It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Dispute of NWO Founding Fathers

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 12:08 PM
Theory suggests that the Founding Fathers of the United States were actually part of the NWO plot, so that the US could be the leader in the takeover of the world. There is one eensie-weensie problem with that.

The Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment (2ndAm) a served two purposes at the time it was drafted. One was to keep the King of England (or any European king for that matter) out of your back yard. The second purpose still stands today: to keep the government scared of its own citizens. Jefferson even said that for true democracy to persist, there must be violent bloodshed against the government every 20 years to make sure they keep off the peoples' backs.

If the citizens are all totin' guns, and they outnumber the state-organized militia, or Army (also protected by the 2ndAm), then there is a HUGE problem with a military takeover of the entire nation.

Another problem: People say the "neo-conservatives" are leading the NWO movement. However, it's the "crazy conservatives" who are opposed to any form of gun control. The NRA and other "gun nuts" are pretty much Republican. Republicans do two things (well, more than two, but for argument's sake bear with me): (1) they support the 2ndAm and (2) they piss off European leadership.

For example, in case you haven't heard, there is this American President called George W. Bush, and nobody in Europe likes him and he likes to go to his Texas ranch and shoot guns.

Can we conclude that the Republican Party actually opposes NWO activity by arming American citizens and keeping an oppressive government scared? Can we conclude that the Democratic Party supports NWO activity by trying to disarm American citizens, leaving them defenseless to a military takeover?

Perhaps not fully conclude, but at least consider. I personally consider the fact that the Democrats want to make European leaders happy with us and want to disarm its citizens.

Here's a tidbit. I lived in Italy for 5 years. You can't get guns unless you are the Mafia or the police. Policemen (specifically the Carabinieri, or the Carbine-ers) sport fully automatic carbine submachineguns in airports, by banks, outside government buildings, etc. You wanna talk about a police state? Italians can't carry guns - just the government. If the government wanted to take over militarily, it would be no problem.

Two million armed solders could not handle 250 million guns circulating in the United States. And these are just the LEGAL guns. Just imagine how many gun nuts there are with fully automatic weapons cached away in the Montana mountains ready to oppose government oppression. Yes I understand that the government has airplanes and helicopters, but just go read or watch Black Hawk Down to see how well low-tech weaponry in high numbers fights back against high-tech weaponry in small numbers.

The Second Amendment to me is a way of the non-NWO Founding Fathers making sure that the American People does not become enslaved, even if we have to revolt every 2 years and start from scratch.

posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 12:30 PM
Ralph - -

Very good point. But- you realize your picking a "friendly discussion" with all those who believe in the NWO on this site.

Good luck, they are going to swarm on you like sand on the beach.

Being a gun owner, i own 4 of the 250million guns in the USA, I'm a firm believer in the 2nd amendment.

Look at how important it is; its number 2. Which leads me to believe that the framers of this great nation thought it was that important.

posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 01:33 PM
Just look at Iraq. Gun suppression is there, but illegal gun trade is handing out guns to citizens everywhere. An entire army cannot take down an entire country of rebels who use guerilla tactics. Look at previous revolutions in the past.

posted on Apr, 19 2006 @ 10:12 AM
So, in light of the 2nd ammendment, the founders couldn't've been part of the NWO. And, considering the influence of secret societies like the masons and sons of liberty, those secret societies can't have much to do with it either.

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 10:12 AM

Originally posted by Nygdan
So, in light of the 2nd ammendment, the founders couldn't've been part of the NWO. And, considering the influence of secret societies like the masons and sons of liberty, those secret societies can't have much to do with it either.

That's my point. A majority of the Founding Fathers were freemasons, and yet they gave the citizens of the US the right to own guns to keep them from being oppressed. If the freemasons were really part of an NWO conspiracy, they would have left the US citizens unarmed and powerless against tyrannical government. Perhaps we can only say that freemasonry would be anti-NWO.

Another anti-NWO fact is the individuality and regionalism of the States. Although it has fluctuated back and forth as needs dictate, each State still maintains a good level of autonomy from another. You would think that an NWO-style government would eliminate State boundaries and do away with regional laws and only instill One National Law. You really can't start up a One-World-Government when your own nation has 50 different regions with 50 different State Constitutions with varying laws, each with the right to sucede from the Union with a simple vote of the people.

The Founding Fathers started up a new country and committed treason against England in the process. Most of them were rich men who had a lot to lose. Fifty-six men signed the Declaration of Independence. Nine were killed in the Revolution. Five were captured and imprisoned as traitors. Twelve had their homes burned down. Seventeen lost everything they owned. Many of them had sons that were captured and tortured because of who their fathers were. Yet none of them went back on their decision.

Yes, I know that the Founding Fathers were imperfect men. They spoke of freedom, yet they still had slaves. Many of them gave up their slaves, either immediately or arranged it when they died. Some kept their slaves. That's not the point. They were good guys, they were part of a good fraternity, and they had good moral values and REALLY wanted US citizens to be free, and they gave us guns to make sure NOBODY - not the President, not the Congress, not the Army or Navy or Marines or Osama bin Laden, or Hitler, or the King of England - NOBODY can take it away from us because we have the right and duty to kill anyone who tries to take away our freedom.

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 11:16 AM
To Amschel -

[Just look at Iraq. Gun suppression is there, but illegal gun trade is handing out guns to citizens everywhere.]

I would like to ask where you heard this? I have not heard this on any news channel or read about it in any newspaper.

If this is true, and "they" are handing out guns to everyone, how come soldiers are not being killed every day by gunfire?

Another question is "Who" is handing out these guns and "Where" are they comming from? "Who" is manufacturing these guns?

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 01:02 PM
Who says the entire population is going to rise up? I would love for that to happen but there are still lots of people who have no idea whats going on.

The NWO is going to happen. It's set in stone now. The police state is already on the rise that much is clear through the Patriot Act.

I'm sure some people will fight but the onset of the NWO is going to be pandamonium. There will be gas shortages, food shortages. Power plants will probably be tripped.

Almost nobody is prepared for any major terrorist attacks to occur even. I wish a revolution will break out but too many people will be tricked into accepting the NWO.

Think about this. The revolution has no leaders as of yet. Has no organization and the few people who do know whats coming are isolated. It would take sometime for a revolution to break out. Which means that the NWO is going to have to go on for sometime before alot of people become brave enough to fight.

People these days are especially fragile beings so I'm not sure how long it will take for a revolution to actually break out.

Gun ownership is a good start though. I hope T. Jefferson is wrong when he said that "by the time the people realize the importance of the second amendment it will be too late..."

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 01:39 PM
Well, I'm just theorizing, but everyone had guns back then anyway. It would probably have been a big problem if they were denied that right. It would have been tougher to control the already riled up, anti-government sentiment. Other than that, the major hinderance to the expansion of the country was the native Americans. If everyone owns a gun, and everyone is told to hate Injuns, then that will help wipe out that problem. That and a little fire-water.

posted on Apr, 20 2006 @ 02:54 PM
To Mr. Crowley -

Maybe I'm Blind, but, could you please explain to me how the "police state is on the rise" even with the patriot act.

Also, could you give me a web site that i can view the "patriot act" as it was voted for this last time around. I heard something that it is not the same as the first "act" and it is a watered down version.

Thank you.

new topics

top topics


log in