Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Was the American Revolution genuine ... or a tool for Jewish moneylender expansion?

  1. #1
    Senior Member Zook_e_Pi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On the way to Tiperary (via shortcut through the Tum Tum trees)
    Posts
    1,091
    Thanks
    1,317
    Thanked 1,254 Times in 665 Posts

    Was the American Revolution genuine ... or a tool for Jewish moneylender expansion?

    The Bill of Rights is ours now.

    But in the beginning, a lot of freemasons were involved in its founding. Just look at the masonic architectures and layout lines in Washington, D.C.

    So question begs, did the freemasons slash protoZionists actually found America?

    If so, was the American Revolution not a rebellion of the colonies against the Crown as per the popular account, but a designed mode of expansion for the protoZionist banksters? (E.g. the protoZionists being pre-Rothschild banking Jews, such as the caricatured by Shakespeare in the character, Shylock). Remember, Queen Isabella evicted these Jews from Spain in 1492. Christopher Columbus made it to the New World in 1492. Plenty of Jewish slave ships captured Africans and transported them to the New World to work under their captors. By the 1700's, many of these masters/landowners were freemasons. There is much evidence to suggest that freemasonry is a Jewish plot, altho' most of the membership is nonJewish at the lower levels. Not unlike Bolshevism. Jewish managers. Goyim workers. That sorta thing. The marrano Jews of Spain and Portugal flooded Europe and the New World during the the establishment of the American colonial states.

    Here's a bit of background from Henry Makow's website:
    http://www.henrymakow.com/marranos_-...nal_crypt.html

    Now, we have to remember that empires consolidate power by division and conquest. We know that the American Civil War was funded on both sides by the Brothers Rothschild. The intriguing question is, was the American Revolution also funded by the Jewish banking families of Europe (the banking collective not yet under the Rothschild brand) to consolidate power? Remember Gutle Schnapper's quote where she states that there would be no wars had her sons (The Brothers Rothschild) not wanted them? Well, before the Rothschilds, it was the banking Jews of Europe that financed much of the turbulence. War means profit for these cutthroats. It was like that before the Brothers Rothschild. It was like that during the money-lending reign of the Brothers Rothschild. And it is like that today with the descendants of the Brothers Rothschild. The Talmudic moral system doesn't view goyim as anything other than expendable beasts.

    The Marrano Jews that crossed the Big Pond, and freemasonry, hold some key answers to the American Revolution and the founding of America thereafter.... at least, according to my research.

    The Boston Tea Party is a good story for tea lovers and turnips.

    Again, no matter who founded it - moral guys with immoral and amoral guys embedded in the mix - the Bill of Rights is now ours to own and pass on. Yes, I'm a Canadian, but the Bill of Rights trumps anything Canada has on its own to protect its citizens, IMO.



    Pax

  2. #2
    In Memory Fredkc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    567
    Thanks
    108
    Thanked 1,035 Times in 443 Posts

    Re: Was the American Revolution genuine ... or a tool for Jewish moneylender expansion?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zook_e_Pi View Post
    If so, was the American Revolution not a rebellion of the colonies against the Crown as per the popular account, but a designed mode of expansion for the protoZionist banksters?

    Again, no matter who founded it - moral guys with immoral and amoral guys embedded in the mix - the Bill of Rights is now ours to own and pass on. Yes, I'm a Canadian, but the Bill of Rights trumps anything Canada has on its own to protect its citizens, IMO.
    Ok, lemme start with the 2nd chunk.
    Yes, there is a "dirty li'l secret" to the B. O. R.s, that most people have been "educated away from".

    Their proper title should be "The Bill Of Won'ts"! Because...
    There are no rights granted in the BOR. None. They were originally written that way, and no one (possible exception of Hamilton) would sign it. Two objections; both showing very good vision into the future.

    1. Those things which were considered a person's "rights", pre-dated the Constitution! They were things that came with having a navel, parents, and the ability to draw breath. Therefore there was no need to enumerate them in a document. Which leads to #2...

    2. Their 2nd worry, which has come true in many respects, was that over time, government would get the idea that those enumerated, were the only ones the people had. This was also the reason that #'s 9 & 10 were written.

    Fact is, what's written is a list of things government can NEVER do, has NO AUTHORITY to engage in, or even consider! They're written to us, but they are written about government!

    Now, as to a plot... Here's a piece, written by a guy with a Ph.D. in colonial American history. Someone whose research, and story telling I give high marks.

    The Declaration of Independence: America's Most Famous Direct-Response Ad
    By Gary North

    Most Americans know little about the background of this event. The details they recall from a high school textbook are incorrect. There is great confusion. The amount of misinformation is shocking. I am here to clear up some widely held misconceptions. (Note: I have a Ph.D. in colonial American history. I have also been involved since 1974 in direct-response marketing. As far as I know, no one else has combined these two careers.)

    With the Tea Act, The British East India Company (BEICo) was back in control of the tea business in the colonies. Hancock was New England’s #1 middleman for tea. He was cut out of the deal.

    BEICo now had a new marketing slogan. “Lower taxes. Lower prices.” (Walmart’s recently adopted slogan is similar: “Save Money. Live Better.”) Hancock had to do something, and he had to do it fast. Fortunately for Hancock, Sam Adams was up to the task.

    Back in 1765, Adams had helped organize a regional sales force, the Sons of Liberty. This group had made tax collectors offers that they simply could not refuse. He had recruited Hancock into the organization. They had worked together ever since. Adams had revived the organization in 1774. It called for a boycott of tea sold by retailers for British tea. This campaign led to the first Continental Congress in September.

    Adams was highly successful in politics but in nothing else. So, honoring market responses, he specialized in politics.

    Thomas Paine.
    Earlier in the year, Paine had proven himself to be a highly skilled practitioner of direct-response marketing. His January 1776 marketing campaign was based on a classic long-copy ad with this headline: Common Sense. The campaign pulled spectacularly. It still does — a phenomenon known in the direct-response trade as “drag.”

    From Wikipedia:
    It was sold and distributed widely and read aloud at taverns and meeting places. In proportion to the population of the colonies at that time (2.5 million), it had the largest sale and circulation of any book published in American history. As of 2006, it remains the all-time best selling American title, and is still in print today. . . .The pamphlet was also highly successful because of a brilliant marketing tactic planned by Paine. He and Bell timed the first edition to be published at around the same time as a proclamation on the colonies by King George III, hoping to contrast the strong, monarchical message with the heavily anti-monarchical Common Sense. Luckily, the speech and the first advertisement of the pamphlet appeared on the same day within the pages of the Pennsylvania Evening Post.

    Paine’s marketing was revolutionary. Literally.

    Summary: In July 1776, Hancock was in charge of a national marketing campaign against the British East India Company. Yet the company was never mentioned. Officially, he was fighting Parliament. This was why he signed the parchment.

    There's more to the story at the link above.

    And yes, the Bill of Rights is now ours to own and pass on.

    All we have to do is stand up for it, and insist on it being honored.
    "Life IS mystical! Its just that we're used to it." - Wolf, the movie
    "Dad, if God is everywhere then, when he's in a piece of paper, is he squished?" - My daughter, age 7

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fredkc For This Useful Post:

    Ross (09-23-2016),Zook_e_Pi (09-23-2016)

  4. #3
    Senior Member Zook_e_Pi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On the way to Tiperary (via shortcut through the Tum Tum trees)
    Posts
    1,091
    Thanks
    1,317
    Thanked 1,254 Times in 665 Posts

    Re: Was the American Revolution genuine ... or a tool for Jewish moneylender expansion?

    Yes, I concur. The codification of rights is just that. Those rights already exist prior to codification.

    That said, Fred, I'm not sure North is correct on his information about Sam Adams.

    http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...ntasmasons.htm

    beginExcerpt
    1764 - Samuel Adams, born in Boston. A major propagandist, opposing British officials and policies, as well as British taxation in the colonies. In 1773 he participated in the planning of the Boston Tea Party. Adams also signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Served as delegate to the Continental Congress until 1781, and became governor of Massachusetts from 1794-97. Confirmed Mason and Illuminatist.
    end


    beginExcerpt
    1776 - John Hancock, born in Mass. Wrote and the first to sign the Declaration of Independence, and served nine terms as the Governor of Mass. Confirmed Mason.
    end


    To me, it looks like the perfect sting operation. To trap the common people of the colonial era.

    Cut out Hancock with Hancock's complicity (low level mason). Have Sam Adams (their high level mason man in Boston) join forces with Hancock. Establish the Sons of Liberty has false opposition to the Crown. And voila, you have a commercial fight in the brewing, which then serves as a stepping stone to rebellion. The common people really had no chance, IMO.

    Just like we're not responsible for today's political landscape that has been designed behind closed doors. Granted, there are turnips among us that claim that we're responsible for ourselves every step of the way, responsible for our minds as opposed to their minds ... that sorta thing. Of course, I ain't ever pulled a turnip that knew a world bigger than its personal lodge space 6 inches underground..



    Pax

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Zook_e_Pi For This Useful Post:

    Ross (09-23-2016)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •