George Washington's Vision & Pre-1800s Freemasonry

2 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I find it interesting that having read Illuminatus Trilogy decades ago I was able to recognize WEISHAUPT in the museum case at the Lodge on the hill. I still feel I was right, it is a lore that may actually have the Masons convinced that they have a secret actually based in historical fact. But not me.

I suppose this sums it up: "marketing". I recall something suggesting to do with WASHINGTON demanding his land back and thus the missing Virginia portions or something like that--dunno. Anyways, the "WASHINGTON as WEISHAUPT" seem to me to be more about anti-America propaganda. Similarly allegations of the U.S. being a two horned beast rising out of the sea doesn't seem to wash being that the U.S.A. isn't an ecclesiastical power neither are any of the states that established the confederacy. To knowledge neither the USA nor any of the states are dyarchies.

There are some that try to associate the American Revolution with the Bolshevik Revolution or with the French Revolution--however, where there mass religious persecutions in the states of America following the American Revolution? Did France declare war on its own citizens? Did the Romanovs put Russian out of allegiance? Coup de tats are quite different from revolutions. Revolutions by definition are purposed to set things back right. Revolutions aren't rebellions.

http://assets2.blurb.com/images/uplo...f8ff2d1578.jpg

With respect to 'spinning lore' what more fantastic and potentially-lucrative lore-spinning than to attempt to steal fire and glory from a group of Christians (and possibly others) who stood their ground after war had been effectively declared against them in 1775--especially when they gave glory to God rather than themselves (who are they aiming to steal fire from them)? Consider the audacity of any such claims when the evidence strongly suggests that the modern "illumined" freemasonry of Albert Pike's kind was and is not the same as WASHINGTON's type and that such types may have not been at all involved in the establishing of The United States of America (the 1781 confederacy) or of any of the of the states of America. Of course, there are various perspectives, opinions and such. I do not aim to be an apologist either for rebels or for tryants.

Quote:

"He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us." (Source: Declaration of Independence)
Attachment 1432
(Question: Is he referring to their attempt to tax the colonists without representation as an EXPERIMENT?!?)

Folks might do well to remember that Colonies first "United" under the Articles of Association of 1774. In 1775 after war was declared against them, the allegiance to Great Britain terminated. This was formalized in 1776. The obligations of allegiance to the British Crown and to the State of Great Britain were terminated. They created new states in 1776 to 1777 before the Articles of Confederation was done. Logic might also have it that any of Great Britain's obligations ceased to be of concern to America...perhaps? Perhaps not?

The history of America fits the long-time assertion that many fled Europe and perhaps even from Africa and Asia to escape religious persecution. And maybe what they sought escape from followed them across the water? The manifest and obvious distinctions between European or Oriental freemasonry and early American Christian social club or convivial Masonry are quite telling. Clearly, the glove doesn't fit Weishaupt's hand. The Oriential/European-Freemasons-invested-America story doesn't wash either. Country club as progenitor of nations? Hmmm.

Quote:

Interesting, the intelligence gathering technique seems to be en-trained upon them as subjects in the lodge and then when they reach 32nd Degree it seems they discover 33rd Degree is just to reveal WEISHAPT's program, that there is nothing there. So they get bored and go looking for an heir to the original estate, on the verge of discovering his heritage so they can affect his destiny - an inadvertent initiate who will wander away without his inheritance...

I have observed much the same. Perhaps forcing someone to personate of a United States citizen might be a felonious strategy for affecting the destiny of an heir to the original estate? For some reason I find myself reminded of a Tom & Jerry cartoon episode where the mouse is fascinated by what the cat "must" have in his hand because of the cat's clever and dramatic act--the mouse can't see and becomes so very intrigued to the extent that the mouse is tempted to get close enough to take a peek. But of course, the cat has nothing in his hand but air (and there was plenty of air for the mouse where the mouse was). The mouse was clearly the intended prize, an empty hand was the bait (very, very inexpensive bait).

Attachment 1427

Quote:

.... I think I got it right in my post above. It is Masons creating mystical-sounding lore for themselves. I saw the DOES a month ago - a free Rosicrucian meeting at the Lodge, and there is scarcely a woman's head that is not completely white... So they need a new recipe for creating intrigue. I did not join the RC.

It could be that rumors about Tupac being a Rosicrucian might have also been lore-spinning public relations. The same might go for rumors about Abraham Lincoln, Leonardo Decaprio and others being Freemasons.

1 Attachment(s)

So it seems for some reason important to re-consider or re-visit the notion of some Antichristian plot having allegedly driven Washington and others to "rebel" against the Great Britain and George III. I provided a pertinent link above concerning the America Revolution. However, I see no harm in exposing further the principles underlying the English Constitution at the time. This is not just about Ancient History but also about Law and Philosophy of Law. Once I get the time I hope to upload some scans and such. Now what we are about to uncover might upright those Hollywood-distortions of what government is or is not. It was and is a principle of British Government that the "Supreme Power" rather than vesting solely in the King/Queen it vested also in the Lords and in the Representatives of the People united. But not only that, it was held that:

Quote:

In the British government every free Subject has absolutely in himself a Part of the Supreme Power. (Source: The Constitutional Advocate: By Which, From the Evidence of History and of Records, and From the Principles of the British Government (London 1776))

Attachment 1431
(Note: that is not from an American publication!)

Comprehending the applicable English/British principles concerning the Supreme Power is key to seeing clearly why the American Revolution was not a war of rebellion. Keep in mind, this has to do with Washington and the nature of the foundations of the states of America. The principle of taxation without representation touched upon very fundamental principles underlying the British Crown. AFAIK, "Supreme Power" pretty much means sovereign prerogative. [More later]

New related thread: George Washington A Mason (Literally!)

Point being (re: the above post) is that more evidence points to George Washington having had little to nothing to do with Freemasons in the religious sense but instead much to do with actual architects and stonemason's guilds. Furthermore there is quite a bit of evidence showing that George Washington and others were out to escape a different type of 'religion' being imposed upon England by secret societies that began to establish themselves in the UK in the late 1700s further substantiating the research above.