliaments is all just a gigantic Anti-Masonic Conspiracy being orchestrated by "The Anti's".One of the most obnoxious aspects of Masonicinfo.com is the continually shifting and threatening personal attack diatribe under the category of "Known or Suspected Anti's", which he uses to defame those who have criticized Freemasonry, or intimidate any might who be thinking of doing so.
King and others claim to operate a widespread network within the millions strong Masonic "Fraternity" where "Intelligence Reports" submitted by Masonic Lodges and Freemasons are used to "track" known or suspected "Anti-Activity".
In regard to Freemasonry Watch, because the "Brethren" have not been able to "dig up some dirt" on us they have resorted to out and out Fabrication and Forgery. King and Enforcer Masonry have made no less than NINE seperate provenly false identity claims for the publisher of the site, of which it is always presented in a breathless prose claiming "incontrovertable" or "compelling" proof.
As quickly as "Masonicinfo" makes one claim and it is exploded he drops it from his repetoire and pretends he never made it. It is like trying to argue with a two year old child.
The current one which he is peddling is that we are some old usenet poster which because we have used the phrase "divert the discourse" on a couple of pages - a phrase which comes straight out of the Oaths taken during the Freemasons "Obligations" from authentic Masonic "Monitors". It is absolute nonsense, just like the other eight claims he has made and dropped.
The "Anti-Mason Hunters" of Freemasonry always play the "Attack the Man" game, rather than respond to the arguements or facts presented, because Freemasonry's own writings are so damning by themselves that there is no way for they to refute them.
Freemasonry, unable to refute the arguements made by it's critics, chooses instead to destroy the critics themselves.
Ad Hominem - Attack the Man.
In short Masons like King employ the methodology of Fascism to deal with dissent - eliminate the dissenters and the dissent will go away.
Well you can't get us all King.
You eliminated Stephen Knight, but others have followed, and will continue to follow.
Freemasonry will end up on the dustbin of History.
That is one claim we are most confident of making.
Additional Resources on Masonicinfo.com
Edward L. King's Masonic Hate Site Exposed and Corrected
By, Mike Restivo
Ed King's Lying Smear Campaign
By, Cutting Edge Ministries
Ed King and his misinformation machine
By, The Revelation
Perry Research Inc V Edward L. KingEd King, Junior Warden & Webmaster
Further Reading:
