Founding Fathers = Love of Money/Materialism
According to some, the true intent of George Washington, John Adams, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and all those who signed the Constitution of the United States was to establish an evil materialistic empire and intentionally promote benefits only for white Europeans.
If this is true beam me up Scotty,
Soon as possible.
However, I would prefer to stay and continue believing that Our Founding Father's honest intent was to establish a democratic republic of united states to promote, for themselves and posterity, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness within boundaries established by The Constitution for the purpose of establishing:
J U S T I C E FOR A L L
Is it pure ignorance to believe the latter?
Wondering.
!Unless the KKK are infiltrating into the police force
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m … story.html
Perhaps you should have Scotty beam you up now. To answer your question: Absolutely, it is pure unadulterated ignorance. The problem with many Americans is education. American History in the public school system leaves a lot to be desired, and the average person hasn't taken the time to crack open a book, or do any research online. Not only were men like Washington and Jefferson criminals: rapists, pedophiles, kidnappers, thieves and slave owners, but they also sold out white Americans, African Freemen, and the Indigenous who fought against the British, as well as every generation that has followed.
Here is an important excerpt from the link I have provided. The United States has remained a British Colony since the Revolutionary War. http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/ha … _index.htm
" ... Esquire - In English Law. A title of dignity next above gentleman, and below knight. Also a title of office given to sheriffs, sergeants, and barristers at law, justices of the peace, and others." Blacks Law Dictionary fourth ed. p. 641
Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and John Jay as you can read in the Treaty were all Esquires and were the signers of this Treaty and the only negotiators of the Treaty. The representative of the king was David Hartley Esqr.. Benjamin Franklin was the main negotiator for the terms of the Treaty, he spent most of the War traveling between England and France. The use of Esquire declared his and the others British subjection and loyalty to the crown.
In the first article of the Treaty most of the kings claims to America are relinquished, except for his claim to continue receiving gold, silver and copper as gain for his business venture. Article 3 gives Americans the right to fish the waters around the United States and its rivers. In article 4 the United States agreed to pay all bonafide debts. If you will read my other papers on money you will understand that the financiers were working with the king. Why else would he protect their interest with this Treaty?
I wonder if you have seen the main and obvious point? This Treaty was signed in 1783, the war was over in 1781. If the United States defeated England, how is the king granting rights to America, when we were now his equal in status? We supposedly defeated him in the Revolutionary War! So why would these supposed patriot Americans sign such a Treaty, when they knew that this would void any sovereignty gained by the Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War? If we had won the Revolutionary War, the king granting us our land would not be necessary, it would have been ours by his loss of the Revolutionary War. To not dictate the terms of a peace treaty in a position of strength after winning a war; means the war was never won. Think of other wars we have won, such as when we defeated Japan. Did MacArthur allow Japan to dictate to him the terms for surrender? No way! All these men did is gain status and privilege granted by the king and insure the subjection of future unaware generations. Worst of all, they sold out those that gave their lives and property for the chance to be free.
When Cornwallis surrendered to Washington he surrendered the battle, not the war. Jonathan Williams recorded in his book, Legions of Satan, 1781, that Cornwallis revealed to Washington during his surrender that "a holy war will now begin on America, and when it is ended America will be supposedly the citadel of freedom, but her millions will unknowingly be loyal subjects to the Crown."...."in less than two hundred years the whole nation will be working for divine world government. That government that they believe to be divine will be the British Empire."
All the Treaty did was remove the United States as a liability and obligation of the king. He no longer had to ship material and money to support his subjects and colonies. At the same time he retained financial subjection through debt owed after the Treaty, which is still being created today; millions of dollars a day. And his heirs and successors are still reaping the benefit of the kings original venture. If you will read the following quote from Title 26, you will see just one situation where the king is still collecting a tax from those that receive a benefit from him, on property which is purchased with the money the king supplies, at almost the same percentage: ..."
- ahorsebackposted 7 years ago
0 Whoa!!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBHy5hC2lLE
1. Speaking of money, George Soros is worth @ 25 billion.
He seems to be another Anti-Christ like Hitler.
He knows a lot and wants to just have his way ...
BECAUSE HE CAN.
2. Speaking of money, he mentions in this video that profit motive used to be seen as a sin in Christian religion, but more and more people are getting hooked on it for the sake of itself alone as our moral values fade. He said, these people, who are becoming addicted to earning profit, don't really even know how to spend it.
Now, that is a very interesting observation.
He has a lot of insights like this as revealed in the video. But clearly, he is using his great awareness toward the wrong ends. (Just check out the multitude of videos that expose his intentions.) He wants open borders. He thinks China will lead the way in a global economy toward a New World Order and that the value of the US dollar must weaken/decline for this to happen. He hates Israel and he loves Islamist Terrorism. He has contributed millions toward Hillary's campaign.
Here is our common ALIEN to fight.
Y I K E S!
I followed your link and watched the entire video. I am in agreement with much of what I heard, although I disagree with his atheist outlook. He is very articulate and intelligent. But he even admitted that he was disillusioned by the fact that in trying to restructure certain nations after the collapse of an old regime, he found that an open society did not result, but only a new tyrannical regime.
Of course, in a Capitalist world economy, money is an important factor in creating an open society, and I respect his knowledge, but the people must first be educated, de-programmed, and de-colonized before any real positive change can occur. And such a process will take several generations to complete. You can't take a society of ignorant, materialistic people, like we have here in the U.S., put them behind the wheel of a fancy new car, and expect them to keep it on the road. No amount of money can make that happen overnight.
I don't have a problem with the Constitution. What I have a problem with is the fact that it is a worthless "feel good" document. There is no way for the citizen to enforce what is written therein when they continue to be ruled by big money interests. The biggest threat to all Americans is Wall Street and the big money that makes it roll. These are the terrorists who shape domestic and foreign policy, and cause the deaths of millions of innocent people here and abroad. Once the corporate thugs at the top are shut down, the rest are bound to follow. But I don't see this happening. The American people are so tied to materialism, they would never risk it all for freedom. Especially since their Overlords have made it so easy for them to pretend that they are already free.Probably so!
!
The good of money is the use of money, said Benjamin Franklin. Freedom of speech can be abused. Religion can be abused and money can be abused. The abuse of these things is what is bad. Not the proper use toward some good: What is good?
L I F E
Related Discussions
- 26
Is the Separation of Powers BROKEN in the USA?
In a true democracy there should be a separation of powers between the Juridical, Executive and Legislature. No democracy is perfect, but how imperfect is the American democracy?While browsing the web in relation to a question on the Separation of Powers in the USA (in another forum) I...
- 34
What's the biggest threat to the United States of America today?
What's the biggest threat to the United States of America today?I vote it's the political divide entrenching. Nobody expects a civil war—not even me.
- 95
Racist and Perjudice (Race)
Why is it that different cultures cant get along? What exactly are we afraid of? We all suffer the same, but different. Right?
- 78
America was founded as a Christian Nation
Is it reasonable to assume that 13 different Christian Chartered Colonies, would send to a convention in Philadelphia a group of men - to make a Constitution - that allowed their way of life to end? Is it further reasonable to believe that those Christians picked only Deists to go represent them?...
- 8
America not a "Christian Nation" in late 18th century
I've seen several discussions of the extent to which the USA was historically a Christian country, and came across this treaty from 1797, placed before the Senate, which stated:"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has...
- 15
I America a "Christian Nation"? What does that term even mean?
I America a "Christian Nation"? What does that term even mean?I often here that America is a "Christian Nation". Do you agree or disagree with this? And what, exactly, does that mean? Clearly, not nearly all Americans are Christians. Does this mean that a few of the first...