Ron Paul: “The PATRIOT Act Was Written Many, Many Years Before 9/11 [And The Attacks Simply Provided] An Opportunity ...

George Washington's picture

Politico notes:


Ron Paul isn’t backing down from his position that the U.S. has provoked terrorists through foreign military occupation and that officials tried to capitalize on Sept. 11 attacks.


“Think of what happened after 9/11, the minute before there was any assessment, there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq, and so the war drums beat,” Paul said Thursday night before a packed room of more than 1,000 students and supporters. “That’s exactly what they’re doing now with Iran.”




His libertarian ideals have struck a cord with many, but conservatives remain deeply wary of Paul’s foreign policy positions, including his assertion that the U.S. provoked the Sept. 11 attacks by maintaining military bases in foreign countries. Paul’s position as the lone dove in the GOP race has made him a foil for some of his hawkish Republican opponents.


“Extremists have taken over, and they’re the ones who run the foreign policy and have convinced us to go along with all these wars,” Paul said Wednesday night.


Paul said that claims Iran could be developing a nuclear weapon are just part of an effort to scare Americans into going to war again.


Paul said of the possibility that Iran has a nuclear weapon is “not true at all.” “It doesn’t mean they might not want a nuclear weapon.”


No other country, Paul said, is capable of attacking the United States.


“How many foreign countries can threaten us right now?” Paul asked sarcastically. “How many are likely to invade us or drop a bomb on us? I can’t imagine.”




“The PATRIOT Act was written many, many years before 9/11,” Paul said. The attacks simply provided “an opportunity for some people to do what they wanted to do,” he said.




“I wish we could guarantee a democratic and honest election in this country as well,” Paul said. “The democratic process in this country has a long way to go.”

Mr. Paul is right:
  • The Patriot Act was planned before 9/11 (and see this). Indeed, former Counter Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke told Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig:
After 9/11 the government drew up the Patriot Act within 20 days and it was passed.

The Patriot Act is huge and I remember someone asking a Justice Department official how did they write such a large statute so quickly, and of course the answer was that it has been sitting in the drawers of the Justice Department for the last 20 years waiting for the event where they would pull it out.

(4:30 into this video).


  • The Afghanistan war was planned before 9/11 (see this and this)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
blindman's picture
Townes Van Zandt - Mr Gold and Mr Mud (Live at the Old Quarter)
) got my girl too (

paintman's picture

I was sitting at home admiring my well-stocked gun cabinet.  I heard that my neighbor was thinking about buying a few guns of his own.  I sent my wife over to talk with him about it, telling him it would not be a good idea and I might take his action as a threat.  He tells her to go home and mind her own business.  I send two of my sons to spy on his house and let me know if he continues this discussion.  They return with evidence of him bringing home gun cleaning supplies and raw materials for reloading ammunition.  I gather my family and, armed to the teeth, we all go over to search the neighbors house.  He becomes angry when we barge through his front door, points a .22 pistol at us, and demands we get out of his house.  We shoot every one in the house.  Who was wrong?  Does it matter if we were America and he was Iraq?

Setarcos's picture

This is a reply to an earlier comment by who opined that there could have been simpler ways to raise the spectre of terrorism and launch endless war.

Because WTCs 1 & 2 were heavily loaded with asbestos and the external cladding was failing, the buildings either had to have multiple millions of $ssssssssssss spent on them, or else be demolished.

They were demolished and Larry Silverstein - who'd recently bought the WTC - made a fortune on insurance against "terrorist attack".

It is all on public record, including Silverstein giving the order to "pull" WTC7.

What better way to get rid of "white elephant" buildings AND create fear.

Several 'birds' were killed with just a few 'stones' on 9/11, i.e. the loss-making Twin Towers, the incriminating files held in WTC7 and the financial records of fraud held in the wing of the Pentagon.

Certainly NO aircraft hit WTC7 and it is dubious that an a commercial jet hit the Pentagon, right where an investigation was going on about missing Pentagon millions of dollars.

