User talk:24.68.243.40

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Warning

Wikipedia is not a place for you to deposit anti-Freemasonry propoganda. IF you intend to try to contribute to this site in the future, please read and follow the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy, as encyclopedia articles cannot take sides in disputes (except for pointing out mainstream opinion and labeling it as such and pointing out errors in arguments by citing appropriate experts where appropriate). The site freemasonrywatch.org is not a valid and accepted source. See the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. DreamGuy 21:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


unindented unsigned comments are by User:24.68.243.40

What is 'Anti-Freemasonry Propaganda'?

Are you suggesting that information that Freemasons disagree with is defacto false and therefore propaganda?

You should read Stephen Knights book, as well as Eddie Campbell's graphical novel. The BBC did a number of investigations on the Masonic theory as well. It has NOT been discredited, despite Freemasons attempts to do so.

Stephen Knight's book is full of inaccuracies and proven deceptions. He is probably the least respected author in all of Ripperology, which says a lot. Alan Moore's comic book (Eddie Campbell was the artist) was FICTION. DreamGuy 22:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Freemasonry Watch is not a valid and accepted source by Freemasons. So what. Freemasons never accept criticism of themselves, yet much of the content of the website is either quoting directly from recognized masonic sources, or is masonic writing itself. Freemasons lie, that is the main problem.

Secondly who is responsible for deleting the additional information about the Jack the Ripper case yesterday? You? No other theory has captured the public imagination about the subject. Yet you, like frantic freemasons, seek to 'disappear' it. It never happened.

Yeah, and the public imagination was captured by Harry Potter too, and it is just as fictional. I deleted your additions, because they violated WIkipedia policies and were filled with errors. DreamGuy 22:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

You can't do an entry on Jack the Ripper and list the suspects without including the Freemasonry theory. Who has the hidden agenda here?

The Freemason theory is listed under the Gull entry, then links to other articles where it is discussed in more detail (and it's errors are extensively pointed out -- it's pure nonsense). If you had bothered to read the article you would have seen this. DreamGuy 22:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

The "logic" you employ here is quite masonic by the way.

Funny, I'm not a Mason... or is that your goal, label everyone who disagrees with you part of some secret conspiracy? DreamGuy 22:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

There certainly is evidence that Masons have been attempting to craft the wilkopedia entry for Freemasonry to their liking, and have undoubtably installed their conferates inside the editorial committees, exactly as they did for Dmoz.

But they failed in Dmoz and they will fail here as well, because they are stupid and they are liars.

And right there you have proven yourself incapable of making an useful additions to this encyclopedia. You are only here to spread hate agains t a group you don't like, not to provide honest information. Any edits you make to articles here will be undone by other editors. Your goals are completely contrary to the goals of this encyclopedia. DreamGuy 22:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I have read your rant Dreamweaver about your crusade against 'Mythology' and 'Jack the Ripper'. Two favourite areas for Freemasons trying to "simplify" their history and public image. I won't suggest you are possibly a Freemason yourself however.

I have no crusade against Mythology or Jack the Ripper, and am actually a leading editor for putting factual information about those topics in this encyclopedia. Perhaps you ought to try to work on that reading comprehension. DreamGuy 22:37, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../2/4/2E/User_talk%7E24.68.243.40.html"