Before I start, I appreciate all that you contribute to this forum so please take this as civil discourse since that is how it's intended.

Here's the problem with saying it didn't start that way. That argument as almost as disingenuous the media using HS football pictures of a black kid that got shoot by police instead of the thug pictures from 4 years after he graduated and got into a gang. The 4 years in the gang have significantly more influence over the context of his actions than the prior 18 years did.

There are many organizations that don't start a certain way and get infiltrated but generally do not reach prominence until after they are infiltrated. In other words, someone starts an organization that gains some momentum, bad actors step in and either offer to amplify the message so as long as they get influence it in, or a full blown secret coup occurs which completely takes over and re-directs the message to their own preference.

The powers that be have had pretty solid control over who rises and who falls for centuries. It would seem that it's very rare that someone rises to prominence with their free will completely in tact.

That said, all the aspects of contemporary Freemasonry point to Lucifer worship at the top. The initiation ritual involves pledging one's allegiance to the group and it's continued secrecy upon penalty of death. I don't think a "good" organization would have that type of ritual if they were doing inherently "good" works.

Another thing, Freemason's believe in universal balance hence the black and white checkered pattern floors in the lodges. The acknowledgement of dark and light means the organization must consist of both dark and light paths to create a harmonious balance. That means one cannot exist without the other and still achieve this balance. That in turn means the organization cannot be seen as being dark or light or it would become out of balance. That precludes it from being able to be "good" because the inherent balance structure would be thrown off. The "bad" side, however, has gotten very good about "informing" us of their plans to absolve them of creating a net bad balance, or so they think.

In regards to Q, out of the three Q posts specifically referencing Freemasons, here is #1630

">>1946203 Why are FREEMASONs on the scene of most shooting locations? Openly giving interviews or in background shots? Symbolism will be their downfall. Q"

Symbolism will be THEIR down fall. "They" in this context are the Freemasons, as a whole. He did not delineate between dark or light path, good or bad.

As I stated, you can't have an organization that openly acknowledges a dark/evil path as equally viable to the light/good path guiding the world and expect a net positive result.

Lastly, even if your contention about the Freemasons is true, the dark path ones have soiled the nest far too much for the "good" ones to attempt to distance themselves in the eyes of the public assuming this aspect is part of declass. The Freemasons, as a group, have spent far too long shoving all their symbolism in our faces while they perform terrible acts. It doesn't matter if the good ones didn't like it, they let the bad ones be far too loud for too long to not get thrown out with them.