Yes Crocket, there could have been a simpler way to generate mass fear/paranoia (after all the anthrax scare was tried) but that would not have achieved so much, e.g. the demolition of redundant buildings PLUS the sowing of divisions amongst the masses.

Sufiy's picture

John Kennedy has tried to return the power to the U.S. government to issue its own currency - you all know what happen next.

Ron Paul - Who owns Federal Reserve System

blindman's picture

.."Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

MarcusLCrassus's picture

No kidding.  I've been saying this since 2001. 


So are we now all, Conservatives and Liberals, in agreement that the PATRIOT Act is pure evil? 

koaj's picture

my understanding is that Biden wrote the patriot act in the 90s

Flammonde's picture

I am bewildered that any person is of the opinion that the war state is able to constrained by citizens.  War is the health of the state. 

Randolph Bourne, The State (1918)

War - or at least modern war waged by a democratic republic against a powerful enemy - seems to achieve for a nation almost all that the most inflamed political idealist could desire. Citizens are no longer indifferent to their Government but each cell of the body politic is brimming with life and activity. We are at least on the way to full realization of that collective community in which each individual somehow contains the virtue of the whole. In a nation at war, every citizen identifies himself with the whole, and feels immensely strengthened in that identification. The purpose and desire of the collective community live in each person who throws himself whole-heartedly into the cause of war. The impending distinction between society and the individual is almost blotted out. At war, the individual becomes almost identical with his society. He achieves a superb self-assurance, an intuition of the rightness of all his ideas and emotions, so that in the suppression of opponents or heretics he is invincibly strong; he feels behind him all the power of the collective community. The individual as social being in war seems to have achieved almost his apotheosis. Not for any religious impulse could the American nation have been expected to show such devotion en masse, such sacrifice and labour. Certainly not for any secular good, such as universal education or the subjugation of nature would it have poured forth its treasure and its life, or would it have permitted such stern coercive measures to be taken against it, such as conscripting its money and its men. But for the sake of a war of offensive self-defence, undertaken to support a difficult cause to the slogan of "democracy", it would reach the highest level ever known of collective effort. 
For these secular goods, connected with the enhancement of life, the education of man and the use of the intelligence to realize reason and beauty in the nation's communal living, are alien to our traditional ideal of the State. The State is intimately connected with war, for it is the organization of the collective community when it acts in a political manner, and to act in a political manner towards a rival group has meant, throughout all history - war.

tony bonn's picture

god how i love that man ron paul!!!

let's be more explicit....the usa maintains at least 2000 military bases around the world with the largest non-conus base in romania....this is nothing but foreign aggression and has nothing to do with the ordinary pursuit of security. it is paranoid world domination - just the kind which yahushua will utterly destroy and crush....

while these foreign bases incite retaliation, the ugly truth is that usa and israeli intelligence blew up the twin towers with nanothermite. no ifs ands or buts. the bushes profitted handsomely while murdering troublesome fbi agents and destroying all of the enron evidence tying the bushes to the husseins and bin ladens....

and of course the blood thirsty caligulama carries on these policies......iran better watch its front and back because the obama-cheney military jauggernaut is about to be launched...

and yess 9/11 was planned years in advance....see the aaron russo interview regarding nick rockefeller on youtube....

goodrich4bk's picture

Anybody else here who doesn't understand why the clone Iran captured didn't self-destruct?  Or why there is apparently no ability to destroy it remotely with a satellite signal?

It sure seems like an incident designed to cause Americans to hate and fear Iran with no real cost to the U.S. if the drone was devoid of any real intelligence.

But if my suspicions are wrong and we really lost an important secret weapon to Iran, whose head is going to roll for not designing it with a poison pill/self-destruct mechanism?

YouMightThinkThat's picture

Agreed. That drone should have gone *poof* before it even touched the ground. Someone dropped a ball, or there is more to the story.

I also think that Hillary never should have sent any sort of important information by email and stored on intranet computers eventually to be intercepted by Manning.

