The founding fathers fraud the biggest scam since religion, page 3

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

---

Yes, a Bill of Rights, the first ten Amendments that protected the individual from acts of the government, was incorporated into the Constitution. But other promised reforms that would have restricted private power -- the capitalists and their corporations -- were ignored.

Corporations did not exist at the founding of the nation. I believe it was in the mid 1800's that land trusts formed and were precursors to the modern corporation.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

---

Fraud? No..Imperfect? Yes..

TJ's Answer to this as always? As Follows:


When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

Up to us my friends... Not our leaders.. Peace.

Originally posted by John_Brown
reply to post by RelentlessLurker

---

They did not "desire" slavery, or wish to remain enslaved. No human being does. Making the best of an inescapable and awful situation does not constitute approval or desire, it is simply survival.

i assure you that was the perspective of the vast majority of slaves in those times.

your looking at this from a post-civil-rights-era point of view, and im just being realistic. in order to "make the best of" a situation, or label it "awful/inescapable" you have to have the notion of a better situation to compare it to. and that "better" situation didnt even begin to start LOOKING like it would exist for at least another 60 years.

they had no notion or desire for freedom, as freedom in any form was perceived as a hard life.Some have compared it to the life of a fugitive. while a few might be willing to live that life most had FAMILIES and were not willing.

im just telling it like it is.
shake your fist at history, not me. i certainly didnt write it...

reply to post by Lookstwice

---

I have a Revolutionary Patriot in my family tree. I guess it runs in the blood...............

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

---

The Boston Tea Party was a Masonic Lodge dressed up to look like Indians?
If Independence was the goal - why not be forthright and demand it outright? Why go to the trouble of an elaborate ruse unless you have a much larger plan that involves getting rid of the Indians too?

This was the beginning of a more perfect union alright....more perfectly able to tax and enslave the citizenry and use the people as tools of commerce and entertainment while they rule from "ivory towers" protected by positions of nobility and influence.... and without "the people" even catching on.

I like the way you think!
Please continue.

IMO, the two of you are bold, brave and brilliant thinkers on this subject.

Both of you please continue

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

---

which is something i can't say for anyone of the people who are about to criticize him.

Being a WW2 Veteran doesn't make you infallible or smarter than anyone else, it also doesn't automatically make you wiser or give you better insight to the founding fathers. What you're doing here is called an appeal to authority, except that you're basing this man's authority solely on the fact that he served in WW2. LOT'S OF PEOPLE served in WW2, many courageous and brave but ALL still human and still capable of mistakes.

Why, why, why have both liberals and conservatives made those vile men, the Founding Fathers, into saints and their self-serving handiwork, the Constitution, a hallowed document?

Were the Founding Fathers perfect? No. But were they vile? Or were they just rich and powerful men of their day doing their best to set up a government? I'm not a big fan of the hero worship associated with the founding fathers and I am well aware that many were flawed or in their own way hypocrites but that does not make them vile or somehow make void the good ideas they had.

For example, the First Amendment is a good idea, giving people the freedom to speak, gather, exercise their religion, and also the provision to keep religion separate from government (invaluable to keeping the US from becoming a theocracy). Simply because the source of the first amendment is dubious does not mean we disregard its validity.

Another good example, the Bible. The Bible is filled with barbaric laws and horrific practices. It prohibits carrying out any work on the Sabbath by penalty of death and yet condones slavery openly, yet at the same time portions of the Bible have good moral advice. Are we to disregard TURN THE OTHER CHEEK because of the barbaric portions of the Bible?

While I do see the Founding Fathers as sort of sacred cows so-to-speak we should not disregard some of the wisdom they left behind for us simply because they were flawed and immoral men. I do not think the founding fathers or Constitution are sacred but I also do not see them as worthless or "vile" as this man does. The truth, I feel, is somewhere in between.

reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

---

I would rather be free, than a "slave with nice things"

That is pretty much what our Founding Fathers said. It is foolish to accept some goofball liberal theory that our Founding Fathers were stooges for the Crown or some other such nonsense. George Washington fought alongside his soldiers in the freezing winter with almost no provisions while the Red Coats had everything they needed from the Crown. It's documented. You could check the Library of Congress. There are letters describing the bad conditions and requesting provisions.

s the Commander in Chief of the Continental Army the services and achievements of George Washington are unique in the world's history. He was much more than the Commander in Chief. He was the one necessary person, whose calm, unswerving, determined sense of patriotic duty to country, and ability put real backbone into the Revolution and kept it from collapsing or merging into a civil conflict, under the hardships and unexpected privations encountered during the eight years of war. Without General Washington at its head it could never have succeeded. His faith in the cause and his devotion to the ideals it embodied made him the symbol of America — the spirit of the Revolution.

To his utter dismay, he found that withal the imposing numbers of men before him there was not enough powder among them or available to put up even the feeblest resistance to an attack; and had the English not been so thoroughly astonished at the results of Lexington and Concord and Bunker Hill, they probably could have driven the provincial army from Boston, since they had abundant military and naval forces at their command. However, they did not know the weaknesses of the colonial troops and one of General Washington's greatest policies of military strategy grew out of this crisis when he managed to keep his enemy in ignorance of his real strength by being apparently constantly preparing to attack.

When the Revolution began and General Washington, unlike the British generals against whom he was fighting and the French generals with whom he became associated, had no powerful organized central government back of him to keep him supplied with the sinews and munitions of war, with its bureaus and departments to facilitate the conduct of military campaigns. Instead, only an elective committee represented all the Colonies. To secure supplies became the all-important issue and the never-ending struggle

www.ushistory.org...

Although the formal historical record lacks specifics about Washington's personal spiritual practices, his recorded public statements express views about divine authority that would be fully consistent with a man who privately communicated in prayer with his god. His "Circular Letter Addressed to the Governors of all the States on the Disbanding of the Army, June 14, 1783" is explicit

I now make it my earnest prayer that God would have you, and the State over which you preside, in his holy protection; that he would incline the hearts of the citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to government, to entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another, for their fellow-citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for brethren who have served in the field; and finally that he would most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of mind, which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion, and without an humble imitation of whose example in these things, we can never hope to be a happy nation.[14]

Anecdotal evidence of Washington's direct spirituality comes from the awful winter of 1777-1778 that he spent with his troops camped at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. The stories tell of a general who prayed desperately for divine guidance and support as disease and cold stole away one fourth of his troops. They also tell of a general who saw a striking vision for the future of the nation he was fighting to establish.

www.newworldencyclopedia.org...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

---

I fail to see how this is a liberal-conservative issue. The issue seems to be that some people, on both the right and the left, praise the founding fathers above what they deserve and regard them as almost sacred. This veteran in particular seems to regards the founding fathers as vile, I doubt you'll find many Americans, regardless of party affiliation, who would defend the idea that the founding fathers were vile. Quite simply this isn't a party issue and attempting to make it one is pretty low.

I'm not affiliated with any party and I hold positions which are both liberal and conservative (and some libertarian), I find it insulting when folks, such as yourself, decide to reduce politics to a black and white us versus them issue.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

---

That's fine, but look at who is trying to keep the populace from having guns? Think about it. You know who it is and always has been since the Clinton era. And look who is giving arms to drug dealers in Mexico? revisionist history is not a new thing. Antony Sutton wrote about it in his book "The Order- America's Secret Establishment". While both left and right are complicit in the NWO takeover, it has traditionally been the left who actively tries to disarm the public. Look at how this admin has treated returning vets from Iraq and Afghanistan, because they know how to use weapons and usually are patriotic. It is almost always liberals trashing the Constitution and bashing nationalism. They conveniently use Hitler as an example of why a citizenry should not be proud of their country.

One more thing, why is the Left under the Obama admin constantly ridiculing, belittling, and calling the Tea Party movement dangerous terrorists? The answer is because they are the most patriotic and willing to stand for true Liberty.
So say what thou wilt.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

---

Is it liberals who bash the Constitution? Or is it both parties who, through their actions, trash the Constitution?

As for nationalism, I see it as just another aspect of our culture that is harmless in moderation. Those who point out the dangers of taking it to the extreme have their point, nationalism in the extreme is dangerous, but a certain level of it is arguably healthy.

I would recommend watching what politicians do, not what they say, there is no reason to paint this in left-right terms, it is power versus the powerless, the lust for power and/or money has no ideological loyalty.

Exclusive - Obama\'s Literary Agent in 1991 Booklet: \'Born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Haw
  Posted 12 days ago with 242 member flags

Ron Paul is NOT dropping out, the Mainstream Media is LYING.
  Posted 15 days ago with 111 member flags

Report: Romney Will Be Disqualified From Race Due To Fraud
  Posted 18 days ago with 105 member flags

Evidence of Vote Flipping in GOP Primary Elections
  Posted 7 days ago with 88 member flags

CNN Asks Ron Paul To Drop Out & Endorse Romney Despite His Chances To Win
  Posted 19 days ago with 70 member flags

Fox News Analyst: First American to shoot down drone will be a hero
  Posted 14 days ago with 68 member flags

Mitt Romney scared Ron Paul is winning!!!
  Posted 7 days ago with 62 member flags

Let\'s just say it: Political Parties are the Problem
  Posted 12 days ago with 60 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: