Dr. Ron Paul is NOT a member of the CFR...

[sunny]

anyone go to this site? www.ronpaulonline.com

i've had it bookmarked for a while and i just actually went there and looked around when i saw a link to the above article.

it's an interesting and organized site about dr. paul.

This is today's featured article:
http://www.ronpaulonline.com/content/view/114/162

There's also an audio interview about dr. paul and secret societies with that link.

Check this site out!

[Man from La Mancha]

I think no member of congress should be involved in any secret organization like the Freemasons or the like. If any member of congress belongs to any organization that isn't completely open to their rituals and bylaws then an amendment should be made to prevent them from serving an elected post. Just like lawyers which are banisters which is a term of royalty have been banned from serving on Congress which is not enforced but should be. Our Congress should have only one master, the US people.

[Slugg]

I think no member of congress should be involved in any secret organization like the Freemasons or the like. If any member of congress belongs to any organization that isn't completely open to their rituals and bylaws then an amendment should be made to prevent them from serving an elected post. Just like lawyers which are banisters which is a term of royalty have been banned from serving on Congress which is not enforced but should be. Our Congress should have only one master, the US people.

I understand your reasonong, but this starts getting dangeriously close to excluding specific religions from participating in Congress. Again, I understand the logic, but I think this is the wrong way to go. We should just stop electing people once we find out they are a part of any of these questionable 'clubs'.

[richard1984]

But, of course, secret societies are just that: secret. The secrecy is intended to keep people from knowing about the society and its members, so that people won't and can't do anything about members of Congress (and others in leadership positions) being members of such societies.

[Man from La Mancha]

I understand your reasonong, but this starts getting dangeriously close to excluding specific religions from participating in Congress. Again, I understand the logic, but I think this is the wrong way to go. We should just stop electing people once we find out they are a part of any of these questionable 'clubs'.

No problem with any group wanting to be in office but if they have nothing to hide it is no problem. We can't have people that have dual loyalties. Either they are for the constitution or evil, prove it. Only evil hides in the dark and secrecy and truth shines in the light of day. And if they have nothing to hide then whats the problem. Notice most churches have big windows to let in the light but most Masonic temple especially in in big cities have no windows, they hide in the dark side, We don't need that.

[WannaBfree]

John Kennedy also spoke of secret societies:

JFK Blows The Whistle on Secret Societies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnkdfFAqsHA

"The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment." - "The President and the Press" by JFK, April 27, 1961

[Man from La Mancha]

John Kennedy also spoke of secret societies:

JFK Blows The Whistle on Secret Societies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnkdfFAqsHA

"The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment." - "The President and the Press" by JFK, April 27, 1961

Excellent speech But a much better video of this speach is this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBF5DbPbg_A&mode=related&search=

[Warhawk]

I think no member of congress should be involved in any secret organization like the Freemasons or the like. If any member of congress belongs to any organization that isn't completely open to their rituals and bylaws then an amendment should be made to prevent them from serving an elected post. Just like lawyers which are banisters which is a term of royalty have been banned from serving on Congress which is not enforced but should be. Our Congress should have only one master, the US people.

Erm, well, most fraternities have secret rituals and bylaws.

[dspectre]

Erm, well, most fraternities have secret rituals and bylaws.

Personally, I don't care for frats. Of course that is coming from someone who doesn't know what they do because they keep things secret.

Why all the secrecy? What do they have to hide?

Privacy of the individual is one thing, which is supported in the Constitution. It supports the well being of the individual over the state.

Secrecy of a society/organization? This is a way to skirt accountability. We can see where this leads to....

[CodeMonkey]

Personally, I don't care for frats. Of course that is coming from someone who doesn't know what they do because they keep things secret.

Why all the secrecy? What do they have to hide?

Privacy of the individual is one thing, which is supported in the Constitution. It supports the well being of the individual over the state.

Secrecy of a society/organization? This is a way to skirt accountability. We can see where this leads to....

Why shouldn't the rights of an individual apply to a private group of individuals? Saying that they should have nothing to hide is the same line of reasoning used by people in favor of warrantless wire taps.