And the Iranians claim Isreal and the US put a virus on the computers they use in their Nuclear Energy Program... How? Did they have those computers hooked to the internet?

Either we give governments too much credit that they think things through, or they are just plain lazy.

besnook's picture

i think the operation was a test of iran's air defense preparedness. i don;t support the war with iran but i think it would have been cool to equip the drone with a trojan horse bomb that could be detonated remotely when certain targets were with in the killing range.

Smokey1's picture

Ron Paul eats shit.

He is a mumble mouth idiot who is an embarrassment in the debates and a national disgrace.

EverythingEviL's picture

You are the idiot.  He's the only one that sounds sane.  Do I think he will somehow turn this country around?  No politician is going to solve the problems that are building to a head now.  It is impossible. 

Hey Assholes's picture

Hey Smokey0

You are an idiot. 

My name is for you.

HamyWanger's picture


I admit Ron Paul does have a large base of followers, but it does not make his demented rumblings more true or acceptable, cf. the 9/11 "truther" movement or Alex Jones ; it simply makes the problem more urgent to solve. 

Populists like him represent a serious danger to our social fabric and our open democratic system. By fueling irrational public resentment, conspiracy theories, fear, frustration and anger towards the U.S. intellectual elite and honourable political figures in a time of economic hardship, they directly contribute to the inexorable rise of political extremism and domestic terrorism that we have witnessed over the course of the last decade.'s picture


Do you really expect your comments to be taken seriously when you include the phrase "U.S. intellectual elite and honourable political figures" as part of your attack against Ron Paul?

You have an American flag for your profile photo but spell like an Englishman.  Go save your Queen and GTFO of the US.

"Domestic terrorism" as defined by one person (i.e. "statist") is a "patriotism" in the eyes of another.  

YouMightThinkThat's picture

You might think that... but you are wrong.

The public resentment is there, rational or irrational. It's the TEA party. It's the 99%. It the average person who reads a news source with any regularity, but does not have their own personal hand in the cookie jar.

Please look at the post again. The conspiracy theories presented are not those of Ron Paul, but of the post originator "George Washington." These theories were made in his efforts to agree with Ron Paul's supposition that America's excessive foreign presence, combined with policy decisions made by administrations of the past two decades, have painted America in an unfavorable light in the Middle East, portions of Europe, and elsewhere. This unfavorable public opinion and the policies of former administrations are what Paul blames for the attacks. I don't know if Paul is right. I really don't care. Let's call it history at this point.

More importantly, I'm tired of the U.S. paying off our "friends" in Pakistan, while watching their people march in the streets chanting how much they hate us and harboring bin Laden. It's 1980's Afghanistan all over again, only Pakistan DOES have nukes.

I'm ready for the U.S. to pull out. Completely out. They think they hate us now, just wait until they realize the money train has stopped.

Reptil's picture

If the populace of the countries around the world would really, REALLY know, and understand the crimes the US Government and it's secret organisations it pays lipservice to, have committed the last 40 years, they'd have their heads, and possibly yours too.
It goes much deeper than the simple financial fraud, and the enslavement of free peoples that results from it in an economical sense. To illustrate:

"If the people were to ever find out what we have done,
we would be chased down the streets and lynched."
-- George H.W. Bush to reporter Sarah McClendon in 1992


agNau's picture

How about the TRUTH? Wouldn't that be nice for a change? If this man stands up and tells the world that our money system is the cause of our problems, wouldn't that be true and not a conspiracy? When the roman empire was unable to pay it's soldiers due to a failed money system, did that not end their global dominance? Would't that be where we are now?
So yea, bringing the troops home makes sense. Ending these costly wars makes sense. The foreign trade issue will be a minor stumbling block, only because we cannot continue without resources from other countries. But resolution of our money problem would go a long way to resolving many major problems today. It would be a painful process, but would end the entitlement driven economy/Government. Big government would simply disappear.

tarsubil's picture

"...U.S. intellectual elite and honourable political figures..."

This is where I laughed. Thanks buddy.'s picture

A populist believes in fewer individual freedoms and a powerful government. Ron Paul is a libertarian as he believes in greater personal freedoms and smaller government.

