RAF Lodge?
Guest
Posts: n/a
RAF Lodge?
Always been a bit suspect about RAF mates working for a 'higher order' (knew a fundamentalist christian families officer who held a prayer meeting to rid a MQ of fleas - claimed it worked, but then anything is better than DHE apparently). Also know a few mates who owned up to being Masons. Did not think freemasonry was rife, but have since been told that there is an RAF Lodge. Anyone know if this is true?
[This message has been edited by YellowBelly (edited 17 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by YellowBelly (edited 17 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yep,
RAF Lodge dates from the First World War (as indeed do many military Lodges). The Lodge meets in London 4 times a year (I think). As with all Masonic Lodges the majority of members will be retired (you can be a Mason for your whole life), but there will be a number of serving members.
There is also a RAF (Warwickshire) Lodge which is peripatetic and meets in Masonic Halls close to RAF bases. Until recently (when a ban on meeting on military bases came into force) this Lodge used to then visit the nearby base. Most members are ex-RAF from days of yore. My friend Flt Lt Jim Pearson-Smith DFC, former President of 101 Sqn Association, was a Past Master of that Lodge (he was crew on an aircraft that sank the Tirpitz).
When I was at Brize the Master of the RAF Lodge was a member of 10 Sqn. There were at least 7 Masons amongst the Operations Wing staff at that time.
My own Lodge currently has a retired V-Force Sqn Ldr as Master. When I joined we were dominated by Engineers and it almost became a gathering of ex-Halton Apprentices ranked between Sqn Ldr and Gp Capt.
I know of a couple of AVMs who are Masons and I suspect there are more.
I don't believe for one moment that Masonic membership harms the service, and those who know me will note that I never gained any priviliges within the service as a result of my membership.
Hope this helps.
RAF Lodge dates from the First World War (as indeed do many military Lodges). The Lodge meets in London 4 times a year (I think). As with all Masonic Lodges the majority of members will be retired (you can be a Mason for your whole life), but there will be a number of serving members.
There is also a RAF (Warwickshire) Lodge which is peripatetic and meets in Masonic Halls close to RAF bases. Until recently (when a ban on meeting on military bases came into force) this Lodge used to then visit the nearby base. Most members are ex-RAF from days of yore. My friend Flt Lt Jim Pearson-Smith DFC, former President of 101 Sqn Association, was a Past Master of that Lodge (he was crew on an aircraft that sank the Tirpitz).
When I was at Brize the Master of the RAF Lodge was a member of 10 Sqn. There were at least 7 Masons amongst the Operations Wing staff at that time.
My own Lodge currently has a retired V-Force Sqn Ldr as Master. When I joined we were dominated by Engineers and it almost became a gathering of ex-Halton Apprentices ranked between Sqn Ldr and Gp Capt.
I know of a couple of AVMs who are Masons and I suspect there are more.
I don't believe for one moment that Masonic membership harms the service, and those who know me will note that I never gained any priviliges within the service as a result of my membership.
Hope this helps.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not harm the service? A secret society who look after one another? No of course not. And my c***s a kipper. I've seen a guy sponsor someone more senior into the local funny handshake brigade. Once in, there were enough senior police officers at the top table to make it look like the local lodge every dining in night. Of course, how could the more senior chap not reward his sponsor? These chaps would often do pretty well anything to get promoted-so why not join the lodge. There'll be a herd of goats driven up me driveway tommorrow.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Love it TBB! Keep it up! If there were no benefits, than why join? To meet four times a year? Cobblers! I buried the result of an accident some years ago, and was amazed at the numbers of senior ranks laying the parsley on the coffin.Mind you, I was invited once, but respectfully declined.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwn
We had this discussion not too long ago on this Forum - the Sting/not in my back yard type thread - and much more recently on Jet Blast. Some of you chaps really ought to venture onto the other Forums a bit more often
The bottom line is that there are good and bad in every walk of life. In an organisation as big as the Masons you are bound to get a few rotten apples. That doesn't mean ALL Masons are corrupt.
Likewise with the RAF. Some senior officers tend to use the 'old boy network' and look after their mates. Don't paint SAC Bloggs in the hangar with the same brush as Sandy Wilson, Peter Harding and Bill Wratten. SAC Bloggs may be a perfectly decent chap!
We had this discussion not too long ago on this Forum - the Sting/not in my back yard type thread - and much more recently on Jet Blast. Some of you chaps really ought to venture onto the other Forums a bit more often
The bottom line is that there are good and bad in every walk of life. In an organisation as big as the Masons you are bound to get a few rotten apples. That doesn't mean ALL Masons are corrupt.
Likewise with the RAF. Some senior officers tend to use the 'old boy network' and look after their mates. Don't paint SAC Bloggs in the hangar with the same brush as Sandy Wilson, Peter Harding and Bill Wratten. SAC Bloggs may be a perfectly decent chap!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Lucky my old man's already left then, eh Jacko.
Oh, by the way, I thought the point of a democracy was the right to be, freedom to choose etc, rather than be dictated to by small minded bigots?????
[This message has been edited by The Mistress (edited 04 April 2001).]
Oh, by the way, I thought the point of a democracy was the right to be, freedom to choose etc, rather than be dictated to by small minded bigots?????
[This message has been edited by The Mistress (edited 04 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jacko
The 'secret society' line of argument is typical of those who do not know nor seek to understand. If you used the words 'private club' in a less pejorative fashion the whole thing would seem as innocuous as it really is. I note that you and others, who might hold your hands up in horror at a racist or sexist statement, find it acceptable to condemn men and women, throughout the world and of all creeds and colours, because of the club or society they choose to belong to.
You base your opinions not on research, not on genuine knowledge, but on half truths and rumour. Although there are many books that seek to expose Freemasonry (the first came out in the eighteenth century), most are based on allegations against individuals or small grouips of people who others perceive to be Freemasons. I say perceive because one such book that I read devoted a whole chapter to the ranting of a small businessman who blamed his business failure on all the other businessmen in town who he didn't like. He assumed, but never offered any proof, that they were all members of the 'local lodge'.
If masonry is secret, how come you and others who condemn it are such experts?
Either Freemasonry is a secret society, in which case you don't know of it's existence, or it is a very well known body. There is a massive head office in central London (with a museum open to the general public), there are buildings in every major town in the British Isles, the names of committee members are quite often available in local libraries and the names of many well known members trip off the tongue (Duke of Kent, Prince Philip etc.).
If you are any good as a journalist you should be well able to find out details of local lodges and who runs them. Your gripe is that they won't let you in unless you are invited to join (by 2 sponsors, not one as suggested above)! This is just like any other private club. Unless you are saying I can wander into a meeting of any local Chapel of the NUJ, watch the proceedings and report them back to others if I so desire. Incidentally the NUJ, of which you may or may not be a member, was notorious in the 70s for depriving people of their livelihood if they wouldn't toe the party line - presumably that's all right. Indeed I remember, coming from an industrial city, people in other industries, sacked for not joining the closed shop, people beaten up for voting against union officials and people not being allowed to work for the local council if they didn't agree to support the Labour Party (and they called themselves Brethren).
You also say that there is no place for secret societies/private clubs in a democracy. I say that, so long as the purpose of the club is not to subvert or overthrow that democracy, then there is no problem. If you've done any research, you will know that a Freemason's promise/oath includes the commitment to uphold the laws of any land in which he/she, for the time being, resides.
Whilst I accept there are get out clauses to all of the following, I would refer you to the European Convention on Human Rights:
Article 8
Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
(My private life includes club memberships.)
Article 9
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching practice and observance.
(I can observe my beliefs in private.)
Article 10
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
(The right which allows you to publish your ideas is the same one that allows me to hold my opinions.)
Article 11
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
(I know that the Armed Forces can be excluded from this, but not every nation chooses to do so. I will associate, privately, with whomsoever I like.)
Article 14
The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or status.
(You will allow membership of the RAOB or Oddfellows, but not Masons.)
Article 17
Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention.
There you are Jacko, I can be a Freemason if I want and you can't stop me.
The first country to ratify the European Convention on Human Rights was the UK. The Convention is now part of the Scottish Constitution, the Northern Irish Constitution and the law of England and Wales
Your suggestion of exposing Masons and sacking them was one that Hitler and Stalin agreed with. Freemasonry was banned in all Communist countries. Hitler went the whole hog and not only sacked all Masons from all jobs, but seized all of their property, confiscated or destroyed all of their meeting places and consigned virtually all of Germany's Masons to the concentration camps where the majority died.
Hitler's reasons were the same as yours - he didn't want any 'secret societies' operating in the Reich.
