Just a Thought

You know, every once in a while I grow tired of the "former forums" and take a little holiday from them. Generally, it is because I happen to have quite a lot of non-related projects to take care of (the kind that bring in cash and look good on my portfolio). However, it is also because of threads like these that I welcome the distance.

Please, I beg of you, take your theories elsewhere. Do not turn this forum into the realm of lunacies. This is not the place to "debate" your "theories" on the conspiracies.

Seriously, people. Berg thought "heaven" is in the moon. You think everyone and their brother (or dog) is involved with taking over the planet and enslaving mankind. What is the difference? It is all hearsay. More importantly, your "theories" are irrelevant to the point of this website.

Sorry, but if I wanted to read about "space invaders impregnating women and cloning their babies to become the future presidents and prime ministers of the ruling class while pretending to be Christians but really sacrificing goats and small children" I would go to the 10 trillion other websites out there that deal exclusively with these issues. Might I suggest you do the same?

Thorwald,
Point taken. It is interesting though, not so much as to debate theories, but to get information, research it and run it by others with some knowledge. To some it may be hearsay. From what I personally have experienced working with those in recovery, it is more. But I can understand how you feel. I would appreciate the freedom to exchange information of this nature. Any suggestions for a more appropriate
forum ? Or perhaps the overseers of this website would rather we didn't engage in this type of communication at all. I would appreciate knowing. I did notice in several forums that the discussions didn't seem to match the forum descriptions. Really I was trying to guard myself. Sorry, I got so interested in the exchange. But as long as it has gone this far, bear with me please as I clarify...the discussion wasn't about how everyone and their dog is in control, but rather how few in high places are, and that fact certainly does not mean the rest of us are in bondage to them. I certainly am not.
Everyone else, thank you for your input. Honestly, I forget about Berg and I need to remember that I have been away and living a good (hard but good) life for many years which may not be the case for others who are affected negatively by some things because of the perspectives they have. I apologize for any insensitivity on my part. Rolling Eyes

Quote:

Sorry, but if I wanted to read about "space invaders impregnating women and cloning their babies to become the future presidents and prime ministers of the ruling class while pretending to be Christians but really sacrificing goats and small children" I would go to the 10 trillion other websites out there that deal exclusively with these issues. Might I suggest you do the same?

Has this thread mentioned "space invaders"?

I must have missed it.

Someone mentioned groups having Tax exempt status in US and we got onto Scientology and then the Freemasons, which someone defended.

The scientologists and Freemasons have a history of abuse similar to CoG/TF

Quote:

Has this thread mentioned "space invaders"?

Well, we are talking about groups of people that believe some bloke named "Jesus" is gonna come busting out of the space.

Quote:

The scientologists and Freemasons have a history of abuse similar to CoG/TF

..as does the Catholic Church and that mullet-infested Christian household down the street but they aren't being discussed here.

Hmmm. So do I go on with this discussion and mention some other things I learned from experience regarding the Catholic hierarchy and satanists or would that be inappropiate?

Thorwald wrote:

"Please, I beg of you, take your theories elsewhere. Do not turn this forum into the realm of lunacies. This is not the place to "debate" your "theories" on the conspiracies.

More importantly, your "theories" are irrelevant to the point of this website."

The motivating factor involved in my beginning this thread was to engage in more constructive dialogue, rather than bashing one another over our differences. For the record, I personally find most "conspiracy theories" far-fetched and unenlightening. Additionally, my previous remarks in this thread, or any other, do not indicate that I embrace any such persuasion as alleged. What another individual believes is their own right, and to censor their expression or beliefs is no one's business or right. Diversity or dissent pose no threat; honest debate is beneficial.

I am reminded of Jack's recent comments posted on 5/4/2006:"A good way to tell you've won your arguement is when your opponent has essentially resorted to name-calling...Give me freedom to think on my own, or give me death."

