For those who claim to be for freedom...

[Woodruff]

But it's wrong to say Obama's to blame. As a Legislator he did his job and argued against giving a President and our government these types of powers. As a President it's only human nature that he go ahead and use the powers the legislators gave his predecessors.

That is terrible logic, and abounds with hypocricy (on his part, not on yours so much).

Nah, just the nature of the political beast, that a party won't want to give up power once they gain it, plus, you miss the point that at least he put in more safeguards which is his way of taking a middle road - and possibly necessary

The Patriot Act has gotten more onerous, not less, during Obama's Presidency. Our government has moved into our rights more, not less, during Obama's Presidency. There's nothing middle of the road about it, really.

The fault still lies with the Legislative branch who awarded powers to the President that the president wasn't supposed to be awarded. Basically they dumped THEIR job on the Presidents.

Oh, I certainly don't believe that Obama is even primarily to blame. I definitely hold Congress as primarily to blame. But Obama is absolutely not blameless either.

So, the OP has a point that many didn't squawk too much then. I'm simply pointing out that I did squawk, not that it did me any good; and pointing out that in lieu of "no way to address these issues," I can understand why Obama didn't undo the only "act" the Legislature passed that enables the US to do SOMETHING, so I can't blame "him" as much as I'll continue to blame the Legislature.

The Patriot Act contains almost nothing necessary to effectively fighting terrorism, so I'll have to disagree with you there.

[thegreekdog]

When deciding whether to vote for President Obama in 2008 or President Obama in 2012, we were told he would not violate our privacy rights, but he did.

No, we weren't.

What he said prior to winning was
1) he didn't support some portions of the Patriot Act (yeah, his reasoning was our privacy/constitutional rights etc. but in the main his statement was against some of the act, not all of it.
2) he wanted more public awareness about what the government is doing

I stopped reading there. I'm sure the rest of your post is awesome, but when you say "No, we weren't [told President Obama wouldn't violate our privacy rights]" and then say "And here's where he said he wouldn't violate our privacy rights during the campaign" the first "No, we weren't" is invalid.

Oh, and in the likely event I did read the rest of your post, I blame President Obama, President Bush, President Clinton, President Bush, and President Reagan. I'm sure if I read some more, I could blame other presidents too. What I'm confused by is the insistence by you (and others) that we are not permitted to blame President Obama or that somehow President Obama is sacrosanct. It really boggles the mind; especially when you (and others) can't wait to bash other presidents for the same or lesser activities (like, did you know that like Obama like expanded the Patriot Act substantially?). And hey, I blame Congress too! How about that? I'm nothing if not consistent in my criticism, without resorting to your partisanship and love of one particular team leader over another.

[warmonger1981]

by Woodruff on Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:45 am

warmonger1981 wrote:
Yes, I do realize it is based on religion actually. Masons claim it is not a religion though. It is based loosely on the Kabalah along with Egyption religion.

Quote from pg 741 " Masonery is a search for Light. That search leads us directly back, as you see, to the Kabalah".

Quote from pg 104 " Masonery, like all Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to misled those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls Light, from them, and to draw them away from it Truth is not for those who are unworthy or unable to racieveit, or would pervert it".

Woodruff:Your response above essentially highlights the oddity of your first statement that I was responding to. In addition, you didn't respond to my second point, I notice.

Oswald Wirth, a 33rd degree Mason of the Grand Lodge of France, in his book, L'Ideal Initiatique, explained the significance of the Masonic initiation :

"It is a serious matter to ask for Initiation, for one has to sign a pact. Agreed, there is no external, formal, visible signature ; it cannot be compared with signing ones name in blood, for being purely moral and immaterial, it demands that the man's soul be truly commited in the act...it is an agreement entered into seriously on both sides, and there is no escape from its clauses...the pupil himself is...indissolubly bound to his masters. It would all be nothing more than a snare and a delusion , if you could ask to be initiated free of all obligation, without paying your very soul for your entry into brotherly communion.

Source O. Wirth, L'Ideal Initiatique, pp10-11.

[Woodruff]

by Woodruff on Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:45 am

warmonger1981 wrote:
Yes, I do realize it is based on religion actually. Masons claim it is not a religion though. It is based loosely on the Kabalah along with Egyption religion.

Quote from pg 741 " Masonery is a search for Light. That search leads us directly back, as you see, to the Kabalah".

Quote from pg 104 " Masonery, like all Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to misled those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls Light, from them, and to draw them away from it Truth is not for those who are unworthy or unable to racieveit, or would pervert it".

Woodruff:Your response above essentially highlights the oddity of your first statement that I was responding to. In addition, you didn't respond to my second point, I notice.

Oswald Wirth, a 33rd degree Mason of the Grand Lodge of France, in his book, L'Ideal Initiatique, explained the significance of the Masonic initiation :

"It is a serious matter to ask for Initiation, for one has to sign a pact. Agreed, there is no external, formal, visible signature ; it cannot be compared with signing ones name in blood, for being purely moral and immaterial, it demands that the man's soul be truly commited in the act...it is an agreement entered into seriously on both sides, and there is no escape from its clauses...the pupil himself is...indissolubly bound to his masters. It would all be nothing more than a snare and a delusion , if you could ask to be initiated free of all obligation, without paying your very soul for your entry into brotherly communion.

Source O. Wirth, L'Ideal Initiatique, pp10-11.

So one dude said it in one book. Do you have some documentation that's from the organization (yes, I realize they like to be secretive)? I bring this up because even the Masons themselves don't agree on everything, and that is absolutely one of the things they don't agree on. This is not a consistently-held position.

[warmonger1981]

Masonic Oaths

7th degree - Royal Arch

"I (name), of my own free-will and accord, in presence of Almighty God, and this Chapter of Royal Arch Mason, erected to God, and dedicated to Zerubbabel, do herby and hereon most solemnly and sincerely swear , in addition to my former obligations, that I will not reveal the secrets of this Degree to any of any inferior Degree, nor to any being in the known world, exept it to be a true and lawful Companion Royal Arch Mason...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will not wrong this Chapter of Royal Arch Masons, or a companion of this Degree, out of the value of any thing, myself, nor sufrer it to be done by others, if in my power to prevent it...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will not speak evil of a Companion Royal Arch Mason, behind his back nor before his face, but will apprise him of all approaching danger, if in my power...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will answer and obey all due signs and summonses handed, sent, or thrown to me from a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons, or from a Companion Royal Arch Mason...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will assist a Companion Royal Arch Mason when I see him engaged in any difficulty, and will espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, wether he be right or wrong.
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will keep all the secrets of a Companion Royal Arch Mason without exceptions...
"To all which I do solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, with a firm and steadfast resolution to keep and perform the same, without any equivocation, mental reservation, or self-evasion of mind in me whatever; bind myself under no less penalty, than to have my skull smoot off, and my brains exposed to the scorching rays of the meridean sun, should I knowingly or wilfully violate or transgress any part of this my solemn oath or obligation of a Royal Arch Mason. So help me God, and keep me steadfast in the due performance of the same.


SOURCE: Malcolm C. Duncan, Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Moniter, part 2, Page 188-190

[warmonger1981]

Masonic Oaths


33rd Degree - Sovereign Grand Inspector General


"In presence of the Supreme Architect of the World and calling on these Illistrious brethren present as witnesses, l (name), do solemnly and sincerely swear, without prevarication or mental reservation, that I will be for ever faithful to the banner of the order, will follow it where it leads and will always defend it; allowing no danger to deyer me therefrom.
"I, furthermore solemnly swear that I will hold true allegiance to the Supreme Council of the United States of America, its territories and dependencies. And that I will never acknowledge any body or bodies of men as belonging to the Ancient Scottish Rite, claiming to be such, except such ashold allegiance to this Supreme Council, or those who recognize this Council. To alll these I do most solemnly swear, calling upon the Most High God to ratify my oath. And should I knowingly or wilfully violate the same, may this wine I now drink, become a deadly poison to me, as the hemlock juice drank by Socrates. And may these cold arms forever encircle me. Amen."
The Most Puissant Sovereign Grand Commander then says:
"Your third journey reminds you, that in the high offices you are now about to fulfil, you must never fail to fulfill your duty to God, your brethren and our order. Even now, though you know it not, you need the aid of your brethren, as others in time will require your assistance."

SOURCE: Scottish Rite Masonry Illistrated, The Complete Ritual of the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite, Vol.1 Page196

[Woodruff]

Masonic Oaths

7th degree - Royal Arch

"I (name), of my own free-will and accord, in presence of Almighty God, and this Chapter of Royal Arch Mason, erected to God, and dedicated to Zerubbabel, do herby and hereon most solemnly and sincerely swear , in addition to my former obligations, that I will not reveal the secrets of this Degree to any of any inferior Degree, nor to any being in the known world, exept it to be a true and lawful Companion Royal Arch Mason...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will not wrong this Chapter of Royal Arch Masons, or a companion of this Degree, out of the value of any thing, myself, nor sufrer it to be done by others, if in my power to prevent it...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will not speak evil of a Companion Royal Arch Mason, behind his back nor before his face, but will apprise him of all approaching danger, if in my power...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will answer and obey all due signs and summonses handed, sent, or thrown to me from a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons, or from a Companion Royal Arch Mason...
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will assist a Companion Royal Arch Mason when I see him engaged in any difficulty, and will espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, wether he be right or wrong.
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will keep all the secrets of a Companion Royal Arch Mason without exceptions...
"To all which I do solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, with a firm and steadfast resolution to keep and perform the same, without any equivocation, mental reservation, or self-evasion of mind in me whatever; bind myself under no less penalty, than to have my skull smoot off, and my brains exposed to the scorching rays of the meridean sun, should I knowingly or wilfully violate or transgress any part of this my solemn oath or obligation of a Royal Arch Mason. So help me God, and keep me steadfast in the due performance of the same.