LOL
[This message has been edited by Paul Wesson (edited 04 April 2001).]
The 'secret society' line of argument is typical of those who do not know nor seek to understand. If you used the words 'private club' in a less pejorative fashion the whole thing would seem as innocuous as it really is. I note that you and others, who might hold your hands up in horror at a racist or sexist statement, find it acceptable to condemn men and women, throughout the world and of all creeds and colours, because of the club or society they choose to belong to.
You base your opinions not on research, not on genuine knowledge, but on half truths and rumour. Although there are many books that seek to expose Freemasonry (the first came out in the eighteenth century), most are based on allegations against individuals or small grouips of people who others perceive to be Freemasons. I say perceive because one such book that I read devoted a whole chapter to the ranting of a small businessman who blamed his business failure on all the other businessmen in town who he didn't like. He assumed, but never offered any proof, that they were all members of the 'local lodge'.
If masonry is secret, how come you and others who condemn it are such experts?
Either Freemasonry is a secret society, in which case you don't know of it's existence, or it is a very well known body. There is a massive head office in central London (with a museum open to the general public), there are buildings in every major town in the British Isles, the names of committee members are quite often available in local libraries and the names of many well known members trip off the tongue (Duke of Kent, Prince Philip etc.).
If you are any good as a journalist you should be well able to find out details of local lodges and who runs them. Your gripe is that they won't let you in unless you are invited to join (by 2 sponsors, not one as suggested above)! This is just like any other private club. Unless you are saying I can wander into a meeting of any local Chapel of the NUJ, watch the proceedings and report them back to others if I so desire. Incidentally the NUJ, of which you may or may not be a member, was notorious in the 70s for depriving people of their livelihood if they wouldn't toe the party line - presumably that's all right. Indeed I remember, coming from an industrial city, people in other industries, sacked for not joining the closed shop, people beaten up for voting against union officials and people not being allowed to work for the local council if they didn't agree to support the Labour Party (and they called themselves Brethren).
You also say that there is no place for secret societies/private clubs in a democracy. I say that, so long as the purpose of the club is not to subvert or overthrow that democracy, then there is no problem. If you've done any research, you will know that a Freemason's promise/oath includes the commitment to uphold the laws of any land in which he/she, for the time being, resides.
Whilst I accept there are get out clauses to all of the following, I would refer you to the European Convention on Human Rights:
Article 8
Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
(My private life includes club memberships.)
Article 9
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching practice and observance.
(I can observe my beliefs in private.)
Article 10
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
(The right which allows you to publish your ideas is the same one that allows me to hold my opinions.)
Article 11
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
(I know that the Armed Forces can be excluded from this, but not every nation chooses to do so. I will associate, privately, with whomsoever I like.)
Article 14
The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or status.
(You will allow membership of the RAOB or Oddfellows, but not Masons.)
Article 17
Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention.
There you are Jacko, I can be a Freemason if I want and you can't stop me.
The first country to ratify the European Convention on Human Rights was the UK. The Convention is now part of the Scottish Constitution, the Northern Irish Constitution and the law of England and Wales
Your suggestion of exposing Masons and sacking them was one that Hitler and Stalin agreed with. Freemasonry was banned in all Communist countries. Hitler went the whole hog and not only sacked all Masons from all jobs, but seized all of their property, confiscated or destroyed all of their meeting places and consigned virtually all of Germany's Masons to the concentration camps where the majority died.
Hitler's reasons were the same as yours - he didn't want any 'secret societies' operating in the Reich.
LOL
[This message has been edited by Paul Wesson (edited 04 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Paul - many thanks for your frank and honest views. To an extent, I agree that our 'fears' are probably based on ignorance and that not all Masons are seeking special privileges. I also agree with your comments on freedom of thought, religion etc. The main problems I have with HM Forces personnel being Freemasons is the potential impact on our clearly defined command chain (eg. A commissioned mason possibly being subordinate to an enlisted mason - surely not compatible with Service ethics, except on the sports field maybe) and its secretive nature (regardless of the Masonic Musuems and access to the names of the Grand Fromages, not many people go around shouting about their membership). Given these concerns, should Forces Masons not be required to declare their membership to their Forces chain of command?
The Mistress - so sorry to have repeated an earlier thread, I obviously missed it (may I recommend avoiding the left key on your mouse on such occasions, or getting out more)
The Mistress - so sorry to have repeated an earlier thread, I obviously missed it (may I recommend avoiding the left key on your mouse on such occasions, or getting out more)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quite what it is that some people have against freemasons I don't know - and no, personally I'm not a mason, nor do I particularly wish to be.
I had a most revealing conversation with a serving officer who was - he didn't use to shout about it, but it was abundantly clear that far more charitable work is done quietly by freemasons than by those who oppose them. I can understand the fear that masonry could undermine the established rank structure, but is there any evidence to substantiate that it actually does??
I had a most revealing conversation with a serving officer who was - he didn't use to shout about it, but it was abundantly clear that far more charitable work is done quietly by freemasons than by those who oppose them. I can understand the fear that masonry could undermine the established rank structure, but is there any evidence to substantiate that it actually does??
Guest
Posts: n/a
Personally, I fail to see how a Cpl Master Mason 'Grand Arch Prince Naseem of the Golden Dog's Bollock' rolling up his trouser leg and putting a noose round the neck of say, a Wg Cdr Apprentice, presents any greater threat to the chain of command than a Sqn Ldr rugby player playing under say, a SAC team captain.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm not quite sure Mr.P, what the latter has to do with the former! I should perhaps clarify my earlier comment in the light of what has been said by others. I have never found any evidence of Masonry affecting any aspect of Service life. It simply wasn't my scene. Having said that, I think a lot of rubbish has been presumed and discussed about the activities of Masons, and as someone has already pointed out, this discussion has been held the world over from time to time.My apologies to anyone whose fingers I may have broken in his attempt to establish my credentials!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Were freemasonry just a harmless social club, I'd have no problem with it. But there is plentiful evidence of widespread corruption surrounding Freemasonry, and especially in the Police Force and the legal profession.
I'm sure that the majority of Freemasons are harmless enough, but the actions of a minority have been sufficiently worrying to make me want to be over-cautious on the matter.
I don't, incidentally, approve of closed-shops, nor of secrecy within (or secret membership of) Trades Unions. But Trades Unions are fairly transparent, and their aims and activities are generally open to inspection. But even a really well-run Trade Union has no place in the military, IMHO, although some similar organisation may be needed.
The idea that Human Rights legislation should be used to guarantee the freedom to indulge in Masonic activities is as mistaken as the belief that people should be free to engage in the incitement of racist violence, paedophile activities or any other socially unacceptable behaviour.
"Why do journalists let politicians and their unelected advisors hide behind the facade of "a source close to the government said.....?" Good question, but if a story's worth telling, and you are given it under certain conditions, then it's perhaps inevitable that Ministers will shelter behind the lobby system, unattributable briefings, etc.
Mr W, I particularly enjoyed your remark that "My gripe is that they wouldn't let me in unless I was invited to join". I'm not discerning or humble enough to pretend that I wouldn't want to be in any club which would have me as a Member - I'll accept almost any invitation. But not, ever, to the Masons - and I'd be quite offended if anyone thought that I was the sort of person who would accept such an invitation. I may be a low-down gutter journo - but even I have some standards!
I'm sure that the majority of Freemasons are harmless enough, but the actions of a minority have been sufficiently worrying to make me want to be over-cautious on the matter.
I don't, incidentally, approve of closed-shops, nor of secrecy within (or secret membership of) Trades Unions. But Trades Unions are fairly transparent, and their aims and activities are generally open to inspection. But even a really well-run Trade Union has no place in the military, IMHO, although some similar organisation may be needed.
The idea that Human Rights legislation should be used to guarantee the freedom to indulge in Masonic activities is as mistaken as the belief that people should be free to engage in the incitement of racist violence, paedophile activities or any other socially unacceptable behaviour.
"Why do journalists let politicians and their unelected advisors hide behind the facade of "a source close to the government said.....?" Good question, but if a story's worth telling, and you are given it under certain conditions, then it's perhaps inevitable that Ministers will shelter behind the lobby system, unattributable briefings, etc.
Mr W, I particularly enjoyed your remark that "My gripe is that they wouldn't let me in unless I was invited to join". I'm not discerning or humble enough to pretend that I wouldn't want to be in any club which would have me as a Member - I'll accept almost any invitation. But not, ever, to the Masons - and I'd be quite offended if anyone thought that I was the sort of person who would accept such an invitation. I may be a low-down gutter journo - but even I have some standards!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Samuel
I merely raised the Rugby Club as a social activity which also transcends rank barriers.
Jackonicko
"The idea that Human Rights legislation should be used to guarantee the freedom to indulge in Masonic activities is as mistaken as the belief that people should be free to engage in the incitement of racist violence, paedophile activities or any other socially unacceptable behaviour."
Steady on, old chap! It's a bit of a hyperbolic leap from handshaking and rolling up trouser legs to the KKK and child molesters!
Yours
Worshipful Bro. Ploppy (Not!)
I merely raised the Rugby Club as a social activity which also transcends rank barriers.
Jackonicko
"The idea that Human Rights legislation should be used to guarantee the freedom to indulge in Masonic activities is as mistaken as the belief that people should be free to engage in the incitement of racist violence, paedophile activities or any other socially unacceptable behaviour."
Steady on, old chap! It's a bit of a hyperbolic leap from handshaking and rolling up trouser legs to the KKK and child molesters!
Yours
Worshipful Bro. Ploppy (Not!)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jacko,
I don't want to be the OCB of this thread, but feel that I must answer some of your points.
But there is plentiful evidence of widespread corruption surrounding Freemasonry, and especially in the Police Force and the legal profession.
As with a previous poster, I would ask you, a professional journalist and researcher, to come up with some of the hard evidence against both the police and legal profession. Do you know of an arrest/charge/release/dropping of charge that was specifically attributable to Freemasonry? Do you know of a case where Freemasonry influenced the decision of a Judge or jury? Could membership of the same golf club not be a reason for doing a favour, or do you consider it improbable that any business deal, dropping of charges etc could ever take place on a golf course?
but the actions of a minority have been sufficiently worrying to make me want to be over-cautious on the matter.
The number of Freemasons in the British Isles may be as many as 400,000. Even assuming a figure of 300,000, I am happy to accept that there will be some people who do not come up to scratch. To put this into perspective, the population of my home city, Coventry, is 300,000. A minority of them are criminals, rapists, paedophiles etc. Do you argue that you will never visit Coventry because a minority are bad. Should all people from Coventry have to identify themselves so that they can be expunged from the RAF? Would you not join a club in Coventry lest you were tainted? Frankly Jacko, you're talking boll*cks. To condemn a world-wide charitable body because there are a couple of bad apples suggests a narrowness of thought that I would only associate with a Redtop journalist (you're not Gary Bushell by any chance?)(Sorry Gary, I Love you really!)
The idea that Human Rights legislation should be used to guarantee the freedom to indulge in Masonic activities is as mistaken as the belief that people should be free to engage in the incitement of racist violence, paedophile activities or any other socially unacceptable behaviour.
The articles I selected were designed to show that there are freedoms that we are entitled to. Even a paedophile, rapist or whatever can claim the protection of Article 1 (Right to life), Article 3 (Prohibition of torture), Article 4 (Prohibition of slavery and forced labour), Article 5 (Right to liberty and security), Article 6 (Right to a fair trial), Article 7 (No punishment without law), Article 12 (Right to marry), together with the Protocols.
You compare the actions of Freemasons with socially unacceptable behaviour. Unnacceptable to who? I dress in a dark suit, add some ancient items of clothing, re-enact an arcane mediaeval ritual and go out to dinner with friends. This is anti-social? You live a weird lifestyle, Jacko. Do you think that the Sealed Knot should be banned? They dress in period clothing, re-enact bloody historic battles and go out with friends (they probably do favours for their mates as well!)
I do what I do, you do what you do. Nothing I have done as a Freemason has impacted on your life in any way whatsoever. I have not been party to anything that you would consider improper and I know of no-one who has.
The reason that the European Convention on Human Rights was passed was to protect philosophical minorities such as the Freemasons from the excesses of ignorant people like Communists and Nazis. If you had your way I believe that you would embark on the same line of treatment that Hitler reserved for Jews and Freemasons alike. You would purge us as Stalin and Mao did. You would drive us from our employment. Would you make us confess our sins as Torquemada did? Would you get our children to decry us as Pol Pot did? Would you encourage children to send their father's Lodge summons to the police? What technique would you use to compel Masons to identify themselves? Would you torture those who did not confess until they did?
You've already made it clear that you would deprive Masons of their livelihood for no other reason than that you have heard a few rumours that some Masons at some nebulous time did something that you disagree with. Remember the Jews in Lincoln and York were murdered because of a woodcut that showed (allegedly) Jewish men drinking the blood of St Hugh of Lincoln.
Martin Short's book, which I believe you have read, is in my opinion based on rumours and suppositions and pejorative statements. The idea that millions of Masons worldwide are sexual deviants because a man looked at the square and compasses and decided it reminded him of an open vagina is one such pathetic rumour peddled in that book!
I may be a low-down gutter journo - but even I have some standards!
Not in the quality of your research nor the reasoning of your arguments you don't.
I don't want to be the OCB of this thread, but feel that I must answer some of your points.
But there is plentiful evidence of widespread corruption surrounding Freemasonry, and especially in the Police Force and the legal profession.
As with a previous poster, I would ask you, a professional journalist and researcher, to come up with some of the hard evidence against both the police and legal profession. Do you know of an arrest/charge/release/dropping of charge that was specifically attributable to Freemasonry? Do you know of a case where Freemasonry influenced the decision of a Judge or jury? Could membership of the same golf club not be a reason for doing a favour, or do you consider it improbable that any business deal, dropping of charges etc could ever take place on a golf course?
but the actions of a minority have been sufficiently worrying to make me want to be over-cautious on the matter.
The number of Freemasons in the British Isles may be as many as 400,000. Even assuming a figure of 300,000, I am happy to accept that there will be some people who do not come up to scratch. To put this into perspective, the population of my home city, Coventry, is 300,000. A minority of them are criminals, rapists, paedophiles etc. Do you argue that you will never visit Coventry because a minority are bad. Should all people from Coventry have to identify themselves so that they can be expunged from the RAF? Would you not join a club in Coventry lest you were tainted? Frankly Jacko, you're talking boll*cks. To condemn a world-wide charitable body because there are a couple of bad apples suggests a narrowness of thought that I would only associate with a Redtop journalist (you're not Gary Bushell by any chance?)(Sorry Gary, I Love you really!)
The idea that Human Rights legislation should be used to guarantee the freedom to indulge in Masonic activities is as mistaken as the belief that people should be free to engage in the incitement of racist violence, paedophile activities or any other socially unacceptable behaviour.
The articles I selected were designed to show that there are freedoms that we are entitled to. Even a paedophile, rapist or whatever can claim the protection of Article 1 (Right to life), Article 3 (Prohibition of torture), Article 4 (Prohibition of slavery and forced labour), Article 5 (Right to liberty and security), Article 6 (Right to a fair trial), Article 7 (No punishment without law), Article 12 (Right to marry), together with the Protocols.
You compare the actions of Freemasons with socially unacceptable behaviour. Unnacceptable to who? I dress in a dark suit, add some ancient items of clothing, re-enact an arcane mediaeval ritual and go out to dinner with friends. This is anti-social? You live a weird lifestyle, Jacko. Do you think that the Sealed Knot should be banned? They dress in period clothing, re-enact bloody historic battles and go out with friends (they probably do favours for their mates as well!)
I do what I do, you do what you do. Nothing I have done as a Freemason has impacted on your life in any way whatsoever. I have not been party to anything that you would consider improper and I know of no-one who has.
The reason that the European Convention on Human Rights was passed was to protect philosophical minorities such as the Freemasons from the excesses of ignorant people like Communists and Nazis. If you had your way I believe that you would embark on the same line of treatment that Hitler reserved for Jews and Freemasons alike. You would purge us as Stalin and Mao did. You would drive us from our employment. Would you make us confess our sins as Torquemada did? Would you get our children to decry us as Pol Pot did? Would you encourage children to send their father's Lodge summons to the police? What technique would you use to compel Masons to identify themselves? Would you torture those who did not confess until they did?
You've already made it clear that you would deprive Masons of their livelihood for no other reason than that you have heard a few rumours that some Masons at some nebulous time did something that you disagree with. Remember the Jews in Lincoln and York were murdered because of a woodcut that showed (allegedly) Jewish men drinking the blood of St Hugh of Lincoln.
Martin Short's book, which I believe you have read, is in my opinion based on rumours and suppositions and pejorative statements. The idea that millions of Masons worldwide are sexual deviants because a man looked at the square and compasses and decided it reminded him of an open vagina is one such pathetic rumour peddled in that book!
I may be a low-down gutter journo - but even I have some standards!
Not in the quality of your research nor the reasoning of your arguments you don't.