"The truth is incontrovertible.
Panic may resent it,
ignorance may deride it,
malice may distort it,
but there it is."
(Winston Churchill
House of Commons May 17, 1916)

Physician, heal thyself.

Day,

I believe the point of my post was pretty clear: This is not the place to debate every conspiracy theory.

I have not resorted to name-calling. Every forum needs moderation and, as a Moderator, it is well within my right to steer discussions away from issues unrelated to the point of this website. I am not "censoring" anything. If I were, your posts would have been deleted. I am simply suggesting that this discussion is getting way off the point of this website. Again, there are plenty of other forums where you can debate these theories freely.

I think that referring to comments as lunacies was attacking and thus can be interpreted as name calling. Perhaps there were better examples, but like you Thorwald, I have a life and cannot, nor do I desire to attend to every miniscule detail, unless absolutely necessary for the sake of clarity.
However, I do appreciate your point and I shall respect that. When I first became active on this site I was looking for some guidelines to follow because I believe in order. I expressed that on some forum and someone, (for all I know without physically checking it could have been you) told me those on this site were pretty easy going and I should feel free to post whatever I like. I am seeking for the balance so please as I do so, do not be offened by my stumbling. I live a very easy, open life and have no problem with you addressing me personally and directly on a public forum with correction given in the right heart attitude.

I apologise if my "lunacies" comment was offensive.

I suppose I should clarify what I meant when I wrote (and, yes, it was me), "just about anything can be posted" in these forums. Generally, yes, just about anything is acceptable. There is a specific topic to this website/forum and that is with issues pertaining to TFI , its current members, and its former members. My personal preference is that this can be a forum that welcomes and respects everyone. I (independently; not as a Moderator) even welcome topics that are not about TFI. However, as always, there is a balance.

Don't worry. I am not at all offended by any of this. I am easy going and my initial post (under this thread) was meant to be lighthearted.

Anyway, I hope you can understand why I am trying to steer the conversation away from a predominantly "conspiracy theory" debate or discussion. I understand that it hasn't become that. However, it appeared as if it was headed that way.

As a side note, I am stating all of this simply as a user of this forum. There are other Moderators and I do not speak for them. This was not a "Moderator request"; simply a user-suggestion.

All the best!

I deeply regret the course this thread has taken, up until now. Please accept my sincerest apologies for my part in this quarrel. This site has been a good thing for me and I have truly enjoyed participating in the some of the discussions and topics, but I was especially heartened to read the last two postings. Thank you so much.

I can't for the life of me figure out where anyone has brought up the issue of "conspiracy theories".

Have i been reading the same thread as Thorwald?

evanman, the exact words "conspiracy theories' were not used but I can totally see what Thorwald is saying. I have lots to learn about the community that is here at this site and I realy want to get to know the people here. We've all been through a lot and there is a commonality amongst those of us who had the COG/FI experience. I personally believe I am a better person for having had that experience because in order to come out of that camoflouged evil, I had to work real hard on me. I am not trying to impose anything on anyone but at the same time do desperately desire to have someone who really understands listen.
I personally fought hard to find the Jesus I originally met. Just He and I.
I believe in Him and the "unadulterated" love He was an example of. I want to emenate that. I know Berg was a very broken individual and the evil that was allowed to permeate him travelled far and wide. But he was an imposter. In order for there to be an imposter there had to be something real to begin with.
In order to respect this forum I would like to invite anyone who has anything to add to this to communicate with me via private message or perhaps a more suited forum.
Thank you everyone. Thank you Thorwald for the direction and for your response.

I don't like the moderator label because often it makes it more difficult to make comments or especially criticisms without people inferring that I am suggeting my views reflect website policy. For the record, there is no specific problem with discussing conspiracy theories here, whether or not you consider some of the comments so far about the Freemasons, Illuminati etc. as engaging in such. BTW, thanks for the Anti-Masonry FAQ link, Peter ... was an interesting read.

The Freemasons denigh that Pike was involved with the founding of the KKK, however the KKK, themselves, state that he was.

This is not conspiracy theory, this is fact!

It is interesting that so many of these cults have rarely ever been charged, or even endicted, for crimes. We know that CoG/TF have been guilty, and so have the JW's & Catholic Church. What will it take to bring them to justice?

evanman wrote:

The Freemasons denigh that Pike was involved with the founding of the KKK, however the KKK, themselves, state that he was.

This is not conspiracy theory, this is fact!

You deny that your cult, Christianity and Jesus have nothing to do with The COG/TF, however they, The Family, themselves, state that he (and christianity) have everything to do what they're doing and have done.

Does that make it fact? If so, it's not a wonder that you believe that some bloke named Jesus was and is a real life, walking, talking un-dead.

Albert Pike is no "mythological" creature, his writings, his works are not disputed--there is even a monument to him, the only confederate officer to have a monument erected to him by the federal state!

I simply don't understand why people are arguing over this!

This is historical fact!

A photograph of Albert Pike

This is getting somewhat off-topic unless perhaps someone wants to make the connection to COG publications (like Mo Letter 948) on this topic. I first heard all this BS about the Illuminati, the Masonic conspiracy, the Protocols of Zion, etc. from the Mo Letters. It is certainly interesting how some exers and particularly first-generation members are apparently more likely to believe in outlandish conspiracy theories and discredited hoaxes. In regards to Albert Pike, he was apparently a racist SOB (as were many of his peers) but there is no credible evidence to support the assertion that he was a founder or high ranking member of the KKK and thus your assertion that he "was involved with the founding of the KKK" is not a "fact" as you claim.

The Wikipedia article on Albert Pike has the following information:

Quote:

Albert Pike and the Ku Klux Klan

Pike has been accused of being a founder and high ranking member of the Ku Klux Klan; however, there is no evidence of this and the claim appears to be based on the unsubstantiated writings of Klan apologist Walter L. Fleming and revivalist Susan L. Davis.

One of the Klan founders, Captain John C. Lester, wrote a 119 page book in 1884, in which he recalled the founding of the Klan fifteen years before. The only person that Lester mentioned was "Gen. Forrest," undoubtedly referring to Nathan Bedford Forrest. Lester does not mention Pike.

Fleming republished Lester's memoir in 1905 and added a list of names and pictures of "Klansmen." These included Pike but also Rev. D.L. Wilson who had been Lester's co-author but not a Klansman. Thus if the inclusion of Pike on the list was a mistake, then it was not Fleming's only one.

Davis published her "Authentic History" of the Klan in 1924. She disagreed with Lester and regarded Fleming as not knowledgeable about the Klan. She also said that David L. Wilson was wrong to say that the original Klan was a failure. (This is not surpirsing since Davis was actively supporting a revival of the Klan at the time of her publication.)

Virtually all books or articles that claim Pike was part of the Ku Klux Klan use Fleming, Davis, other authors who cite Fleming or Davis, or else use no sources whatsoever. As one source puts it, "Research into primary source material will reveal that there isn't any primary source material" that proves or disproves Pike's association with the Klan. It is noteworthy that when the Klan was founded in Pulaski, Tennessee around Christmas 1865, Pike was living in Arkansas, and there is no record of him journeying to or being in Pulaski.

Below is a quote from one of Albert Pike's writings which supporters of the thesis that Albert Pike was, at the very least, a member of the Ku Klux Klan, sometimes cite in support of their thesis[1][2] (Albert Pike was the owner and publisher of the Memphis, Tennessee Daily Appeal, and the below quote is from an editorial by him in that paper from April 16, 1868):

Quote:

With negroes for witnesses and jurors, the administration of justice becomes a blasphemous mockery. A Loyal League of negroes can cause any white man to be arrested, and can prove any charges it chooses to have made against him.... The disenfranchised people of the South ... can find no protection for property, liberty or life, except in secret association.... We would unite every white man in the South, who is opposed to negro suffrage, into one great Order of Southern Brotherhood, with an organization complete, active, vigorous, in which a few should execute the concentrated will of all, and whose very existence should be concealed from all but its members.

The KKK, themselves state:

Quote:

Q. Why do you use such weird titles for officers such as Grand Wizard, Grand Dragon, Exalted Cyclops, etc.?

A. The Knights does not use these titles. When the Klan was re-organized in 1915, by Col. Simmons in Stone Mountain, Georgia, he patterned the Klan after a fraternity. The early 1900's was a time of fraternities. The nation was seeing prosperous times and many fraternities sprung up around the country. Col. Simmons with the help of Albert Pike who was a great fraternalist, created for the Klan an aura of secrecy, ceremony, etc. They had odd sounding titles, secret code words, and lengthy ceremonies in which certain officers stood in certain designated spots, said certain phrases, etc. It was a fraternity much like the Odd Fellows, the Elks, the Moose Lodge, or any other. They had no unifying political goal. It was simply a fraternity for white Christians.

Frequently Asked Questions

Copyright 1995-2005, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Thomas Robb, national director
http://www.kkk.bz/faq.htm

The quote you have provided proves nothing except the existence of a statement by an organization which is one of many that came long after the dissolution of the second KKK in 1944. The first KKK was founded in 1865 and disbanded in the early 1870s. The second KKK was founded in 1915 and dissolved in 1944. The third KKK is composed of numerous organizations including the one you quote. There is clearly no organizational continuity and thus they are not a reliable source about the first KKK. That Albert Pike is revered by today's KKK does not demonstrate or prove that he had any association or sympathy with the original KKK. Although some members of KKK organizations apparently believe they are using rituals written by Pike specifically for the KKK, there is no evidence to support this. However it is possible they copied stuff from Ralph P. Lester's 1904 Look to the East!, Thomas Smith Webb's 1816 The Freemason's Monitor or William Preston's 1775 Illustrations of Masonry or even adapted for their own use a ritual Pike wrote for the Scottish Rite. One source also notes the "The title [which Pike was alleged to have] of Chief Judicial Officer does not appear in the Prescript of the Order, under Article I, Titles; Article V, Judiciary; or elsewhere. [pp. 153-176.] The title also does not appear in the 1868 Revised and Amended Prescript."

It is also interesting that the quote you cite says that "Col. Simmons with the help of Albert Pike who was a great fraternalist, created for the Klan an aura of secrecy, ceremony, etc." However, Pike died in 1891 so he certainly wasn't around to help Simmoms found the second Klan in 1915. If you want to find evidence of Freemasons being involved in the KKK, then you need look no further than William J. Simmons who was a Freemason and founded the second Klan. There is no factual dispute whatsoever about that and it seems puzzling that you would focus on Pike rather than Simmons.

evanman wrote:

The KKK, themselves state:

Quote:

Q. Why do you use such weird titles for officers such as Grand Wizard, Grand Dragon, Exalted Cyclops, etc.?

A. The Knights does not use these titles. When the Klan was re-organized in 1915, by Col. Simmons in Stone Mountain, Georgia, he patterned the Klan after a fraternity. The early 1900's was a time of fraternities. The nation was seeing prosperous times and many fraternities sprung up around the country. Col. Simmons with the help of Albert Pike who was a great fraternalist, created for the Klan an aura of secrecy, ceremony, etc. They had odd sounding titles, secret code words, and lengthy ceremonies in which certain officers stood in certain designated spots, said certain phrases, etc. It was a fraternity much like the Odd Fellows, the Elks, the Moose Lodge, or any other. They had no unifying political goal. It was simply a fraternity for white Christians.

Frequently Asked Questions

Copyright 1995-2005, Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Thomas Robb, national director
http://www.kkk.bz/faq.htm

well well well
Pretty soon we'll see who's watching enough TV.

G'luck on the exam. Flunking could cost your freedom.

xFamily

Just a Thought

Quick Links

My Account

able2know