In February of 2007, two caucasian young women robbed a Bank of America in Acworth, GA. Ashley Miller and Heather Johnston earned the "Barbie Bandits" nickname after police released bank video they said showed them laughing and joking behind fashionable sunglasses before handing a holdup note to the teller. It was later determined that a teller from the bank, Herman Allen, and another man, Michael Chastang (considered the "Master Mind") helped plan the robbery.
Flash forward ...
Today Ashley Miller, convicted of theft and drug distribution, was sentenced to the maximum of 10 years. She has to serve two years behind bars, with the remainder on probation.
She also has to pay at least $2,500 in restitution. Her co-defendant, Heather Lyn Johnston, who pleaded guilty to robbery and drug use charges in August, was sentenced to 10 years probation with community service, a minimum $2,000 fine and $2,500 in restitution. Benny Herman Allen III, who at the time of the February 27, 2007, robbery was a teller at the Bank of America in Acworth, Georgia, also was sentenced to the 10-year maximum. He's required to served five years behind bars and pay $2,500 in restitution.
The "Master Mind", Michael Chastang, faces at least 10 years in prison. As many of you know, Michael Chastang and Herman Allen are both black, and the Barbie Bandits, who by the way carried out the crime are both white.
What does this say about the American Justice System?
Your thoughts?
Monday, March 24, 2008
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Shoot 'Em Up - An Anti-Masonic film?
I had the opportunity to watch a so called action film last night entitled Shoot 'Em Up. It starred Clive Owen (Inside Man) and Paul Giamatti (Lady in the Water). Giamatti's character was a a mercenary of sorts who (among other things) is paid to assainate a new born child. He is the picture of evil in this movie. The problem that I have with the movie is that throughout the movie he wears a coat that has a Masonic lapel pin on it. It is very evident in just about every shot that he has in the movie almost to the point that its a prop.
Because the character has no redeeming values, I would doubt that Giamatti himself is a Mason, because I couldn't see a Mason wanting to portray such a negative image of a Brother.
I think that the producers of the movie may have deliberately wanted to reflect a negative light on the Craft.
If you have seen the movie, please post your thoughts.
Hobson
Because the character has no redeeming values, I would doubt that Giamatti himself is a Mason, because I couldn't see a Mason wanting to portray such a negative image of a Brother.
I think that the producers of the movie may have deliberately wanted to reflect a negative light on the Craft.
If you have seen the movie, please post your thoughts.
Hobson
Monday, September 3, 2007
Meeting my father after Twenty-two Years
For those of you who know me, I am a very private person. But being that I am among my Brothers I would like to pose a question. You can respond by replying to this post or back channel (email or phone is fine).
My mother and father had a long-distance marriage. Throughout my early childhood my father lived and worked in New York while my two brothers, sister, and mother lived in Mississippi. When he retired in 1984 my parents bought a home in Mississippi and attempted to have a real marriage. After six months of constant arguing my Brothers and I went to school one morning and when we got home he had moved back to Virginia. I haven't seen my father in twenty-two years. No, that's not a type-o.
This coming weekend, I am going to visit my younger Brother in DC and since my father will be four hours away (and since he's told my Brother to ask me to contact him), we are going to drive over and see him as well.
Currently, the only thing that I feel is anger. I want my children to at least meet their grandfather probably more than I want to see him myself. So, I need some advice. I know that it may be hard to put yourself into my shoes, but how would you handle this situation? Do you think that I should even make an effort after so long?
Sorry for turning the blog into "Dear Abby", but I need some un-biased advice.
My mother and father had a long-distance marriage. Throughout my early childhood my father lived and worked in New York while my two brothers, sister, and mother lived in Mississippi. When he retired in 1984 my parents bought a home in Mississippi and attempted to have a real marriage. After six months of constant arguing my Brothers and I went to school one morning and when we got home he had moved back to Virginia. I haven't seen my father in twenty-two years. No, that's not a type-o.
This coming weekend, I am going to visit my younger Brother in DC and since my father will be four hours away (and since he's told my Brother to ask me to contact him), we are going to drive over and see him as well.
Currently, the only thing that I feel is anger. I want my children to at least meet their grandfather probably more than I want to see him myself. So, I need some advice. I know that it may be hard to put yourself into my shoes, but how would you handle this situation? Do you think that I should even make an effort after so long?
