17 December, 2006

The True Origin of the American Revolution

Posted by alex in America, historical factualism, history at 2:28 pm | Permanent Link

[Originally an LTE to Brighton Independent]

After watching six hours of TVO’s recent airing of “Liberty” (an expensive American production purporting to explain the reasons and history of the American War of Independence), I am driven to ask if this TV fare was an indication of TVO’s participation in the Revisionist Movement or simply a careless and uncritical acquisition?

Frankly, nobody gives a damn what nonsense the media promulgates in the U.S., but for TVO (unwittingly or otherwise) to participate in this propaganda is, in the name of historical accuracy, shameful!

But, one might ask, what about all those History academics who lent their faces and names to the production? Courtesy demands that the obvious answer be set aside.

Canadian school children, or Canadians in general, were they to be asked to explain the origins of the War of Independence, (if they were listening to their teachers) would doubtlessly respond with, “It was a case of taxation without representation, brought to a head with the Boston Tea Party.” Charming, of course, but essentially false, and should be filed along with that silly Cherry Tree incident.

To get to the nub of this historic event we must cite the first clue which can be found in the words of one Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790). Right, he was the guy with the kite and the bolt of lightning; but he was also an American statesman, diplomat, author and inventor who helped draft the Declaration of Independence.

Around the time of the Treaty of Paris, 1763, Franklin, who was visiting England, was asked to explain why the colonies were so prosperous, to which he repliled:

“That is simple. It is only because in the colonies we issue our own money. It is called “Colonial Script” and we issue it in the proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry.” (See Senate Document #23, Page 98, by Robert L. Owen, former Chairman, Committee on Banking and Currency, United States Senate.)

Owen writes: “It was not very long until this information was brought to the attention of the Rothchild’s Bank, and they saw that here was a nation ready to be exploited; here was a nation setting up an example that they could issue their own money instead of the money coming through the Banks.

“The Rothchild’s Bank caused a bill to be introduced in the English Parliament, therefore, which provided that no colony of England could issue its own money. They had to use English money. Consequently the colonies were compelled to discard their “Script” and mortgage themselves to the Bank of England (i.e., the Amsterdam Bullion Brokers!) to get money. For the first time in the history of the United States our money began to be based on debt.

“Benjamin Franklin stated in one year from that date the streets of the colonies were filled with the unemployed because when England exchanged with them, she gave them only half as many units in payment in borrowed money from the Rothchilds as they had in ‘Script’. In other words, their circulating medium was reduced 50% and everyone became unemployed, according to Benjamin Franklin’s own statement.”

Continuing the quote from Senate Document #23: “Mr. Franklin went further than that. He said that this was the original cause of the Revolutionary War. In his own language: The other matters had it not been that England took away from the colonies their money which created unemployment and dissatisfaction.”

Finally, the six-episode document, along with a few intonations by the voice of American conservatism, George Will, ended with that seemingly irrepressible falsehood: “The Revolution (the creation of the U.S.A.) was caused by a tax dispute with the British.”

Don Newlands
Colborne


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 07/04/11 The “Founding Fuck-Ups” and the American Revolution 30% similar
  3. 07/18/14 America: Spoiled From the Beginning? 28% similar
  4. 04/20/10 Commemorating the Anniversary of the Birth of Adolf Hitler 26% similar
  5. 10/11/16 America: Once a White Republic, Now a Multicultural Democracy Where Anything Goes 25% similar
  6. 01/13/18 Our Anti-American Leaders in Congress vs. Donald Trump 24% similar
  7. 4 Responses to “The True Origin of the American Revolution”

    1. Olde Dutch Says:

      Yes, the Robert L. Owen was one of the international criminal jew conspiracy who wrote the Federal Reserve Act. ;) Oye Vey. :)

      Btw, there wasn’t much in the way of money circulating in the American colonies prior to the Revolution.

      The point Owen is probably trying to make, is that script i.e. paper money when managed correctly represents value, and is a tool for economic prosperity. As far as a cause of the American Revolution—just one of many economic, political, and social-racial factors in play.

    2. 2050 Says:

      “That is simple. It is only because in the colonies we issue our own money. It is called “Colonial Script” and we issue it in the proper proportion to the demands of trade and industry.”

      Ben said it plainly in his autobiography.

      Owen is quoting Ben.

      When the jews found out; shit hit the fan for the once prosperous colinies.

    3. Olde Dutch Says:

      There was no such thing as “Colonial Script” per se; what small amounts of script i.e. paper money/debt instruments there was in circulation would have been issued by either the individual colonies to pay a particular debt, or more likely private individual debt instruments.

      For example, George Washington had a merchant factor in England who would buy his crop and then send Washington the goods he ordered. Sort of like mail order. No money changed hands. Only “script”.

    4. WWJC Says:

      So you mean to say that even though there were Jews in the colonies there were Jews involved in international trade and banking on both sides of the Atlantic the ones in England didn’t find out about the magical “Colonial Script” untill Ben Franklin said those “fateful” words?