| Revision as of 21:22, 17 September 2005 editDreamGuy (talk | contribs)33,601 edits warning about highly biased anti-Freemason edits | Revision as of 21:58, 17 September 2005 edit undo24.68.243.40 (talk) →WarningNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ==Warning== | ==Warning== | ||
| What is 'Anti-Freemasonry Propaganda'? | |||
| Are you suggesting that information that Freemasons disagree with is defacto false and therefore propaganda? | |||
| You should read Stephen Knights book, as well as Eddie Campbell's graphical novel. The BBC did a number of investigations on the Masonic theory as well. It has NOT been discredited, despite Freemasons attempts to do so. | |||
| Freemasonry Watch is not a valid and accepted source by Freemasons. So what. Freemasons never accept criticism of themselves, yet much of the content of the website is either quoting directly from recognized masonic sources, or is masonic writing itself. Freemasons lie, that is the main problem. | |||
| Secondly who is responsible for deleting the additional information about the Jack the Ripper case yesterday? You? No other theory has captured the public imagination about the subject. Yet you, like frantic freemasons, seek to 'disappear' it. It never happened. | |||
| You can't do an entry on Jack the Ripper and list the suspects without including the Freemasonry theory. Who has the hidden agenda here? | |||
| The "logic" you employ here is quite masonic by the way. | |||
| There certainly is evidence that Masons have been attempting to craft the wilkopedia entry for Freemasonry to their liking, and have undoubtably installed their conferates inside the editorial committees, exactly as they did for Dmoz. | |||
| But they failed in Dmoz and they will fail here as well, because they are stupid and they are liars. | |||
| Misplaced Pages is not a place for you to deposit anti-Freemasonry propoganda. IF you intend to try to contribute to this site in the future, please read and follow the ] policy, as encyclopedia articles cannot take sides in disputes (except for pointing out mainstream opinion and labeling it as such and pointing out errors in arguments by citing appropriate experts where appropriate). The site freemasonrywatch.org is not a valid and accepted source. See the ] policy. ] 21:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC) | Misplaced Pages is not a place for you to deposit anti-Freemasonry propoganda. IF you intend to try to contribute to this site in the future, please read and follow the ] policy, as encyclopedia articles cannot take sides in disputes (except for pointing out mainstream opinion and labeling it as such and pointing out errors in arguments by citing appropriate experts where appropriate). The site freemasonrywatch.org is not a valid and accepted source. See the ] policy. ] 21:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:58, 17 September 2005
Warning
What is 'Anti-Freemasonry Propaganda'?
Are you suggesting that information that Freemasons disagree with is defacto false and therefore propaganda?
You should read Stephen Knights book, as well as Eddie Campbell's graphical novel. The BBC did a number of investigations on the Masonic theory as well. It has NOT been discredited, despite Freemasons attempts to do so.
Freemasonry Watch is not a valid and accepted source by Freemasons. So what. Freemasons never accept criticism of themselves, yet much of the content of the website is either quoting directly from recognized masonic sources, or is masonic writing itself. Freemasons lie, that is the main problem.
Secondly who is responsible for deleting the additional information about the Jack the Ripper case yesterday? You? No other theory has captured the public imagination about the subject. Yet you, like frantic freemasons, seek to 'disappear' it. It never happened.
You can't do an entry on Jack the Ripper and list the suspects without including the Freemasonry theory. Who has the hidden agenda here?
The "logic" you employ here is quite masonic by the way.
There certainly is evidence that Masons have been attempting to craft the wilkopedia entry for Freemasonry to their liking, and have undoubtably installed their conferates inside the editorial committees, exactly as they did for Dmoz.
But they failed in Dmoz and they will fail here as well, because they are stupid and they are liars.
Misplaced Pages is not a place for you to deposit anti-Freemasonry propoganda. IF you intend to try to contribute to this site in the future, please read and follow the Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view policy, as encyclopedia articles cannot take sides in disputes (except for pointing out mainstream opinion and labeling it as such and pointing out errors in arguments by citing appropriate experts where appropriate). The site freemasonrywatch.org is not a valid and accepted source. See the Misplaced Pages:Verifiability policy. DreamGuy 21:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)