Forum Post: The American Revolution they did not teach in school
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 30, 2011, 5:28 a.m. EST by TheEvilFuckaire
(208)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
http://www.homeofheroes.com/hallofheroes/1st_floor/birth/1bc6a.html.
Many of our founding fathers did time. They did things to tax collectors and customs agents. They destroyed corporate property (Boston Tea Party) They were activists. They supported not only the right to protest but the right to revolt, not just against England but against the government they were creating if it became unjust. Thomas Jefferson knew slavery did not match the ideas he was writing down. Just like we know the concept of money is wrong.
[Removed]
That is true. However we should have learnt something. The founding fathers kicked off the American Revolution, causing many lives to be lost. In the ways of modern communication, we hope to achieve the same sorts of results with minimal disruption. Also, our banking enemies are far more wicked than the English Army was at the time.
It was the same banking families of Europe that owned Parliament and through Parliament wielded the British Army as a tool of their own interests, that know own our Congress and send our soldiers to die in foreign soil for oil to keep themselves rich and the rest of us poor. Every president that opposed the debt based money of the central banking system had an attempt on his life many were successful attempts. Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, John Kennedy.
Historically revolution has been bloody, OWS has the power to make change with the system in place. More and more people are realizing what is wrong with the system we have i.e. healthcare, oil greed, the fed banking system, corupt political system, etc. etc. This a protest from the grass roots and its catching on, more people are paying attention because more people are being hurt and are saying ENOUGH.
[Removed]
You think the American government will step down and give you the reigns of the country in some kind of prestigious ceremony followed by a parade? Back in the real world, it's obvious that if OWS starts a revolution to topple the American republic, it will get very ugly. We're talking about civil war here.
That's fine by me. 99% vs 1% seems like pretty good odds. (303,936,485 vs 3,070,066)
These wall street bankers, corrupt politicians/legal system, corporate/military dictators, and many others behind the curtains that are fucking everything up should have already turned themselves in by now. They need to pay for their crimes and spend some REAL time behind bars. They should know that what they are doing is wrong--and most probably do, but plainly don't give two shits about the people they are oppressing. Why else would they fight so hard to retain their positions of power. It won't be long before these evil powers start paying with their pitiful lives.
You understand those are fictitious numbers right? It's far from being clear that 99% of the US population would support a political revolution aimed at removing the republic and replacing is with direct democracy.
That's okay, they too can burn in hell right alongside their 1% masters.
Ah yes,threats of violence as usual. If a civil war were to start I think OWS and their ilk wold be very sorry and not happy with the outcome.You don't seem to understand that you don't represent the 99%,hell you don't even represent a majority of the 99% lol. Remember all us dumb hick Republicans cling to "Our religion and guns". Amen on that brother!
Threats of violence? What are you talking about? Your perspective is truly flawed.
Karma...
June 15th 1768 Harvard educated local shipper John Hancock today refused to allow royal inspectors aboard his ship the Liberty. When one customs official did get below he was taken by the crew and literally NAILED to the wall. When the official reported the incident upon his release, Hancock's ship was seized by the British leading to a riot in Boston. They forget to mention the customs official had no warrant as required by common law.
a people's history of the united states by howard zinn should be mandatory reading for all us students and they should know it inside and out.
The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.-- Tomas Jefferson
Sure I hate the banker but I also am not into nationalizing banks. I also don't believe Jefferson ever said that for one people didn't talk like that in wording back then and two, why would Jefferson be talking about himself in pass tense
http://www.barefootsworld.net/index.html
More interesting history found here as well. Great link TEF, thanks, but it 404's page not found..........
http://www.homeofheroes.com/
I would say you have the %'s mixed up. You keep talking about the 99% but let me clue you in. YOU ARE THE 1%.
How so? I am willing to accept the possibility that you are right. If you offer no reason for your opinion then you are just a stupid troll. Say something with meaning or say nothing!
Before Jefferson had ever raised any objection to slavery, he had slaves. While Jefferson was raising objections to slavery, he maintained slaves. After Jefferson's objections to slavery were ignored, he retained slaves. If no one else was going to give up theirs, he certainly wasn't going to give up his, at least not until after his death when he could no longer use them. What a great guy. Just like Hamilton, Washington, and notably Samuel Adams, when they put down the Whiskey Rebellion or John Adams when he signed the Sedition Act making it illegal to criticize the government. Jefferson had complained about representatives being bribed by the monied aristocracy (ie. bankers) but, as lobbying is an inherited English tradition, it's always been allowed. However, what the founders didn't allow was for their fellow landed gentry to exercise power over them with Initiative, Referendum, and Recall. The monied aristocracy was free to bribe politicians to obtain immediate results but even the fellow citizens of the landed gentry were restrained to waiting for another election to attempt any real political change.
Though there were objections to slavery, the economy at the time was based on it. If they had done what their conscience told them was right, the economy which was still on shaky ground having just finished a war would have completely collapsed. So, they left it for another generation to deal with. Which resulted in another war.
Not true. They had taken a vote on whether or not to abolish slavery and abolishment had lost by a mere single vote. They clearly did not feel it was essential to the national economy. But that's besides the point. The point is that the chief advocate for abolishment was unwilling to release his own captive work force if no one else was willing to release theirs. Apparently he felt that it was better to disadvantage the lives of others than to live with a personal disadvantage among his peers. The same hypocracy is seen with Samuel Adams who was the leading advocate for rebellion against the injustices of Britain but turned a complete 180 when it came to the rebellions against the injustices of the Republic, wanting anyone who would even consider rebellion to be hung. Even the Republic itself had been established with coersion as despite the fact that a 75% majority of the states had existed to ratify the Constitution, Rhode Island had held out until George Washington had threatened them with invasion and annexation, the same George Washington who had said "Experience has taught us, that men will not adopt and carry into execution measures the best calculated for their own good, without the intervention of a coercive power." It was that same coercive power nearly a century later that refused to acknowledge a state's inherit right to disassociate itself with any union entered into. The same coercive power that, well after the war had begun, decided to use emancipation as a toothless threat against the Confederacy. The same coercive power that had allowed slavery in its own states and had regarded captured slaves forced to work for the Confederate army not as victims to be freed but as contraband. Subsequently, due to losing the war, slavery had actually ended in the South before it had come to an end in the North. The bottom line is that the problems we face today have existed from the beginning, founded by men whose primary concern had been control over the people they governed.
It is broken but it can be fixed.
It's not broken. It does what it has always been designed to do based upon the desires of those who designed it. It doesn't need to be fixed. It needs to be changed by those who desires are different from the 1% who created it and continue to benefit even more from it. The only reason there's even a Bill of Rights is because people among the state legislatures, notably Massachusetts, insisted that a bill of rights be considered if the Constitution was ratfied. Although the Founding Fathers had rejected a bill of rights and 8 states had ratified the Constitution without regards to a bill of rights, desires that differed from the 1% that had only wanted centralized control over the masses prevailed in the state legislatures to prevent a federal government that could operate without respect to certain rights. Even so, the rights that had been established were subject to state jurisdiction and were being neutralized by various legal means such as plea barganing. The Founders did not want freedom, they wanted control. It was the people who had to fight for whatever freedom they could possibly obtain from the very beginning. Whether it was Shays Rebellion, the Anti-Federalists, or the state legislatures that insisted on a bill of rights, people have always had to stand against the aspirations of the wealthy Founders and their heirs who have only wanted to obtain complete control.
Our Leaderless organization is leaderless, cuz they told us so ...
The OWS given who owns it, .e.g. CLINTON retreads who de-regulated the bankers in the first place, ...
Big Brother’s Clenched Fist Leads the Clueless
In America, our protests appear leaderless, ill-defined, and uncoordinated. To mask the central planning, the protests began small in a few cities before the national rollout proceeded, a common tactic of most marketing schemes. These protests are not leaderless. And their well-defined agenda can be derived from those manipulating the leaderless mobs behind the scenes.
Last July, Adbusters Media Foundation announced they were organizing a street protest to occupy Wall Street. Founded in 1989 by Kalle Lasn and Bill Schmalz, this Canadian firm describes itself as “a global network of artists, activists, writers, pranksters, students, educators, and entrepreneurs who want to advance the new social activist movement of the information age.” They are anti- Capitalism, anti-consumerism, pro-environment, and pro-violence.
Adbusters is financed through its magazine subscriptions, but it also received grants the last ten years totaling $185,000 from the Tides Foundation, which is partly financed by the mastermind of financial destabilization, George Soros. Soros announced his sympathy for the protestors and has committed his organizational and financial resources.
Soros’ MoveOn.org has organized liberal protest movements in the past and urged its members to join the “occupying” protests. MoveOn.org has also promoted an Internet-based demonstration in conjunction with Rebuild the Dream, another radical group financed by Soros and led by Van Jones. Van Jones was President Obama’s former Green Jobs Czar, who resigned when his past extremism was exposed. In an e-mail to its supporters, MoveOn predicted, “Together, we’ll add hundreds of thousands of voices of solidarity from the American Dream Movement for the protests across the country and show just how widespread outrage at the Wall Street banks really is.”
Van Jones is a central planner using his front group Rebuild the Dream among others. In a speech to the Soros funded Center for American Progress, he compared our protests to the Arab Spring. “They had the Arab spring, which was a people-powered, non-violent opportunity to change the conversation in those countries. We should have an American Autumn, people-powered, non-violent.”
David DeGraw of AmpedStatus is another central player who spent the last three years trying to organize protests in America against the international bankers. As his website was attacked and knocked offline, the loosely led hacker group, Anonymous, approached him covertly and helped salvage his work and website. DeGraw organized a protest to begin against Wall Street on Flag Day, June 14th. Anonymous also announced “Operation Empire State Rebellion” to begin June 14th. When that fizzled, DeGraw teamed with Adbusters to coordinate the September attack.
I read your post and I believe a lot of it is true. I remember when I first started going to the rallies back in mid-September. I remember meeting a lot of these types, Mainly foreign college interns for political groups.
Many of them were literary paid protesters that make a living to protest around the world from activist groups, something on the lines of those flash mobs you see in T.V shows. The problem is mainly of the leaders at the time didn't think quite ahead since NYC brings a lot of variables to the table and you have to love NY folks, they are not easily swayed into doings something without thinking that there is something in it for themselves.
By early October most of the people in the rally were the homeless and locals who started forming their own leaders within OWS. The problem came when the majority of OWS were the poor and real anti-establishment types began to infiltrate the movement. No one wants to listen to a little college girl that wears fancy cloths and doesn't speak the majorities language nor life experiences.
That's why you heard so many news reports about the college kids and the locals in the area going at it.
I would say that the OWS movement has changed in NY to a pro-capitalistic and anti-Federal government mood, can't say much for other states occupations occupy, specially Iowa.
[Removed]
Your attempt to equate ows with the Founding Fathers is ridiculous, if not libelous.
there are a lot of people, with guns, who love America who are just itching for some hppie wannabes to threaten America.
if you are looking for a threat look at this. I found the US it is a corporation in Delaware https://delecorp.delaware.gov/tin/controller. And this is the US code that states that The US is in fact a corporation. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_28_00003002----000-.html De Facto Government is expressly forbidden by the constitution. If you are looking for a threat to America? First we need to restore the true government.
[Removed]
I agree with most of your post but not the ending specially about the part of money being wrong, that sounds a lot like commie shit to me and not what the founding fathers were about.
The word welfare is in the preamble of the constitution. The words, capitalism and free market make no appearance at all. Tell me if you believe in a free market or capitalism as a foundation of our nation why are they not mentioned?
They kind of go hand in hand with being able to be free.
How does making money and profit the sole motivation of our nation, and it's only measure of success (capitalism) equate to freedom? As far as markets being free what gives one person the right to claim a piece of land over another and in doing so lay claim to all things nature produces on the land? In other words Markets should be absolutely free as in free of charge. Land ownership and exploitation leads to the ownership and exploitation of people.
Well who is to say I cant work hard to try to create something for my family, and then have everyone take from me/.screw it up?
Well I believe in the American buck, and I don't believe in sharing it with other assholes after I have made it
You mean that funny money? The Federal Reserve Notes are not money, money has intrinsic value. Those are IOUs and they are NOT American, they are British. England owns the FED
they also should teach how the founding fathers dressed up like ladies. thats the main thing that sticks with me.
they did more than time; they did themselves up in glorious feminine attire.