There are too many freemasons in many fields. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Freemasons
too many not laypeople in sensitive positions than you would hear of other organizations.
Where is your comparative data to support that statement? Also, yes, that list is bound to have a lot of important people on it, because, as it says, it is a list of
notable Freemasons. A full list would be worthless since no-one cares if Joe Bloggs of boring street, nowehereville is a mason until and unless he becomes a noted public figure.
Now, where is your list of notable members of other organisations to comapre with?
This makes the lay people in it, who are not of high degrees in the fraternity specifically, a minor issue,
And yet you specifically pointed out the lack of laypeople as an issue earlier on. Choose your words with more care, and at least admit you made such an error before brushing it under the carpet as insignificant.
Here's an interesting question for you to consider: how many of these notable masons in high public office are in similarly high-ranking positions within their lodges? Or are the high ranked lodge members actually laypeople who rose up the ranks of the organisation without ever becoming notable figures? Or are we supposed to believe the cliche that obvously the high-ranking masons are shadowy background figures and all the high-ranking public figures are somehow beholden to them?
especially that they are not the planners and they don't know the highest secrets as those with higher degrees.
Again, true of every organisation and club. Lower 'ranks' don't have access to the intricacies of running the group. I don't have access to my company's accounts and I'm not part of the high-level strategy meetings. Want to read some significance into this?
But not true for every organization to have that much non laypeople in sensitive positions
Circular reasoning. By definition the high ranking public figures are not 'laypeople'. And again, prove it. You should know by now that on this forum simply asserting something without evidence is not accepted blindly.
The masons participated in the Russian, American and French revolution. They are shaping our world.
There is a world of difference between 'participated in' and 'shaping'. Those events involved entire nations. Any organisation that's been around for as long as Freemasonry will have 'participated in' major historical events of that scale in some way.
You can go on believing that Johnny Bravo having a tower burning in the background and saying "coming soon' months before 9 11 attacks, and all the agenda of freemasonry is clean, and Monica Lweisnky's scandal is not planned by them, and the Simpson's issues are all coincidence.
Yes, I will thank you. Burning tower blocks are not unique to 9/11. You might as well argue that
The Towering Inferno or
Die Hard are suspect because they showed burning tower blocks years before 9/11. Maybe the masons burned Grenfell Tower too?
.to me , there is power control and shaping of the world we live in in many aspects.
But as usual all you have done is cherry picked your sources that say 'this thing I agree with is happening' and assumed that is enough. Where is your critical and comparative analysis?
This is just another manifestation of your old 'scientists say' arguments. You're not interested in actually debating because every contrary position is brushed away under the carpet. OK, fine, you believe Freemasonry is controlling the world. At least admit it is just a belief with no hard evidence backing it up.
