The American History You're Not Supposed To Know

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by warrenb

 

The real funny thing is every nation has a "Real History" like this. Every single nation on earth, every people on earth.

Reading all the 'it's anti-American propaganda!!1' retorts, every single nation apart from America, apparently!

Yes.... were not suppose to know? Then why do I know that almost everything in those links are covered by my college history class?

Ex. The Pilgrims, it was basically a half-summary from my book.

It may just because I took it in high school and many others didn't and that is why I know, but then the regular history kids would be unaware.

Originally posted by FSBlueApocalypse
Link #1 The Puritans ... "There was no prohibition on the practice of Puritanism, an extreme fundamentalist form of Protestantism, in Britain." Yes there certainly was. If you didn't go to a Church of England church back then, you risked getting executed.

I think you might be are misinformed here - the Puritans were always recognised as a legitimate if very extreme group within the Church of England after Orange's "Glorious Revolution". Although they faced spotted discrimination before 1640, during the Protectorate they were granted complete equal rights. After Chalres II was reinstated, there was an initial purge, but no prohibition of practice. Sporadically there were persecutions, but, like I said, after Orange's revolution that came to an end too.

EDIT: To add, the persecutions were mostly political, not religious - the Puritans were anti-monarchy and therefore were kept from positions of high power within the CoE - BUT they were still allowed to practise and were considered within the CiE.

[edit on 9/11/2008 by rexpop]

I am going through the links. I will reserve comment until I get through it all, which means, some time next week.
On top of that, I found "Lies My Teacher Told Me" on Google Books.

book

Check it out, if you dare.

reply to post by Pamie


There are literally thousands of assertions of fact in the links. You think you can dismiss all of them by quibbling about Washington and the White House?

Not sure I think it all rings so true. Clearly the author is on their own crusade and agenda. Some events like the black guy in Oklahoma city sounds a lot like an arranged event to me. Not sure I believe George Washington was wealthy. etc.. The information provided is very skewed.

Originally posted by Distractions4Nothing
I don't know where people get the idea that Americans don't know about this stuff. When I was a kid in school, we learned all about the slave trade and our aggressive wars against Native Americans.

I agree 100%. (I made the same point, slightly differently.)

I think the OP needs some rethinking. I even wonder whether this thread was started by a US citizen or not, since it seems pretty surprised about some very basic information.

A lot of this stuff is common knowledge to all Americans: Salem witch trials. Washington owned slaves. We committed genocide against the native Americans. President Grant was an alcoholic. We provoked the Spanish American War. We interned Japanese-Americans during WW2.

No news there.

#

It is in the nature of USA citizens to be highly self-critical. I think it is our way of testing whether we actually have freedom of speech or not.

The good news: Yes, we have freedom of speech.

Again, no news there.

[edit on 9-11-2008 by Buck Division]

Thanks, any scources of this, like 200year old Freemason, books lying around?

A few Masonic shops sell books like these to other masons, for "safe Keeping"

reply to post by warrenb


Starred and Flagged. I gotta say that I absolutely LOVE when the rose colored glasses of history are roundly smashed and crushed into red sand with the real truth. Looks like I won't be getting any work done at work tonight, like I ever do anyway.

I haven't read all the responses. I did read all the information and WOW. Very, very interesting. I'm a little shocked, to be honest. Funny thing is, I don't recall hearing any of this stuff in public school, or anywhere else for that matter.

But then, as though by magic, everything changes. Congress enacts the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 which has the effect of stripping transit lines away from their utilities and forcing them onto the market where they are snapped up and destroyed by General Motors, Standard Oil et al.

mtwsfh.blogspot.com...

Making their way by law is the Illuminati way.

Perhaps only known by kids whose parents were in their 30s and
said GM needed to sell cars.

In the case of GE making the nations power network, every upgrade
Tesla made was bought out and not used. A perpetual Helium
generator in every home will have to wait till the power system
freezes over from UFO interruptions. Lucky for GE Tesla made
the watt-hour meter so we get charged for the electrons coming
back and forth out of the ground in out basements.

A lot went on after and before 1935 but that is a crucial year.
Well they all are and getting used to a shock and awe history
is something to wonder at with author, Tesla researcher Lyne.

I never heard of Illuminati before reading the Lyne book and now
every conspiracy expert talks about them at one time or another.
One forum owner started his forum to find out more when
some one told him about the 13 families with most of the
worlds wealth and called them the Illuminati. He never heard
the term and didn't like not knowing something like that and
started his net forum to find out more.

reply to post by warrenb


While I have not read every blog on the site you are listing, I am finding issue with the fact that I have not found any reference to sources of these so called, "truths".

I can do that too... "In 2008, aliens came down from Beta Reticuli and revealed that Bush, is indeed, one of them."

Where did I see/hear that? It doesn't matter. I wrote it down, so it must be true.

Does anyone remember what it takes to write a convincing argument? Where are this person's sources? Why even waste your time reading some rhetoric that looks to be the ramblings of a single person's mind, without any proof whatsoever. It's that same "blind" following without questioning, that got all of us here in the first place. If you want to say that George Washington wanted to kill off the indians for land in spite of Brittain's order against such, then you need to have some validated source. Otherwise, your're trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes, just as "they" have been doing to us since the beginning.

Originally posted by warrenb
no spoon feeding....google is your friend

[edit on 8-11-2008 by warrenb]

Excuse me? I haven't ever been spoon feed and don't want to be. You on the other hand would believe any trite that is posted on the internet. Keep using Google and spoon feed your self some more nonsense.

-Ign0RanT

Well, that is some really awful propaganda. Yes, there is another side to those stories, however, the person who wrote that obviously has both no understanding of history, and is extremely biased. Sadly, I think we will see a lot more of that perspective popping up. Ignorance under th guise of intelligence is the new order of society.

I fail to see the need to counter such slander. The author of these pieces is nothing more than an American bashing, U.S. hating, spiteful, slanted "Author" of History. So much of the Author's opinion is injected into these "Historical Pieces", that one must begin to wonder if Political Pundits have hijacked the field of Social Studies and History.

I for one learn my History from the Novels and Documents of those who lived through it, as well as from my own family's records and journals. My family has been around here since Jamestown, and Plymouth, so much of what I learn is passed on as Family Knowledge. I will admit that the History books I had in School did skew certain issues here or there, but it was nothing I could not remedy with a decent amount of studying or discussion.

Certain facts here or there, which are presented through these links, do provide some insight and knowledge into events of the past. However, they fall victim to the very same issue which skewed the History in my aforementioned school books, and that is the injection of Opinion and Politics by those who never lived through it.

I will not tell you to keep a closed mind, or to forget about alternative sources of information, but I will state that these links are blatantly biased and spiteful. If you cannot pick that up from the format of the pages, and the first paragraph or two, then you are not scrutinizing the information closely enough.

As for stating that this somehow makes you "Ashamed to be an American", that is an extremely pitiful attitude, and you have done nothing but proven yourself to be easily persuaded by the slightest of Opinionated "Facts".

Hey blog bashers, post the history items you have a problem with.
Lets all see the problem.
There can be only one history and if you think his is different
lets take a look.
Its only up to 1935.
That leaves all of us out as first hand witnesses to history.
ED: Well I think 1935 might be the most sensitive area
and worth good look further on.
mtwsfh.blogspot.com...

1935: UNITED STATES. John Foster Dulles who, through the robber barons' favorite law firm, Sullivan and Cromwell, is orchestrating arms and finance for Adolf Hitler and the Nazis for their takeover of Germany and ultimately all of Europe, is the author of a major article in the Atlantic Monthly entitled "The Road to Peace." Dulles explains away Germany’s secret rearmament, which he has had a key role in arranging, as an action to "take back their freedom". Dulles assures Americans that the Nazis and the Italian Fascists are interested only in peace. Would John Foster Dulles lie?

People say things, we all say things.
Shades of ENRON and Ken Lay, buy my stock, as I sell sell sell.

[edit on 11/11/2008 by TeslaandLyne]

[edit on 11/11/2008 by TeslaandLyne]

[edit on 11/11/2008 by TeslaandLyne]

Originally posted by Nerevar
Good links. S&F!

More people need to read the other side of the coin. The problem is that history is written by the victors.

Therefore the truth quite often gets misconstrued. The most poignant point in the whole article is the fact that HARDLY ANYONE is aware of Britain's role in abolishing slavery WORLDWIDE. My forbears actively tried to stop the trade in humans be it through paying indirectly for the naval patrols off the coast of Africa or taking part in these patrols.

To this day, Britain is still accused of everything and anything to do with slavery but NEVER credited with being the first country in the world to abolished slavery and root out its benefactors.

Even the fact that Britain established treaties with the Indian nations of the Americas illustrates that we have always been (or at least tried to be) a tolerant and fair nation.

While i harbour no resentment towards our American descendants / cousins (quite literally cousins), i do feel that the representation of the actions of Britain during the "Revolution" were always distorted. Films such as The Patriot etc really anger me. The fact that they are blaming the "King of England" for unfair taxation smacks of ignorance...all laws in Britain were (and still are) passed through Parliament before reaching the King for his seal of approval.

More and more people should read this, obviously with a pinch of salt as it is considerably biased in its wording (bear in mind that slave trading in the Colonies was a legal trade up until the laws of England abolished it - so it cannot really be used as an insult) and you will be fine.

King George III gets the blame for the acts of Parliament, because he did not take action to redress those grievances and appeared to be punishing the Colonials for complaining to him. Had he had the wisdom to insist that the Colonials be given seats in Parliament, then he would have been a hero and there never would have been an American Revolution. So King George III gets the blame because it was his fault!