Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only reason we don't consider them treasonous to the Crown was because they won. They were well aware of the consequences of treason under the Trial and Treason Act of 1696 they would have been treasonous.
Thomas McKean, was a signer of the Declaration of Independence and then served as Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. He observed that: "In civil wars, every man chooses his party; but generally that side which prevails arrogates the right of treating those who are vanquished as rebels."
Show the link about the Founders being treasonous. I like that one better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.
The Founders absolutely were traitors to King George III and would've been strung up if they'd lost.
Clearly people are not following the arguments based on the Constitutionality of the Constitution, that began shortly after it was signed, by the very ones that wrote and signed the document.
Patrick Henry was against it, before he was for it --- just one example. (Thomas Jefferson, also changed his opinion)
PS: there were those that wanted to return the u.s. to the British rule, as well.
Last edited by Ellis Bell; 01-03-2021 at 03:16 PM..
That the Founders committed treason is in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence violates the 3rd law of treason which is:
"If a man do levy war against our lord the king in his realm" (George Chase's Blackstone Commentaries on the Laws of England in Four Books. New York: Baker, Voorhis & Co., 1936, p890 - Blackstones is still in print).
Specifically, the Declaration says: "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other out Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor." They realized they could be That he be hanged by the neck and then cut down alive, their entrails be taken out and burned, while still if alive, their head be cut off. At that point, the body would be quartered to be disposed of as directed by the Crown.
Nathan Hale was hung as a spy. He avoided the worst of the punishment; he was hung not as a traitor, but as a spy.
Note on Henry. He was never a traitor to the United States. He opposed the Constitution.
Clearly people are not following the arguments based on the Constitutionality of the Constitution, that began shortly after it was signed, by the very ones that wrote and signed the document.
Always best to make the rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
Patrick Henry was against it, before he was for it --- just one example. (Thomas Jefferson, also changed his opinion)
lol And? So?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Bell
PS: there were those that wanted to return the u.s. to the British rule, as well.
That the Founders committed treason is in the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence violates the 3rd law of treason which is:
"If a man do levy war against our lord the king in his realm" (George Chase's Blackstone Commentaries on the Laws of England in Four Books. New York: Baker, Voorhis & Co., 1936, p890 - Blackstones is still in print).
Specifically, the Declaration says: "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other out Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor." They realized they could be That he be hanged by the neck and then cut down alive, their entrails be taken out and burned, while still if alive, their head be cut off. At that point, the body would be quartered to be disposed of as directed by the Crown.
Nathan Hale was hung as a spy. He avoided the worst of the punishment; he was hung not as a traitor, but as a spy.
Note on Henry. He was never a traitor to the United States. He opposed the Constitution.
King George and the British Parliament had the consent of the governed, making the rebellion non-treasonous. The slaves never consented to be property, making the Confederate secession illegitimate.
"Alexander Hamilton, one of the constitution's enemies, indulged in bursts of chagrin and dissatisfaction, unbecoming a member of Washington's Cabinet. Washington hearing such treasonous ideas from various sources; of his Secretary, wrote him a letter July 29, 1792, asking an explanation of such shameless sentiments."
"These all agree that the Country is prosperous & happy; but they seem to be alarmed at that system of policy, and those interpretations of the Constitution which have taken place in Congress."
One issue they had was with the Alien and Sedition Acts ---
""I lay before you certain copies of documents which remain in the department of the State. They prove that at a recent period, on the part of British Government through its public minister here, a secret agent of that government was employed by certain States in fomenting disaffection to the constitutional authorities of the country, and intrigued with the disaffected for the purpose of bringing about resistance to the laws, and eventually in concert with a British force, of destroying the Union and forming the eastern part thereof into a political connection with Great Britain""
PS: who can redress the government today and it not be considered treasonous for having done so? the history was taught in the class rooms a certain way so as to obtain a specific response of those learning, ergo --- some instances recorded in history are not found in the polished version of history. the idea of redoing a civil war --- ? not something the government is too keen on in having a repeat.
Last edited by Ellis Bell; 01-03-2021 at 08:28 PM..
Reason: add a ps
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
In the years following the Civil War, it was the political elite in the South who took it upon themselves to rewrite history - a process they're still eagerly pursuing. Making it clear that Lee wasn't a hero fighting for noble cause and doesn't deserve a place of honor in the public square - that's setting the record straight.
The Daughters of the Confederacy and groups of their ilk are the ones who have been rewriting history.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