[Electrostatic]

I am much more for letting them be in whatever wittle secwet gwoop they want to be in and then exposing their agendas.
IMO

[Bradley in DC]

Tancredo at CFR

http://www.cfr.org/publication/11141/

[dspectre]

Why shouldn't the rights of an individual apply to a private group of individuals? Saying that they should have nothing to hide is the same line of reasoning used by people in favor of warrantless wire taps.

I don't know if there is a way to regulate this kind of behavior, but to think individuals and groups are the same is naive.

I'm a big free market capitalist, but I know that groups called Corporations have to answer to high accountability if we want to keep the system clean. Why don't we just allow Corporations to keep all of their inner workings secret?

Ironically, Corporations are legally an individual. This lowers legal liability, but there has to be more legal oversight(quaterly statements etc) because of this fact.

I think it is obvious that the group/collectivism can be dangerous. Just look at history. The purpose of a group is to change individuals or society in some way. If the goals are meant for the common good, why keep it secret?

[sunny]

Tancredo at CFR

http://www.cfr.org/publication/11141/

you think that (being on the site) automatically makes tancredo cfr?

[Bradley in DC]

you think that (being on the site) automatically makes tancredo cfr?

I have no idea, nor do I really think it makes any difference, honestly. Just couldn't resist throwing a stone at the hornet's nest, I guess.

[Electrostatic]

you think that (being on the site) automatically makes tancredo cfr?

If they are on that site and do not deny it I think a prudent person would assume such. If they want to debase those assumptions they have every right to deny membership despite having been involved with them.

[paulitics]

Government workers paid by us the tax payers are there to serve us, and there should be no secret meetings between private and public individuals discussing policies that benefit elites at the expense of America. This in itself should be illegal, yet it happens regularly at CFR, Trilateral, etc. Evil deeds occur behind closed doors. The founding fathers wrote extensively about this.

[LibertyEagle]

you think that (being on the site) automatically makes tancredo cfr?

I don't think one can jump to that conclusion.

[sunny]

I don't think one can jump to that conclusion.

who knows? maybe he controlled opposition....? his main thing is the securing the borders...i dunno........just wondering!

[V-rod]

The founding fathers of our country were freemasons. The Constitution was drafted by freemasons. Many of the principles of our constitution come from the beliefs of Freemasonry. Denying the right of privacy to a individual or group is totalitarism.

[foraneagle2]

Opposing secret societies is ridiculous. A family is a secret society. A group of friends is a secret society. Any group has the right to privacy. However, transparency also has its benefits (look at the open source movement).

[ronpaulhawaii]

Opposing secret societies is ridiculous. A family is a secret society. A group of friends is a secret society. Any group has the right to privacy. However, transparency also has its benefits (look at the open source movement).

I wonder about that;

A family/group, such as you dscribe, is only a "secret society" in a narrow semantic view/circumstances. When any group uses their "secrets" to harm the general public, they become criminals.

IMHO- there is something very basically wrong with any justification for "secret societies" operating in "Public Service"

my2cents

[romelll]

I wonder about that;

A family/group, such as you dscribe, is only a "secret society" in a narrow semantic view/circumstances. When any group uses their "secrets" to harm the general public, they become criminals.

IMHO- there is something very basically wrong with any justification for "secret societies" operating in "Public Service"

my2cents

So, Spanky from the Women Haters club from Our Gang could not be a member of Congress? Nor could Ralph Kramden, Ed Norton or Kingfish for that matter.

Look, secret societies come and go. They have been in decline because most people have something better to do (like surf the net). Do not believe me, then go to your local Shriners event and look at the avereage age. Pretty old guys and it gives them something to be a part of.People get hypersensitive because they are not a part for whatever reason. If I recall correctly you must ask to become a member of the Mason's.

[Wyurm]

I wonder about that;

A family/group, such as you dscribe, is only a "secret society" in a narrow semantic view/circumstances. When any group uses their "secrets" to harm the general public, they become criminals.

IMHO- there is something very basically wrong with any justification for "secret societies" operating in "Public Service"

my2cents

Then they should no longer be called secret societies. The CFR, and such like organizations should be called: "Organized Criminal Societies"

The only problem with this is that secret society is shorter and easier to say and write.

[Man from La Mancha]

The founding fathers of our country were freemasons. The Constitution was drafted by freemasons. Many of the principles of our constitution come from the beliefs of Freemasonry. Denying the right of privacy to a individual or group is totalitarism.

I think the Masons of 250 years ago was an animal of different color. I'm no expert on this matter, but so many corrupt members of congress and industry and world organizations are 33 degree mason.

Can you honestly tell me a mason's oath to his country is higher than to his fellow masons? Would he divulge masonic info or rituals if it was needed in a congressional investigation of collusion? I think not.

.

[Birdlady]

The Freemasons have several levels of membership. The husband that goes down to his local lodge once a week (or however often they meet-I have no idea), isn't part of this conspiracy. However, those individuals that are above a certain degree, I think it is 33rd ARE part of the larger conspiracy. Those are the people I think most of us are talking about when we say secret society. You can't just walk into their club and say hello I want to join. You must be picked and serve their higher order above all else.

[ronpaulhawaii]

So, Spanky from the Women Haters club from Our Gang could not be a member of Congress? Nor could Ralph Kramden, Ed Norton or Kingfish for that matter.

Look, secret societies come and go. They have been in decline because most people have something better to do (like surf the net). Do not believe me, then go to your local Shriners event and look at the avereage age. Pretty old guys and it gives them something to be a part of.People get hypersensitive because they are not a part for whatever reason. If I recall correctly you must ask to become a member of the Mason's.

lol-

I said nothing of barring members from office, I only stated my distaste for them "operating" (as a group) in public service. If they want to wear funny hats, womens underwear (i.e. "Trudy"), and feel important in their free time... whatever floats the boat.

m

[Roxi]

my dad is a mason and has been for 40 years...he has gotten as far as potentate which is like a president of a pretty large group....hes never been involved in anything corrupt and its mostly just a big group of guys who get together with their families and do a lot of charity work for kids...

.Im certainly not saying that corruption isn't part of groups higher than him or whatever because thats very probable but to view a very large group of people negatively because of a few bad apples....well thats just plain racism

[Man from La Mancha]

my dad is a mason and has been for 40 years...he has gotten as far as potentate which is like a president of a pretty large group....hes never been involved in anything corrupt and its mostly just a big group of guys who get together with their families and do a lot of charity work for kids...

Im certainly not saying that corruption isn't part of groups higher than him or whatever because thats very probable but to view a very large group of people negatively because of a few bad apples....well thats just plain racism

It is not racism. Another doublespeak word to fend off criticism. If the masons at the lower level are so benign then they better break off from the masons of higher level. Because of their complacency they are supporting the actions at the top and so are part of the problem. All they so stupid not to see this? Why don't they criticize their leaders and revolt against such evil? No personal offense to you.

I'm doing it again getting away from Ron Paul. I believe the original question was important on the CFR because it shows what the believes of our leaders have which is not in our best interest.


See the first 3 Mason rituals here
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-783233753719250111&q=freemason+rituals&total=122&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=2

[Andrew76]

Now now, don't go getting all bent out of shape over the Masons. I know a couple where I live, and my grandfather was one as well. I think many of you, myself included, would be greatly dissappointed at how boring and mundane those groups really are, could you actually find out all their "secrets." Because they're secret, people can then come up with whatever wild fanstasies that want about the Masons, Shriners, Templars, etc. "The Davinci Code," is a fictional novel, and "Behold a Pale Horse," is quite simply a steaming pile.... interesting read, but irretrievably fasle nonetheless.

All those secret societies are now, is a bunch of old guys trying to do right, and having their own special, secret boys club. The idea that somehow being involved in a "secret" society like this one, would somehow infringe on ones ability to hold public office, is stretching it, IMO.

And no, you rarely have trouble joining anymore since their numbers are so incredibly low. Yes, you can walk right in and say you want to join. They'll of course walk you through all the charades of being invited and all that, but, it ain't what it used to be, not that it was ever anything more than a secret boys club/charity group.