Sorry for turning the blog into "Dear Abby", but I need some un-biased advice.
Wednesday, January 3, 2007
Where were you first prepared?
The topic of quantity versus quality is discussed a lot in my lodge, and I am sure that it is a popular subject among the membership of most organizations in existence today. Whether it’s the NAACP, a BGLO, the SCLC, ACM, or NSBE you can have but so many membership drives or reclamations before you realize that the same 20-30 people are bearing the work of the entire organization.
Freemasonry has an internal mechanism that I speculate was incorporated in order at its origin to ensure that this argument did not exist as our most excellent tenants were passed through succeeding generations. This failsafe is embodied in one of the first questions that a candidate for the Entered Apprentice Degree is asked, “Is this an act of your own free will and accord?”. Only after this question is answered in the affirmative is the individual allowed to continue with the ceremony of initiation. And then his affirmation is periodically verified throughout his initiation, passing, and raising.
As the class instructor for my lodge I have seen many men enter and leave through the doors of the lodge hall. Many men leave after the first night of degree work. They generally have the most legitimate reason, “This isn’t what I expected.” Others attend a few classes (we require our candidates to attend weekly classes and to perform community service) and decide that they don’t want to invest the time to learn the material or perform the community service projects that they touted as the very reason that they wanted to become Masons in the first place. Others stick around until they get raised and then fade away like the memory of some dearly departed loved one.
After being in the lodge for a few years I thought that I had the ability to determine who would complete the class and who would continue to participate in lodge activities after they were raised. I have found that to be as impossible as predicting the weather. I have since determined that this is a futile practice because there is no way to see within another man’s heart.
So who’s responsibility is it to guard the door of our lodge to ensure that the men whom we let enter will be as dedicated as we? This, too, can be found in our rituals. As EA's we are all admonished to be careful when recommending anyone for membership in the Lodge. We should be sure that he will conform to our rules in order to ensure the dignity of the institution and that the world at large is assured of its good effects.
So what does this brief lecture have to do with the title? If you are a Mason, then you wouldn’t have to ask.
Freemasonry has an internal mechanism that I speculate was incorporated in order at its origin to ensure that this argument did not exist as our most excellent tenants were passed through succeeding generations. This failsafe is embodied in one of the first questions that a candidate for the Entered Apprentice Degree is asked, “Is this an act of your own free will and accord?”. Only after this question is answered in the affirmative is the individual allowed to continue with the ceremony of initiation. And then his affirmation is periodically verified throughout his initiation, passing, and raising.
As the class instructor for my lodge I have seen many men enter and leave through the doors of the lodge hall. Many men leave after the first night of degree work. They generally have the most legitimate reason, “This isn’t what I expected.” Others attend a few classes (we require our candidates to attend weekly classes and to perform community service) and decide that they don’t want to invest the time to learn the material or perform the community service projects that they touted as the very reason that they wanted to become Masons in the first place. Others stick around until they get raised and then fade away like the memory of some dearly departed loved one.
After being in the lodge for a few years I thought that I had the ability to determine who would complete the class and who would continue to participate in lodge activities after they were raised. I have found that to be as impossible as predicting the weather. I have since determined that this is a futile practice because there is no way to see within another man’s heart.
So who’s responsibility is it to guard the door of our lodge to ensure that the men whom we let enter will be as dedicated as we? This, too, can be found in our rituals. As EA's we are all admonished to be careful when recommending anyone for membership in the Lodge. We should be sure that he will conform to our rules in order to ensure the dignity of the institution and that the world at large is assured of its good effects.
So what does this brief lecture have to do with the title? If you are a Mason, then you wouldn’t have to ask.
Suitable Proficiency
In the Middle Ages operative apprentices were required to labor seven years before they were thought to know enough to attempt to become Fellows of the Craft. At the end of the seven-year period an apprentice who had earned the approbation of those over him might make his Master’s Piece and submit it to the judgment of the Master and Wardens of his lodge.
The Master’s Piece was some difficult task of stone cutting or setting. Whether he was admitted as a Fellow or turned back for further instruction depended on its perfection.
The Master’s Piece survives in Speculative Masonry only as a small task and the seven years have shrunk to a minimum of one month. Before knocking at the door of the West Gate for his Fellowcraft’s Degree an Entered Apprentice must learn “by heart” a part of the ritual and ceremonies through which he has passed.
Easy for some, difficult for others, this is an essential task. It must be done, and well done. It is no kindness to an Entered Apprentice to permit him to proceed if his Master’s piece is badly made.
As the initiate converses with well-informed brethren, he will learn that there are millions of Masons in the world. He does not know them; they do not know him. Unless he can prove that he is a Mason, he can not visit in a lodge where he is not known, neither can he apply for Masonic aid, nor receive Masonic welcome and friendship.
Hence the requirement that the Entered Apprentice learn his work well is in his own interest.
But it is also of interest to all brethren, wheresoever dispersed, that the initiate know his work. They may find it as necessary to prove themselves to him as he may need to prove himself to them. If he does not know his work, he cannot receive proof any more than he can give it.
It is of interest to the lodge that the initiate know his work well. Well-informed Masons may be very useful in lodge; the sloppy, careless workman can never be depended upon for good work.
Appalled at the apparently great feat of memory asked, some initiates study with an instructor for an hour or two, find it difficult, and lose courage. But what millions of other men have done, any initiate can do. Any man who can learn to know by heart any two words can also learn three; having learned three he may add a fourth, and so on, until he can stand before the lodge and pass a creditable examination, or satisfy a committee that he has learned enough to entitle him to ask for further progress.
The initiate should be not only willing but enthusiastically eager to learn what is required because of its effect upon his future Masonic career. The Entered Apprentice who wins the honor of being passed to the degree of Fellowcraft by having performed the only task set him goes forward feeling that he is worthy. As Speculative Freemasonry builds only character, a feeling of unworthiness is as much a handicap in lodge life as a piece of faulty stone is in building a wall.
But this important reason for learning the work thoroughly goes farther. It applies more and more as the Fellowcraft’s degree is reached and passed and is most vital after the initiate has the proud right to say, “I am a Master Mason.”
Claudy, Carl H., Introduction to Freemasonry – I – Entered Apprentice, 1931, Carl H. Claudy.
The Master’s Piece was some difficult task of stone cutting or setting. Whether he was admitted as a Fellow or turned back for further instruction depended on its perfection.
The Master’s Piece survives in Speculative Masonry only as a small task and the seven years have shrunk to a minimum of one month. Before knocking at the door of the West Gate for his Fellowcraft’s Degree an Entered Apprentice must learn “by heart” a part of the ritual and ceremonies through which he has passed.
Easy for some, difficult for others, this is an essential task. It must be done, and well done. It is no kindness to an Entered Apprentice to permit him to proceed if his Master’s piece is badly made.
As the initiate converses with well-informed brethren, he will learn that there are millions of Masons in the world. He does not know them; they do not know him. Unless he can prove that he is a Mason, he can not visit in a lodge where he is not known, neither can he apply for Masonic aid, nor receive Masonic welcome and friendship.
Hence the requirement that the Entered Apprentice learn his work well is in his own interest.
But it is also of interest to all brethren, wheresoever dispersed, that the initiate know his work. They may find it as necessary to prove themselves to him as he may need to prove himself to them. If he does not know his work, he cannot receive proof any more than he can give it.
It is of interest to the lodge that the initiate know his work well. Well-informed Masons may be very useful in lodge; the sloppy, careless workman can never be depended upon for good work.
Appalled at the apparently great feat of memory asked, some initiates study with an instructor for an hour or two, find it difficult, and lose courage. But what millions of other men have done, any initiate can do. Any man who can learn to know by heart any two words can also learn three; having learned three he may add a fourth, and so on, until he can stand before the lodge and pass a creditable examination, or satisfy a committee that he has learned enough to entitle him to ask for further progress.
The initiate should be not only willing but enthusiastically eager to learn what is required because of its effect upon his future Masonic career. The Entered Apprentice who wins the honor of being passed to the degree of Fellowcraft by having performed the only task set him goes forward feeling that he is worthy. As Speculative Freemasonry builds only character, a feeling of unworthiness is as much a handicap in lodge life as a piece of faulty stone is in building a wall.
But this important reason for learning the work thoroughly goes farther. It applies more and more as the Fellowcraft’s degree is reached and passed and is most vital after the initiate has the proud right to say, “I am a Master Mason.”
Claudy, Carl H., Introduction to Freemasonry – I – Entered Apprentice, 1931, Carl H. Claudy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