SOURCE: Malcolm C. Duncan, Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Moniter, part 2, Page 188-190

Masonic Oaths

33rd Degree - Sovereign Grand Inspector General

"In presence of the Supreme Architect of the World and calling on these Illistrious brethren present as witnesses, l (name), do solemnly and sincerely swear, without prevarication or mental reservation, that I will be for ever faithful to the banner of the order, will follow it where it leads and will always defend it; allowing no danger to deyer me therefrom.
"I, furthermore solemnly swear that I will hold true allegiance to the Supreme Council of the United States of America, its territories and dependencies. And that I will never acknowledge any body or bodies of men as belonging to the Ancient Scottish Rite, claiming to be such, except such ashold allegiance to this Supreme Council, or those who recognize this Council. To alll these I do most solemnly swear, calling upon the Most High God to ratify my oath. And should I knowingly or wilfully violate the same, may this wine I now drink, become a deadly poison to me, as the hemlock juice drank by Socrates. And may these cold arms forever encircle me. Amen."
The Most Puissant Sovereign Grand Commander then says:
"Your third journey reminds you, that in the high offices you are now about to fulfil, you must never fail to fulfill your duty to God, your brethren and our order. Even now, though you know it not, you need the aid of your brethren, as others in time will require your assistance."

SOURCE: Scottish Rite Masonry Illistrated, The Complete Ritual of the Ancient Accepted Scottish Rite, Vol.1 Page196

I'm going to go ahead and answer both of your "sources" with one answer, as it applies to both. There is a tremendous amount of disagreement even amongst Masons as to the authenticity of Duncan's ritual. It is largely considered to be outdated and superceded. Basically, you're using old shit in an attempt to make some statement about the Masons which largely can be understood as the formality of their language and the depth of the traditions behind what they do.

I'm not even a Mason, and I find your arguments here amusing at best.

[Woodruff]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130620/18182823551/obama-administration-has-declared-war-leakers-claims-any-leak-is-aiding-enemy.shtml

[warmonger1981]

I have given my sources. Now do you have sources to back up your claim to the Duncan ritual. How about the Scottish Rite ritual. Oaths claim allegiance to Supreme Council. How are these amusing as if I made this up? This is coming from their own writings in which they use? How much do you know about Masonry? Do you have any idea how much the masons influenced this country? But to you it seems to be just a boys club with oaths and allegiances that mean little. The formality of the language has been chosen by the writers. Not me.

[BigBallinStalin]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130620/18182823551/obama-administration-has-declared-war-leakers-claims-any-leak-is-aiding-enemy.shtml

Is it the Executive position and the incentives which turn good men evil?

Or are those 'good' men morally decrepit and corrupt before attaining office?

[john9blue]

Basically, you're using old shit in an attempt to make some statement about the Masons which largely can be understood as the formality of their language and the depth of the traditions behind what they do.

sounds just like the old testament, right woody?

[Phatscotty]

WarMonger, are you a traveling man?

[Phatscotty]

Voter apathy and blind allegiance are a big part of the problem that led to Prism. People don't care as long as their 401k still has money in it, even though many Americans' portfolios still haven't recovered from the economic tsunami. Maybe the US is too big and a strong central government is necessary, but this is what we get when most people tune in to the country's governance only once every four years.

We need more citizen participation in the government and better understanding of what government can and should do. Otherwise, the US will remain a centralized oligarchy ruled by a political class with most people content to let their elected representatives make all the decisions for them.

[BigBallinStalin]

Voter apathy and blind allegiance are a big part of the problem that led to Prism. People don't care as long as their 401k still has money in it, even though many Americans' portfolios still haven't recovered from the economic tsunami. Maybe the US is too big and a strong central government is necessary, but this is what we get when most people tune in to the country's governance only once every four years.

We need more citizen participation in the government and better understanding of what government can and should do. Otherwise, the US will remain a centralized oligarchy ruled by a political class with most people content to let their elected representatives make all the decisions for them.

I pretty much agree.

Regarding the underlined, it's not true that most people aren't content about letting their elected reps make those decisions. Instead, most people simply don't care to even vote, and this is indicative of not being satisfied with the current political process. Apathy is really the problem; people face an inability to profit from voting.*

*Not trading votes per se, but rather profit = benefits > costs, and profit is both monetary and non-monetary.