Feel free to try again once you've reoriented yourself with reality.

Madcow's picture

just curious here -

how many of you believe that Building 7 collapsed because of "nearby fire and collateral damage" - ?

how many of you believe that Building 7 collapsed becaused of explosives in a controlled demoltion?


tallystick's picture

Compare the adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene with the melting point of steel.  Kerosene can burn hot enough to melt steel, but I can't name another steel structure that has collapsed due to fire.

tarsubil's picture

9/11 was conducted by 19 suicidal retards. They successfully outsmarted the entire US Federal Government. The US Federal Government is run by retards among retards. There is no master plan. Congress consistently writes legislation that is impossible to implement and backfires. They are retards. The world is held together with the bubble gum of ignorance and the duct tape of reckless shows of force. Just don't play into their paranoia games. Sit back and watch the whole fucking retard mountain collapse. Buy gold and silver, hold it in your hand. Laugh at the retard mountain!

Reptil's picture

This is factually incorrect. The international branch of the BBC (possibly missing the directive from it's paymaster, the government) reported that 12 of these alleged hijackers were alive and well, and living ordinairy lives in Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere.
Then, of course the question should be; if there were no hijackers, what happened to these planes? Were these even the same planes as claimed? Anything after stumbling on such an obvious lie is suspect. Who can you trust? The group of men controlling your government at that moment?
Of course buy silver, gold, perfect, but the ignorance on this particular subject is yours, not the governments' who covered up the conspiracy of powerful men that planned the 9-11 attack meticulously, long before that day. It's now the 11th of december 2011. I'd respectfully suggest you pay closer attention.

FYI this is a nice primer on a few issues, there are of course more that are obviously fraudulent, about the official myth:

As for the HarmyWanger figure; he must be a troll, or someone who actually tries to force people to see the fascism within your walls by putting it into words. Thirdly, he might actually believe that himself, and in doing so this places him at the same level as others that pleaded in favour of mass murderers. Finding excuses to label those that disagree with him, on the subject, as enemies. The only thing yet missing is these veiled threats to be followed up with actions.

Occams Aftershave's picture

If one looks at US history with a clear unbiased eye, one must admit the power of citizens to govern themselves ended with the first attack by the regular army on US citizens on April 12, 1861.


bshirley1968's picture

Thank you for pointing this out.  The public has been duped into blatant stupidity for so long now that most of them can't fathom that thought that Lincoln was a traitor and the worst enemy the Constitution ever had.

Can you imagine what Lincoln would have done to this country had he of had the internet and controls available today?  Well use your imagination well because the second coming of Lincoln in upon us.

PLove's picture

Inside Rick Perry's game to siphon votes from Ron Paul.

JW n FL's picture

Euro crisis-On the Edge with Max Keiser-12-09-2011

Uploaded by PressTVGlobalNews on Dec 10, 2011

In this edition of the show Max interviews Greg Hunter from . <--- he is NO! George!!

He talks about the concerted efforts by ECB and FED to solve the Euro crisis.

Greg is the producer and creator of Greg Hunter's The site's slogan is "analyzing the news to give you a clear picture of what's really going on." The site will keep an eye on the government, your financial interests and cut through the media spin.

Enjoy Ya'll!


digalert's picture

...and the Department of Defense (WhiteHouse) has declared the Fort Hood muslim maniac murder "workplace-violence" WTF?

Stuck on Zero's picture

In polls, eighty-five percent of Americans want to end our foreign wars, bring the troops home, and take care of America first.  That's Ron Paul's position.  But most of our leaders call this position extremist!

Cathartes Aura's picture

anyone who believes a president can "bring the troops home" for anything other than policing the homeland in the coming months/years is not really paying much attention to reality.

irrespective of what RPaul may say as campaign speech, a president is merely a figurehead installed to have a face to watch when the words are whispered into their earpiece and come out their mouths.

no really, stop believing in this "change" of the figurehead's face - the policies are seamlessly enacted at this point. . .

midtowng's picture

Foreign, military policy and civil rights is a place where you can draw a clear dividing line between libertarians and Republicans.

Libetarians want fewer wars, fewer foreign entanglements, and more civil rights. Republicans want more wars and give nothing but sound bites about civil rights and freedom.

Winston Smith 2009's picture

BOTH Dems and Repugs "want" whatever their campaign donors and cabinet advisors formerly employed by those donors want.  Therein lies the problem.

blindman's picture

"The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription


IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." ...
..'s picture

Are you are missing fingers on one of your hands, believe in the Constitution, vote Ron Paul, have stored more than 7 days' food supply and have "weatherproof" ammunition?  

You must be a TERRORIST! 

blindman's picture

..."Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

blindman's picture

.."He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." ..

Harlequin001's picture

sounds like bullshit...

Perhaps you could explain how the bit about how "all men being created equal' managed to exclude black African American negroes?

This bullshit merely perpetuated slavery for another 90 years, abolished by the British and was the real reason why this shite was written, to con you lot into thinking you had some semblance of equity in your country. It wasn't. George Washington , just like Jefferson was a slaver, and would have been put out of business by the British ruling on the abolition of slavery. Had he not succeeded in this revolt he would have either been bankrupt or hanging from a British noose.

Do us all a favour and stow this shit, once and for all.

paintman's picture

Your opinions are obviously NOT based on a depth of knowledge and understanding of this subject.

Cathartes Aura's picture

always entertaining when the replies to posts about "all men" being "created equal" never mention the other 50% not-men, the females.

the words are there, the meaning is clear, and the "founding FATHERS" weren't yer mom.

men are men, and everything else is property.

ebear's picture

"Perhaps you could explain how the bit about how "all men being created equal' managed to exclude black African American negroes?"

Whoa.... you mean there are white African American negros as well?  Quick, somebody call Naseem Taleb!

crazyv's picture

you may wish to brush up on your history. It was only in 1833 that the Britsh banned slavery in their empire. It was only in 1807 ( the United states in 1808) that they banned the importation of slaves.

So I think you might do well to take your own advice.

bshirley1968's picture

So you think you are not a slave now?  Then you are either stupid or lying to yourself.  All Great Britian did was make it so the common, middle class person couldn't compete in man power the way the ubber rich did.  Slaves were to economy what debt is today.  So what you can borrow a few thousand.  How can you ever compete with the ones who can borrow hundreds of millions?  You can't.

Yeah, the British "abolished" slavery and then enslaved the whole world to the British court.  Lincoln did the same thing.  He "freed" the black man, LMAO, and then eslaved the whole country to the federal government.  Wake the hell up sheeple boy.  That stuff you call "bullshit" built the greatest country the world has ever seen.  Not the "perfect" one but the greatest and most free one.  You are like most people that fly.  They enjoy the benefits of aerodynamics but don't know the first thing about the laws of science that controls it.

dow2000's picture

Yeah look what good that we have 45million of them on Food Stamps.  At least in the past, there was a businessman that had to pay to feed his cattle and in return got a day's work out of them. Now they just sit at home on their Xbox smokin blunts and starting fights at Wendy's.

lincolnsteffens's picture

You views are obscured by the lens of modern liberal thought. At the time the Constitution was written there were very few who viewed Negroes as human beings except themselves. There were modest attempts to include blacks in "All Men" at the time but the proponents of inclusion understood there would be no chance of success if emancipation and equality were a make or break issue.

One certainly has the right to be disappointed on this issue with the Founding Fathers. If you however take the reality of the time that the Constitution as it was written was a radical concept and a giant leap forward in protected freedoms from abusive Monarchies and other despots you will see it for the important evolving principals it spawned which ended slavery in less than 100 years of its ratification. Slavery was a universal institution that had been in existence before recorded history so lighten up a bit on the "Men of Property" who risked their lives to improve and set principals for a new form of government. Unfortunately there are still areas in the world in which slavery still takes place.