America & Thanks Giving day were born under the leadership of a forgotten 1st Heroic President!

The Peace of God To all that belong to The light,
Dear Readers,

Thanks Giving Day is the most original of the Ending Year holidays in America. This that is a celebration to honor the first pilgrim puritans that came to New England to settle down, was however established as a national official holiday in 1782 by a President that sadly is almost forgotten in the Books of History.

www.answers.com...

He was the very First President of the United States, as an independent nation, under the rule of the Articles of the Confederation approved in Philadelphia, in time of war and so previously to the signing of the Constitution.

Although it seems incredible Many Americans on our days don't know that the First national leader of this Nation was Mr John Hanson, that was a patriot that at 65 years old decided to lead a nation that was not already completely free toward its consolidation.

www.cbn.com...

This noble man, that also thought in the need to create a celebration that joined all the sons and daughters of the new nation, nevertheless is so forgotten on our days that his burial place ironically remains unmarked somewhere in a parking area at Prince George's county in Maryland.

His house was also completely demolished in 1980, although some years ago an exact copy was build back in the original place.

rolandsramblings.wordpress.com...

I think is there is something called conspiracy is perhaps the way the nation has decided to ignore who was his very founder father, I am sure that even George Washington might feel embarrass to see that he has taken a place in the books of History and in the collective memory that really deserves to other man.

news.yahoo.com...

Please this Thanks giving day let us offer the first cheer for Mr John Hanson, First President of an independent America!.

Thanks for your attention,

Happy Thanks Giving Day!

your friend,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

Hanson was born on a plantation called "Mulberry Grove" into a wealthy and prominent family.

The U.S.A. founded by the elite for benefit of the elite.
Nothings changed there then.

a reply to: alldaylong

It is my policy since many years ago to let the people in general to express their ideas or opinions on my threads, I still think that is a wise attitude. However, I reserve to me the right to also express mines, and I don't necessarily endorse the ones of anybody that like my threads or find them interesting.

America was founded by people of all social spheres, in the American Revolution there is a spirit of equality in plurality that made it unique in the time it happened, that spirit is clearly expressed either in the Declaration of Independence and later in the Constitution.

When we read a sentence that is written beginning with the expression We The People.... or When we read that there are truths that are self evident like that all men were created equally, it is clear that this was not a revolution just for one social class, but it was a movement inspired and supported by and for the masses.

The difference in between Hanson and Washington as First President is not their social status , neither their values, since it is clear they both belonged to a condition blessed with good education, that is not a sin, we can't discriminate them just because they were neither extremely poor or uneducated.

A Comparison in between Hanson and Washington is interesting, since one was a Civilian all his life, a statesman compromised all the time with the Political leadership, while the second was Primarily a Military that later became Politician.

It seems that if we accept that the father founder was a military possibly it projects the image that America is a nation created of war, by the war, and for the war, in other words that civilians were not really involved in the leadership of the Independence. However, that is actually a false conclusion, taken from a judgment based only in appearances.

We all know that the civil population represents the majority of the nation. Nevertheless, Militaries are a very important profession that must serve the nation not only in times of war, but also in Peace, which duty is to work for the support of the public order, the Legal institutions and the defense of the social guaranties of external and internal dangers, externals like attacks of foreign forces and internals like subversion of any kind.

To achieve such an important mission militaries are a professional body that must separate themselves from the Politics, why? because they must maintain a loyalty with the Institutions in general, their motivations must be all the time of patriotism, never of sectarianisms and definitively well above of the political divisions that the Parties represent.

When militaries become Politicians they must surrender their previous status, their rank in the arm forces, understand that in the political life they are no longer separated of the rest of the civilians, but part of them. George Washington understood this very well, he showed that what a Military can contribute a lot, while returning to the civil life is to control the divisions created by the parties, to defend the genuine national interests of the ones of pressure groups, and above all social differences to treat everybody as members of the same team.

Dwight Eisenhower is a nice example of this paradigm, he was a General along all WWII, and his performance as a military was absolutely brilliant, but when became President he understood that he must rule a nation in times of Peace, not of war.

As President he maintained a strict balance of priorities, he avoided the involvement of the country in unnecessary conflicts, without risking the national security standards, pushed the national spirit to move forward through the path of progress, in balance between public and private sectors, he opened the exploration of the Space, boosted the research in Science and Technology sponsored by federal funding, he was the first to talk about civil rights, He modeled the highway national system, he also was smart enough to see that Vietnam was an important battle against communism, but of the people of that nation, not an American one.

He was the only President of the Second half of the XX Century that decided to don't involve America at all in the political turmoil of the Middle east. He didn't support the action of France and England in the war of Suez Crisis against Egypt, he understood that the Arab world was a key piece of the balance of forces of the cold war, and so he decided that it was the best policy for the nation to be absolutely neutral in the Israel - Palestinian conflict.

We are seeing and painfully experienced after his epoch all the negative consequences that the American involvement in middle east problems have carried to the country, the Petroleum Embargo of the 1970s, crisis of the hostages in Iran in 1980, arrival of terrorism to American soil in 2001, plus wars in which it does not look to be an end in that region and the thousands of American lives sacrificed on them.

Moreover, when retiring from the Presidency, he warned the country of the existence of what he called a Military establishment that was dangerously pushing the country out of balance, obsessively focusing a so high economic momentum just in to maintain an armament industry. He worried a lot of the extremely high cost this would carry to the nation, suspecting it should be an unsustainable weight for the public finances, that in the long run will constraint dramatically until suffocation many vital areas of the national life and even our freedom.

His last speech to the Nation is of incredible courageous moral authority, about that an uncontrolled Military Industrial complex could compromise American progress at future.

Farewell address Jan 1961

If what he told to us would have been respected, it is very likely that America never would have suffered the fiasco of Vietnam, The recession of mid 1970s, the early 1980s, the Post Persian Gulf war one, or even the great recession of 2008-10, and possibly it should never have gone in course of collision with fundamentalisms that basically are not of our concerns, since they were aroused from problems that are far of the American life .

He clearly pointed that the possibility of another great war in the world must be at any cost avoided, since if it happens, it should collapse by sure the civilization. Interesting meditation in times like ours, in 2014 when a political dispute created for pushing Ukraine to one or other sphere of influence has increased exponentially such a risk as never before.

Why a President that offered along his 2 campaigns to work for the Peace, that even got a Nobel prize, is now insisting in to go ahead in a fight that we all know easily could go out of control and destroy Civilization?

The best answer is in this relatively short, so honest, so patriotic, so sensate, so wise speech asking for balance of who leaded the ally victory in WWII.


Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

Eisenhower Jan 17th 1961 ,
You and I --need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice .