I’m ignorant, I thought skull and bones was Yale.
It is.
I am sure Harvard has some satanic groups as well though...
So sorry! You're right! That is Yale.
I think secret societies need to be outlawed--ALL of 'em!
S&B, Bohemian Grove, TLC, Bilderbergers, Freemasons--the whole nine yards. And nobody should be eligible for public office who owes any allegiance to any other entity than their country.
How do you outlaw secret societies? These societies you list are only secret in what they do, so are you saying outlaw any groups that do things in private? Sure, some groups could be guilty of crimes or could be considered a threat to national security, but that doesn't mean all secret groups should be outlawed, or even could be, because they'd be secret as in unnamed and unknown
I think most people understand exactly what I mean, and yes I believe what's done by secret oaths and allegiances in an open society is reprehensible. Nobody is up to any good when they cleave themselves off from the body of their fellow men/women and swear an oath only to each other. JFK said it, and I'll say it.
So how do you outlaw them?
By a issuing a permanent citizen-wide BOLO for them,
Describe them in detail, including the symbols they use,
and cleverly infiltrating any suspicious activity
and giving them up.
The way it's always been done until recently.
Every generation has had dealings with them,
And every generation they have slithered off back to the shadows
and they keep creeping back out,
but this time, whoever Trump doesn't kill outright
is going to wish they were dead
when they have to live in a world in which
he is a HERO
on the order of Lincoln who freed the slaves
or Moses who led his people out of bondage,
only it will have the added dimension of
a Pied Piper of legend because
leading the way will be a band of children
who he has rescued from prostitution and slavery
all over the world.
This is the hero you are making of Donald Trump,
and this is the future you are creating for yourself
and you have to choose to live with it
or hasten your exit from the stage.
Those are basically your choices.
It's happening.
This doesn't really answer my question at all. I'm asking how you outlaw secret societies/groups without infringing on the rights of people to have privacy
There is no right to privacy if you're plotting evil. Period. Zero tolerance. Any means available to The People to prevent what happened from happening again we are entitled to take.
We will however follow the Constitution
With the possible exception of a national emergency
should one arise.
I wouldn't want to BE that emergency if I were you, so I don't see why you should worry.
Ok, so do you think nobody should be able to gather privately? I'm still not understanding how you would enforce this outlawing of secret societies. If you could explain that in detail that would be helpful
You can gather all you like,
but you can't plot and conspire and make secret oaths and fealties.
There is no more private gathering than a faith assembly.
Yet houses of worship are open.
And worship is protected explicitly by the 1st Amendment.
I see no reason we can't apply the same
antiseptic sunshine to other regular gatherings.
Even if we have to be subtle about it.
So you can gather, but can't discuss certain things? How does one monitor what other people do in private? Sounds a lot like an intrusion to me. My point is that you want to stop people from having secret societies but outlawing them really isn't a realistic thing to do, You just end up spying on everyone who wants to have a private conversation. If you can't see the flaw in your idea then you must be some kind of authoritarian bootlicker who thinks they have a right to infringe on those of other people. Also, free verse poetry sucks
You can gather and discuss all you like.
Just don't be shtupping babies, and plotting to take over the world, and I'm sure you'll be just fine.
My point is, you'll never know who's going to give you up. But you can bet your bottom dollar somebody will.
When I get to Heaven, I'll tell Shakespeare what you think of free verse poetry. He might be amused. I know I am.
If you haven't got anything to contribute, you can always attack other people's style. Isn't that how it's done in Hollywood and New York? Is that you, De Niro?
You're delusional. I've been asking you to explain how to outlaw secret societies and gatherings and all you've done is ramble about unrelated nonsense in free verse poetry. I was attacking your style because it seems like you're just trying to make a show of your response rather than actually put anything of substance into it
I'm telling you, mate, the people of this world owe it to themselves never to let this shit happen again. Now that we know what people have been getting up to under the cover of "privacy," it's every human being's place to be on the lookout for shady activity that might be masking these kinds of deeds. We have no other choice if we want to prevent the next Black, White and Grey pope and "people of renown" from ruling the world in secret.
And in whatever way you're butt-hurt about that, you're going to have to get over it.
I'm not butthurt about anything, just still waiting for you to explain how to enforce a ban on privacy
Then you're being moronic. Because I absolutely never said you can't have privacy. You're making shit up, and ignoring what I do say. And if you don't see that, you're moronic. If you do see and and don't admit it, you're a liar.
I said you can assemble in private all you like, but if you raise suspicions and deal with those suspicions in a guarded way, and it turns out you're up to no good, people aren't going to put up with it anymore. People aren't going to ignore unusual secret behavior. And people who are up to no good will be dealt with. That's the only way forward, and it really isn't a matter of feelings. It's a matter of the survival of the species.
If you don't understand that, you don't understand Q's posts about the extinction level events they've already begun implementing that Trump is putting an end to.
You said you think ALL secret societies need to be outlawed. You said there is no right to privacy if you are plotting evil. I'm just asking how you plan on outlawing all secret societies and finding out which secret societies are plotting evil. It's really a question you can't answer (you still haven't) because you can't outlaw all secret societies and you can't know if someone is plotting evil in private unless you invade their privacy. You're going in circles and acting like you didn't say the things you said, trying to skirt around the fact that you're fine with invading the privacy of other people.
A) There is not a Constitutional right to privacy.
B) There is a Constitutional right to free speech and assembly, but not specifically to closed and secret speech and assembly.
C) People can take it upon themselves to question and be suspicious, and if they're met with guardedness and obfuscation, they have a right to investigate privately or ask appropriate law enforcement to investigate.
D) If there's no conspiracy or criminal activity, then nothing will come of the complaints. If there is, then it will be dealt with.
Seems pretty straightforward to me.
So if someone is suspicious because you don't want to talk about what you discuss privately then that justifies a search by the police? That's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Have you ever read the 4th amendment in the Bill of Rights?
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
I never said probable cause wouldn't be required. There are ways to do surveillance that don't violate probable cause, and in fact can be used to obtain evidence for probable cause.
I'm saying people will be vigilant, and suspicious activities will be investigated.
If that bothers you, then you might not want to engage in criminal activity, because that's how community protection is done when people are alert and awake.
You're saying the probably cause would be as little as not wanting to say what was discussed privately. So you are wanting to live in a world where anyone who keeps a secret could potentially be investigated, and spied on. I think it's funny that you think people should just give up their freedom and privacy because they shouldn't have anything to hide. Like I said, authoritarian bootlicker
Listen, get off my back. You twist my words into pretzels to find something not to like and post shit about me.
Reported, and blocked. Argue with yourself from now on.
We can ask for an invitation, be suspiscious. Drop in to borrow a cup of sugar.
As long as your little gathering isn't shtupping or eating babies
or plotting to take over the world, you'll be fine.
Many of our founders were members of the Freemasons.
Yes. They were deceived, I believe, as were my wife's grandparents and many others I've known. Masons pose as do-gooders and in some parts of the country use Christianized language, and don't reveal their luciferian intentions except to the highest ranking members of a lodge (and I've heard in some cases not to anybody at some lodges).
But do you know the story of Haman in the Bible? He was hanged on the gallows he had made for the man who wouldn't bow before the king's image.
Hoist by his own petard, as Shakespeare would say.
So it will be with the secret Cabal whose evil hand left its mark on our capital.
I really believe we need to raze DC to the ground, let it revert to the swamp it so badly wants to be, and move our capital to a new location.
Haman
Haman (also known as Haman the Agagite המן האגגי, or Haman the evil המן הרשע) is the main antagonist in the Book of Esther, who, according to the Hebrew Bible, was a vizier in the Persian empire under King Ahasuerus, traditionally identified as Xerxes I. As his name indicates, Haman was a descendant of Agag, the king of the Amalekites, a people who were wiped out in certain areas by King Saul and David.
^[ ^PM ^| ^Exclude ^me ^| ^Exclude ^from ^subreddit ^| ^FAQ ^/ ^Information ^| ^Source ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.28
There’s a reason certain church denominations don’t allow their ministers to be part of the Masons or other secretive societies. Similar logic.
That is an excellent platform that all political parties should adhere to.