Hey Joe,
If it makes you feel any better, I follow you. I don't know that the U.S. Constitution was a coup by the banking elites, but I do believe that we glorify our nation's beginnings too often without understanding the full history.
On this site, people often try to point to one president or one event that sent our nation down the wrong path ever since. Not an easy thing to do. Few look at the problems that we have always faced. Yes, George Washington's first use of the Military as president was to suppress tax resisters. Called the Whiskey Rebellion, it consisted of poor Appalachian corn farmers in Western PA who were able to make more money by selling whiskey than corn and who tarred and feathered the tax collectors who wanted to take the money from the poor and give it to the rich. And Washington crushed the rebellion. That's just one problem with how our country was founded. Our Constitutional Republic only gave the right to vote to land owning white men. If you want to point to when things went wrong, how about right there. The freedoms that have been gained by the disenfranchised in our country only came at a time when they would not disrupt the status quo by using their freedoms.
I guess my point is our country was founded on many inequalities that have never been fully rectified, and all the major changes that have happened and will happen will come too late.

++++++++
If it makes you feel any better, I follow you. I don't know that the U.S. Constitution was a coup by the banking elites, but I do believe that we glorify our nation's beginnings too often without understanding the full history.
++++++++

Timmeadors,

I feel the need to pass on accurate data and expose false data. There is no shortcutting this necessity. False data creates falsehood. Falsehood creates injury to innocents. My feelings are improved when accurate data flows and my feelings are injured when false data flows.

Your words do not make me feel any better since you ‘don’t know that the U.S. Constitution was a coup by the banking elites’ and therefore, from my end, another person is ignorant of a very important fact. When ignorance of a very important fact pervades human existence, such as this fact, injuries occur to innocents.

This is simple and easy to understand from my view. I’ve read a book that reports the Secret Proceedings and Debates of the Constitutional Convention, 1787

http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Proceedings-Debates-Constitutional-Convention/dp/1410203638

I can offer quotes from that book. My guess is that a person wanting to not know something will find a way to not know something. This may appear to be harsh to you. I can sympathize with that possibility, yet I do not change my word choice. I think back to a time when I did not know that the U.S. Constitution was a coup by the banking elites and I appreciate all the efforts made by everyone who has managed to expose that fact like, for example Robert Yates and John Lansing. I would rather they spelled it out in plain English. They used good English. I don’t.

I can sympathize and offer a challenge to provide any evidence refuting the fact that The Dollar Hegemony began with the enforcement of The U.S. Constitution. The Bill of Rights clearly supports the hypothesis of a coup. The Bill of Rights was counter to The Constitution as was The Declaration of Independence. These are diametric opposites.

On the one hand The U.S. Constitution empowers dictators to torture and mass murder.

On the other hand the Bill of Rights and The Declaration of Independence refutes dictatorial powers (including the power to torture and mass murder which is something that dictators do on a regular, predictable, schedule).

The currency fraud is a necessity or power that must be seized in order to gain the power required to enforce the legal crimes (like torture and mass murder) committed by dictators. The label (false front) on the desk or letter head, be it El Presidente or Das Fuhrer, is one example of currency. We, human beings, employ many forms of currency. The false stuff injures innocents, on purpose, for profit.

It does not make me feel good to report these things as if by doing so I manage to unload a burden. I report these things because it is the right thing to do according to me. What makes me feel good is laughter. This is serious stuff.

You can go on not knowing that the U.S. Constitution was a coup by people who created and enforced a currency fraud from day one and from days before the coup. That is fine by me. So long as you maintain the power to discriminate accurately I’m happy. If you get picked up and sent to the Gulag I’ll be sad. My part in the exposure will have failed in that measure.

I’ll feel bad.

I will feel sorry. I feel sorrow for those people who are now being tortured and mass murdered. It is appalling. It is unconscionable. It is inexcusable to know that my economic power is being stolen to finance torture and mass murder and not do something about it. Perhaps that is why so many people refuse to know. I can’t confess. I know.

Ok, I understand now, thank you. I do agree with you as far as I am able to understand.