It's partly because of a lack of education. People won't participate more directly in governance if the gains are trivial (e.g. sitting on city council meetings about sewage). Since 'all roads lead to D.C.', the more important policies are determined there as oppose to one's parish/county. The status quo eliminates the decision-making at more local levels of governance, thereby eliminating many of the gains of local participation.

From the local level, people learn to govern themselves, and without it, we lose that education. We can't learn if we're denied that ability to govern over greater policies at more local levels. That's a main problem with the US and its political process, and it's unsustainable.

[Woodruff]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130620/18182823551/obama-administration-has-declared-war-leakers-claims-any-leak-is-aiding-enemy.shtml

Is it the Executive position and the incentives which turn good men evil?

Or are those 'good' men morally decrepit and corrupt before attaining office?

You know the old adage about politics...the ones who would be good for the position aren't interested in the position.

[Woodruff]

Basically, you're using old shit in an attempt to make some statement about the Masons which largely can be understood as the formality of their language and the depth of the traditions behind what they do.

sounds just like the old testament, right woody?

To some degree, though I wouldn't agree with that completely. Is there a reason you're pointing that at me?

[john9blue]

To some degree, though I wouldn't agree with that completely. Is there a reason you're pointing that at me?

just making sure you remember not to criticize christianity based on shit from the old testament. lots of atheists tend to be fond of that

[Woodruff]

To some degree, though I wouldn't agree with that completely. Is there a reason you're pointing that at me?

just making sure you remember not to criticize christianity based on shit from the old testament. lots of atheists tend to be fond of that

Perhaps you can point out for me where I've done that?

Perhaps you can point out to me where I have criticized Christianity based on the Bible, instead of criticizing Christianity based on CHRISTIANS (which is what I almost always criticize).

Still working hard for that "gotcha" moment, are you?

[john9blue]

Perhaps you can point out for me where I've done that?

Perhaps you can point out to me where I have criticized Christianity based on the Bible, instead of criticizing Christianity based on CHRISTIANS (which is what I almost always criticize).

Still working hard for that "gotcha" moment, are you?

you're the one who is trying to "gotcha" me lol... and i never said you did.

[warmonger1981]

by Phatscotty on Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:33 am

WarMonger, are you a traveling man?

I guess I don't understand??

[BigBallinStalin]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130620/18182823551/obama-administration-has-declared-war-leakers-claims-any-leak-is-aiding-enemy.shtml

Is it the Executive position and the incentives which turn good men evil?

Or are those 'good' men morally decrepit and corrupt before attaining office?

You know the old adage about politics...the ones who would be good for the position aren't interested in the position.

My favorite defense of "politics is teh best" is this:

If I, the best, does not become a politician,
then someone of lesser ability will become the politician.
What then? Shall I let such a shame occur?
Of course not! Therefore I must become the politician!

[Woodruff]

Perhaps you can point out for me where I've done that?

Perhaps you can point out to me where I have criticized Christianity based on the Bible, instead of criticizing Christianity based on CHRISTIANS (which is what I almost always criticize).

Still working hard for that "gotcha" moment, are you?

you're the one who is trying to "gotcha" me lol... and i never said you did.

I am? You came into the discussion with a question from out of nowhere that really wasn't relevant to the discussion...I guess I dragged you in here by way of trying to gotcha you? You really are too much...but not in a good way.

[Woodruff]

Stolen from Reddit:

WHO IS MICHAEL CHERTOFF?

If that name rings a bell it's probably because Chertoff was the co-author of the infamous PATRIOT Act. Or perhaps it rings a bell to you because, after writing that abomination of a law, he went on to become Director of the Department of Homeland Security. And those of you that recall his term as DHS chief probably still remember vividly how aggressively he insisted on the use of "watchlists" and "body scanners".

Now, how many of you know that upon leaving office he started his own company called THE CHERTOFF GROUP -- and that TCG is the company that handles the multi-billion dollar contract to manage the watchlists he pushed for while in office? How many of you know that TCG represents the company that provides the body scanners?

How many of you know that his partner in business is MICHAEL V. HAYDEN, the former head of the CIA and the NSA?

While we're at it... How many of you know that JAMES R. CLAPPER, the current intelligence boss in Washington, was the former CEO of Booz Allen Hamilton (Booz). If Booz sounds familiar it's probably because you already know they help handle the PRISM contract.

Can we all say unconscionable conflicts of interests?

[warmonger1981]

Now welcome to the great USA. This is how our economy and country is ran. Big names in big interest corporations. I think the lady who was in charge of Motorola was working for the NSA. These people are putting each other in high level positions in the government then they go work for large corporations. This is not a mere coincidence. Land of the slaves. You just don't know it yet. And you think it is for safety. Funny.

[john9blue]

but those conspiracy theorists are so CRAZY right? there's no conspiracy here, kids. sit down and shut up like a good citizen.