It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Thomas Jefferson made slip in Declaration

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Thomas Jefferson made slip in Declaration


news.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON – Preservation scientists at the Library of Congress have discovered that Thomas Jefferson, even in the act of declaring independence from England, had trouble breaking free from monarchial rule.

In an early draft of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote the word "subjects," when he referred to the American public. He then erased that word and replaced it with "citizens," a term he used frequently throughout the final draft.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
The truth finally comes out-- HA HA-- I just thought this was kind of interesting, and wanted to post it here because of all the NWO topics. Maybe the NWO isn't so NEW. We should probably start calling it the OWO. Nobody cared about the thread I started yesterday about the number of casualties in the current Iraq war, so it's pretty safe to say this story that doesn't matter one bit will be a huge success.


news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 06:07 PM
link   
Well I for one find this small piece of trivia rather interesting. Its kinda like calling your new wife your ex-girlfriends name during a fight. So used to using the exes name when angry...outa habit...Im really sorry honey no no I dont still love her



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   
I find this highly awkward.

All the anti-government people who hold this man in such high respect in reverance are gonna be shocked. So what the hell was the true agenda back then? How far back does the plans for the NWO go?



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:01 PM
link   
The Declaration of Independence really should have been called the “Declaration of Intent to Propose New Management.”

We live in a world where you can’t get away with shoplifting a pack of chewing gum, so no, most people don’t stop to think that Colonial America it’s land and assets were lawfully owned and titled to a collection of sovereign monarchs, banks and creditors that truly in fact would never see the difference between the word Robbery and the word Revolution.

The revolutionaries did not have the money to purchase the assets of America, in fact the U.S. Government has still not finished paying for those assets. We did get very close in 1825, we were down to just 25,000.00 dollars, but our debt has just increased significantly since then to the International Banking Cartel that actually holds title to the Nation (corporation) and the land.

The intent of the Revolution was to create a new form of management for the lands, but they were not sure if that was going to be a new monarchy with a sovereign appointed or a Republic based on the principles of Rome.

So what this document displays is the confusion at the time, as to whether we were going to be subjects of a monarchy where the sovereign was appointed by Rome’s Prince Elector, King George of England, or whether we would be citizens, another form of property of the state that is also Roman in origin.

I don’t think it was ever decided until the Constitutional Convention which route the new management would ultimately take, but I do believe they decided more people would fight for new management based on the concept of being free and sovereign citizens, than subjects of a new monarch.

Interesting find, one that is in fact very important for people who have done some ‘non-textbook’ research on the period.

Thanks, star and flag.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


This is offensive.

Jefferson's whole life was to free people.

If he was raised to say subjects, and indeed, citizen wasn't exactly a common word then, then it is one mistake.


How about you learn about Jefferson before you make wild accusations about him?



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   
It seems to say fellow subjects. I think that puts him on the same playing field as us.

It's possible that was a common term in those times.

There was a link, www.myloc.gov... to the documents. I gave a quick look but I couldn't find them.

Like with everything, it seems people go reading more into it before actually reading more.

[edit on 7/2/2010 by ThaLoccster]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
 


This is offensive.

Jefferson's whole life was to free people.

If he was raised to say subjects, and indeed, citizen wasn't exactly a common word then, then it is one mistake.


How about you learn about Jefferson before you make wild accusations about him?



Jefferson never freed his own slaves. Just saying, as you seem to be upset about this.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Subject

"One who is under the rule of another or others, especially one who owes allegiance to a government or ruler."


Citizen

"A resident of a city or town, especially one entitled to vote and enjoy other privileges there."





Pretty substantial difference between the two words. While my faith in Jefferson has diminished some it is just small change. This was the common word among the people of higher ranks in society of the time, the socialites. While he should have known better and even thought better than to have ever repeated that word, can you truly blame a man for using a common word?

[edit on 7/2/2010 by Misoir]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLoony
Jefferson never freed his own slaves. Just saying, as you seem to be upset about this.



None of the founding fathers freed their slaves. That wasn't part of the deal at the time. Even though some have suggested that they struggled with the idea of slavery. They left the whole mess out for later generations to deal with.