Post edited by: RossDuprey, at: 2008/04/22 02:03

Let me see if I have a handle on this. The founding fathers were a bunch of elitist bankers who were out to rape the commoner? Then why, pray tell, were so many of them so adamently opposed to a central banking system? Why was the only form of taxable income to come from manufactured goods and trade tarrifs where as the majority of commoners income was from farming? As I understand it the founders were land owners and business men and as per the time would be considered the elite but the taxes they imposed were levied against THEMSELVES. The farmers who started the Whiskey Rebellion grew their corn on their own land up in the hills and thru trial and error determined that they could make the most PROFIT from their efforts by distilling the corn into spirits thereby getting the same amount of produce onto less wagons and increasing the profit margin. The end result being a manufactured good that was LEGALLY taxable. It was after much thought and with great regret that President Washington put down the rebellion. The Constitution may not be a perfect document but it is as close as is ever going to possible. What other form of government would afford the individual the right to do anything they wanted to as long as it was not immoral? The idea of our forefathers was that as long as you obey the law of God then everything else should fall into place. The only society less restictive would be anarchy and anyone with even a grain of common sense knows where that would lead.

++++++++++
Let me see if I have a handle on this. The founding fathers were a bunch of elitist bankers who were out to rape the commoner?
++++++++++

Sic Semper Tyranus,

Are you being cute? Alexander Hamilton is one example of what can be called a “Banker” actually Alexander Hamilton was a person. Alexander Hamilton expressed his desire to nationalize the colonies and the currency during his ‘founding’ efforts that were successful. The Articles of Confederation were discarded in favor of the U.S. Constitution. The First Bank of the United States is an example of Bankers creating a currency fraud. Can I offer great detail concerning these particular historical facts?

Your version goes like this (and it could be considered cute):

++++++++++
Let me see if I have a handle on this. The founding fathers were a bunch of elitist bankers who were out to rape the commoner?
++++++++++

Were those words meant to couch my words with a new, and better, spin? The State of Massachusetts operating under the Articles of Confederation after the defeat of the British occupation and the Royal currency fraud began debasing the new currency with a new fraud and the former insurgents who rebelled against the British rebelled against the Massachusetts version.

That was Shays’s Rebellion.

Here is your version:

++++++++++
Let me see if I have a handle on this. The founding fathers were a bunch of elitist bankers who were out to rape the commoner?
++++++++++

Who are these ‘founding fathers’? Am I being brain washed with your words? I think not.

I will read on despite the obvious intent to editorialize, marginalize, spin, and otherwise twist the meaning of my words into something unrecognizable.

++++++++++
Then why, pray tell, were so many of them so adamently opposed to a central banking system?
++++++++++

Is ‘pray tell’ more cuteness?

Who is the person who spins history into a homogenous case of fathers founding something? I am not that person. If someone reads the following book in the following link they may read the historical record from the horse’s mouths as they created The U.S. Constitution:

http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Proceedings-Debates-Constitutional-Convention/dp/1410203638

Many people including the rebels who rebelled against the British currency fraud, the Massachusetts currency fraud, and the U.S. National State currency fraud were, pray tell, opposed to the central banking system. What happened?

Shays’s rebellion was defeated and the law at that time was bypassed in the process of defeating the Massachusetts currency fraud rebellion. The Articles of Confederation did not out-law, specifically, a rebellion such as Shays’s rebellion nor did The Articles of Confederation out-law rebelling against the British occupation and the British currency fraud.

Here are words attributed to Ben Franklin:

++++++++
We would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters, had it not been that they took from us our money, which created great unemployment and dissatisfaction. Within a year, the poor houses were filled. The hungry and homeless walked the streets everywhere.
++++++++

Here is context:

http://www.perfecteconomy.com/pg-parable-of-perfect-economy.html

Shays’s rebellion in Massachusetts was not unique to Massachusetts as proven by the later rebellion called The Whiskey Rebellion. The U.S. Constitution did out-law rebellion.

Here is the law:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section8

+++++++
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
+++++++

Here is the enforcement of the law:

http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/whiskey/text.html

The new President drafted a National Army and suppressed one State’s currency fraud rebellion. Other people in other States got the message. The coup was complete.

+++++++++
Why was the only form of taxable income to come from manufactured goods and trade tarrifs where as the majority of commoners income was from farming?
++++++++++

What is the purpose of asking that question? Why did who form a tax in the way described by that question? Whoever formed the tax in the way the tax was formed is the person who can answer that question. If the person who wrote that tax law was Alexander Hamilton and the question is answered by Alexander Hamilton my advice is to get a lawyer because Alexander Hamilton recorded many contradictory statements that expose his propensity to lie as a means of gaining power. Someone called Alexander Hamilton on his lies and that person shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel.

What is the accurate answer to your question? Why did someone form that tax law in that way?

++++++++++
As I understand it the founders were land owners and business men and as per the time would be considered the elite but the taxes they imposed were levied against THEMSELVES.
+++++++++++

During the rebellion against the British occupation and the British currency fraud many people contributed to the effort. Many people profited. The people who profited most were the people who loaned the STATE material goods and finances to buy material goods. This is a long and sordid story that you may want to read.

The war profiteers invested in the war and they wanted their pound of flesh. It wasn’t enough for them to have won liberty from the brutal British occupation and liberty from the British currency fraud. The war profiteers wanted their contributions returned to them with interest. If they couldn’t get their contributions to the war effort returned to them with interest they wanted land titles.

Land titles went to the troops who volunteered their bodies and skills in battle. When the new TAX laws insisted that TAX was paid with Gold and Gold had left the colonies due to Gresham’s Law (due to the new State currency fraud) the troops had to sell their land titles at a discount in order to get the Gold needed to pay the TAX.

That was bad enough. The last straw was a demand to pay the Whiskey Tax with Gold when no one had Gold and the proof of that fact was the employment of Whiskey as currency since no Gold was available as currency. The Whiskey Tax was an effort to eliminate competitive currencies. Whiskey is a competitive currency. When things are so bad, due to a currency fraud, that people are forced to invent currencies like Whiskey the people are apt to rebel against the monopoly currency fraud. That is what happened. You can read about it or ignore it.

+++++++++++
The farmers who started the Whiskey Rebellion grew their corn on their own land up in the hills and thru trial and error determined that they could make the most PROFIT from their efforts by distilling the corn into spirits thereby getting the same amount of produce onto less wagons and increasing the profit margin.
+++++++++++

Everyone is a capitalist? No one can earn an honest living? I don’t get people who couch everything in their capitalist world view of exploitation. You have your world view. I am reporting the viewpoint as it was written in the books I have read and anyone can read the same books and arrive at whatever viewpoint they can imagine.

This one is an on-line book:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Hym2U_4C5fYC&dq=the+whiskey+rebellion&pg=PP1&ots=ODqTvwH3xa&sig=LQh3qafY-8hELOMWG7TOLXklUI4&hl=en&prev=http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=The+Whiskey+Rebellion&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail

+++++++++
The end result being a manufactured good that was LEGALLY taxable. It was after much thought and with great regret that President Washington put down the rebellion.
+++++++++

According to whom? The words above constitute an apology for a military draft, an apology for the invasion and occupation of a sovereign state by a conscripted foreign army, and an apology for involuntary taxation. I can see by those rationalizations why the country is in the state that it is in right now.

I suppose next I am going to read an apology for torture and mass murder.

+++++++++
The Constitution may not be a perfect document but it is as close as is ever going to possible.
+++++++++

Why?

+++++++++
The idea of our forefathers was that as long as you obey the law of God then everything else should fall into place.
+++++++++

Statements like that are examples of blind faith in political dogma. What I find most disturbing about that type of blind faint in political dogma is the facts that contradict the words expressed by politicians. Almost everyone knows by now that politicians lie.

++++++++++
The only society less restictive would be anarchy and anyone with even a grain of common sense knows where that would lead.
++++++++++

Speaking of common sense:

++++++++++
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.
++++++++++

http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm

Post edited by: Joe Kelley, at: 2008/04/22 06:23

Mr.Kelley, I am only trying to sort through your blather so as to understand your view point. I leave cuteness to puppies and new born babies. Yes, Hamilton was a power hungry money grubber and he was disliked by many of his collegues and also received his just dessert. That's why I posed the question why were so many of the founders against a central bank? rather than why were they all against a central bank? As far as the constitution being a near perfect document I already stated why. As long as man follows the laws of God he is to be left alone,no other document ever gave the common man that much freedom since civilizations first spang up. What would you suggest, in your infinite wisdom, NO government? That surely can't be your intention. I think you're a GOVERNMENT SHILL trying to spread discourse in our forum because, quite frankly, never in my life, have I ever heard anyone say the consitution was a piece of tyranical legislation.As for my having a view that you consider to be political dogma then so be it,At least I've formed my own opinion. Hell from what I can see from your flowery posts with all your links, you can't form your own opinion you just like quoting out of books and sounding like your smart.Oh,by the way my ancestors recieved one of those land grants you spoke of for fighting in the Revolution but when Lincoln suspended the Constitution and took away the rights of the people my forefathers lost their land so maybe thats why I hold the Constitution so dear.

Post edited by: sic semper tyranus, at: 2008/04/22 10:26