The use of the phrase " Subjects" doesn't surprise me in the least. Remember the world was a very different beast. The whole idea of citizenship in this form was a novel idea at the time.

Keep it in perspective. It wasn't written in 2010.




[edit on 2-7-2010 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by TheLoony
 


He freed them at his deathbed.

Jefferson was ridiculed for that in his day too. he still freed them. he even had a family with one. hardly seems he viewed them as anything more than business, but respected their humanity.

It was a stoic philosophy. Many founding fathers were.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kojack
I find this highly awkward.

All the anti-government people who hold this man in such high respect in reverance are gonna be shocked. So what the hell was the true agenda back then? How far back does the plans for the NWO go?


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Why should constitutionalists and other small government advocates be surprised by a slip up like this? Most of the Founders were subjects and most of colonial America were subjects of King George. Just because they hated the British Monarch doesn't mean that many of the Founders didn't consider themselves British subjects...It just came time, however, for the subjects to find a new identity, as was required of their circumstance.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


[edit on 2-7-2010 by projectvxn]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:02 PM
link   
I don't see what the difference is in essence, since both terms require acceptance to a higher authority. The only thing is the English word "Subject" directly implies subordination whereas Citizen does not?? Look at the opposites, a "Rebel" against Subject, and a "Barbarian" against Citizen.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheLoony

Jefferson never freed his own slaves. Just saying, as you seem to be upset about this.


Not true!

Well actually it is partly true. Jefferson had several illegitimate children with one of his slaves.


Thomas Jefferson freed all of Sally Hemings' children: Beverly and Harriet were allowed to leave Monticello in 1822; Madison and Eston were released in Jefferson's 1826 will. Jefferson gave freedom to no other nuclear slave family.

Thomas Jefferson did not free Sally Hemings. She was permitted to leave Monticello by his daughter Martha Jefferson Randolph not long after Jefferson's death in 1826, and went to live with her sons Madison and Eston in Charlottesville.


And that is from Jefferson's biased Monticello estate!

www.monticello.org...

[edit on 2-7-2010 by tooo many pills]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 





Jefferson's whole life was to free people.


This is the pat I was engaging. Jefferson only freed a handful, the rest were sold to pay off his debts.

He never freed them because he couldn't afford to. Seems money was more important than freeing people, eh?

Is just seems to me that saying his whole life was about freeing people is a bit misleading.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by TheLoony
 


He was and always was a business man. But he DID free all his slaves at his death.

He spent his whole life in pursuit of religious and personal freedom.

It's not misleading at all. The man sewed it into his architecture and his writing. Even if he was a bit hypocritical, he still fought his whole life for freedom. He did free his slaves. He had a family with them. He raised children with them. He most certainly did not treat them that much less than himself.



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
I have to say it sounds like he thought he was a king....maybe we are still under rule by the British



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   
This was already posted bud...

Thomas Jefferson made slip in Declaration

Didn't you bother to run a search option before you posted this?



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Megiddodiddo
 


Sorry about that, I did do a search but nothing came up.

S&F for yours

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
It is amazing what a range of perspectives are represented by this draft, and that is what it was, a draft.

Here is a man whose entire life (up to this nexus of events) took place during the stage of our civilization where nearly every country was subject to hereditary rule.

Of course, it seems so trivial to consider that the angst and anguish this 'discovery' can be a terrible overinflated and completely mundane mistake. As the words flow from your fingers, as you post on this or any other thread, have you NEVER written a word you were used to and heard in your life - in the matters you're interested in - everyday, then backed up and erased it for a more refined reflection of what you want to say?

This isn't some kind of ideological slip at all. It's the fabrication of a meme. As such I reject it completely as relevant to Mr. Jefferson's intent.

Where's the surprise? Where's the intrigue. We must speculate, infer, and fabricate conditions and circumstances of a man none of us ever knew....

Could he have meant 'subjects' when the point of the declaration was to stop being 'subjects' in the first place? I suspect not. But in "real life" at the time they were all subjects. - so he fixed it. Now we have to question Mr Jefferson's character, and by some bizarre mental gymnastics our nation's - based on a corrected "typo"?

I think we are too easily offended. We take these people's word regarding their discoveries as too significant. I am content to say I disagree. I will not allow them to interpret reality for me.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join