Was The American Revolution An Act Of Terrorism?Â Foundations Of Freedom Thursday!

Was The American Revolution An Act Of Terrorism: Its Foundations of Freedom Thursday, a special day of the week where we get to answer questions from you, the listeners! Always answering your questions from constitutional principles! Tune in today as we answer your most pressing questions!

Air Date: 04/25/2019

On-air Personalities: David Barton, Rick Green, and Tim Barton

WallBuilders | American historical events, founding fathers, historical documents, books, videos, CDs, tapes, David Barton’s speaking schedule.
Coupons: Use promo code WBL17 to receive 10% off your entire order on ALL WallBuilders Store Products!!
Helpful links:
Today’s Link:
- Article From Question

Listen:

Download: Click Here

Transcription note: Â As a courtesy for our listeners’ enjoyment, we are providing a transcription of this podcast. Transcription will be released shortly. However, as this is transcribed from a live talk show, words and sentence structure were not altered to fit grammatical, written norms in order to preserve the integrity of the actual dialogue between the speakers. Additionally, names may be misspelled or we might use an asterisk to indicate a missing word because of the difficulty in understanding the speaker at times. We apologize in advance.

Links: Share a veteran’s story

Summary:

Tags: (please put a comma between every word.)

Faith And The Culture

Rick:

Welcome to the intersection of faith and the culture. This is WallBuilders Live! Where we”re talking about today”s hottest topics on policy, faith, and the culture, always doing that from a Biblical, historical, and Constitutional perspective.

We’re here with David Barton, America’s premier historian and the founder of WallBuilders. Also, Tim Barton, national speaker and President of WallBuilders, and my name is Rick Green, I’m a former Texas state legislator, national speaker, and author.

Visit Us Online

You can find out more about us at our two websites. We’ve got WallBuildersLive.com, our radio site. And then, go over to WallBuilders.com, our main site.

At the radio site, you’ll get a list of all our stations. You’ll be able to get into the archives of the program over the last few weeks. And, you can also make a donation there.

So, be sure to click on that donate button if you like what you hear today and you want more of this education and want to help equip and inspire folks all over the nation to get involved and be a part of the solution for preserving freedom. Donate to WallBuilders Live! It’s what makes this possible.

Check Out These Great Resources!

And, then also visit WallBuilders.com for some of those great resources. You can take a constitution class or find all kinds of curriculum for your family to study, get into your Sunday school class, or even just for your own learning. Check WallBuilders.com for more of that.

It”s Foundations of Freedom Thursday, a special day of the week where we get to answer questions from you, the listeners! Always answering your questions from constitutional principles! David and Tim, we got a lot of great questions from folks across the nation.

And, we’ll get to as many of those today as we possibly can. Here we go with Foundations of Freedom Thursday. Are you all ready for some questions?

TIM:

You bet.

RICK:

All right, the first one comes from Adam in Virginia. He said, “I recently read an article talking about “American terrorism” during the Founding Era.” That was “American terrorism” with quotes around it.

“Here’s the link to the article.” We got the link We”ll put that out there.

“Here’s a snippet from the article: “From the beginning, the revolutionaries, the patriots, fought the British redcoats simultaneously with the loyalists in an-“ I don’t know how to pronounce this word, guys–“internecine.”

Internecine

DAVID:

Internecine.

DAVID:

They don’t use that word in Dripping Springs?

RICK:

No, in Dripping Springs, that’s not in in every other sentence here. Nope. So, you leaving me hanging, or you going to tell me what it means?

DAVID:

No, you guys in Dripping Springs are going to have to learn to look things up on your own.

RICK:

You sound like my mom, “Go get the dictionary and look it up, son.” Whatever that word is.

TIM:

Let me just throw out. So, if you just say, “Hey, Siri,” or “Hey, Alexa,” or, “Hey, Google.”

RICK:

All right.

TIM:

Generally, you can kind of look up words in that way.

RICK:

There you go, no dictionary needed, huh? It’ll find the dictionary for me. Well, I’m going to leave it out there to you all.

That’ll be the first question you’ll get instead of whatever Adam is actually going to ask here.

The South a “Principal Terrorist Battleground?”

“A series of battles for control of the population. By definition these battles were terror attacks, particularly for the civilians that got caught in the middle. The South became the principal terrorist battleground in the war between patriots and loyalists, also called Tories.

‘The southern campaigns where nearly all guerilla in type, where terrorism reached a gruesome peak. Lynchings, ambushes, and murders became a common feature of daily life.”” All right.

Here’s what Adam says, “Can you please comment on the accuracy of this article and whether or not it is appropriate to call what was going on “terrorism”? Thank you. WallBuilders is great.”

And, that is from Adam in Virginia. Adam, thanks for the question and for leaving me hanging on the definition of “internecine.” But, I’m going to look it up while David’s answering the rest of this question.

TIM:

Mary let me let me jump in. So, the question was on the accuracy of the article. The answer is it’s not accurate.

RICK:

Let’s go to the next question. What does “internecine” mean? That’s the next question.

David:

All right. Just so you know, it means “destructive to both sides.” Both sides suffered because of it. So, can you imagine that, a war where both sides suffer?

I can’t imagine a war where both sides suffer.

TIM:

And, let me also interject. You did look that up on your computer and might have known; but, I don’t want the audience to get the wrong impression that you know all words, because you do have to look things up too.

Both Sides Suffer in War.

DAVID:

That is right.

TIM:

But, but I to your point, something where everybody suffers, that’s generally what happens in a war; which is why you don’t want to go to war. You want to figure out everything you can to avoid a situation where, in many perspectives of war, there is not always a easy winner because there’s generally suffering and losses on both sides. Somebody could come out “winning” in the sense of they’re gonna have power, dominance, control, or whatever it is in the end; but, in war there’s loss, casually, hurt, and pain.

It’s not something you want to go through. So, it does make sense that in war, both sides would suffer losses.

DAVID:

Now, I’m going to I’m going to speculate that whoever wrote this article is an academic of some kind; or, at least they consider themselves to be. One of the original points of that is instead of saying the obvious, like: “A Civil War or revolution hurts both sides;” they throw out a word that nobody knows. That why you think, “Oh, wow; they really know what they’re talking about.”

Just boil it down; they’re talking about a war. Now, the first thing I would do–and, this is an article, grant it. But, here’s the first reaction to that.

We’ve heard the charges: that there’s terrorism on the American side of this thing, that there were terror attacks, that the civilians got caught in the middle, and the South was the principal terrorist battleground in the war between the patriots, and that there were lynchings, ambushes, murders, and that was a common feature of daily life, etc.

So, here’s where you start. What acts of terrorism can they specifically identify? Give me three.

Acts of Terrorism?

Give me three things that you call an act of terrorism. Next I would say, “Okay, so what did the Southern incidents you’re talking about that are different from the North–why do you say the South was worse than the North?” And, third is What lynching incidents are you talking about?

Give me some specifics. Those are the first things I would go to. And, by the way, all this reference of “South and North” is not a reference to the American Civil War.

This is what this article is saying was the American Revolution: that there was all this difference between the North and the South and the violence happened in the South.

Terrorism happened the South.

TIM:

I think we’ve confused “patriots” and “loyalists” with the “North” and the “South,” right? This is kind of a weird take on this because there were patriots in all 13 colonies. Now, some colonies had more patriots than others.

But, there were loyalists in all 13 colonies, and some colonies had more loyalists than others. However, this was not a “North and South” battle. So, I’m already confused by what you’re talking about “North” and “South.”

Loyalists in the North

DAVID:

And, see that’s the way the article is. And, by the way, you and I this past weekend were up in Cambridge, Massachusetts right by Harvard. That is the heart of Massachusetts.

George Washington had a headquarters there for about nine months. And, guess what. All the houses along both sides of him were filled with loyalists.

So, the stuff about loyalists in the South, we’re talking the heavy, deep North. And, Tim, you mentioned some states have more patriots and others. I would say Massachusetts had an abundance of patriots; and, there is George Washington in Massachusetts surrounded by Sam Adams, John Hancock, and John Adams.

And, more immediately surrounding him were all these loyalists. I would also point to, for example, New Jersey where that signer of the Declaration, Richard Stockton, was captured by his neighbors who were loyalists. That’s not a southern state.

And, that “there was more conflict in the South than the North,” is an interesting thing to me. Let me just kind of throw out some thoughts here. Rick, even you’ll be able to get this. You may not be able to get “internecine;” but, you can get this way.

North or South?

RICK:

I was about to say, “What does that mean? “Rick, even you get this.”

TIM:

That is not an underhanded comment or a dig at all. But, Rick, let me just put it in words you understand: kitten, puppy. Do you know what those are?

Okay, that’s all I got. That was a little tacky, Dad. I don’t know about that.

DAVID:

So, here we go. The Battle of Quebec in 1775, is that in the North or the South?

TIM:

Well, Quebec I’m thinking is North. I mean, I’m not Rick; but, in my mind it’s North.

DAVID:

All right. How about the Battle of Concord?

RICK:

Hey, most importantly, was it an internecine?

DAVID:

I think people on both sides did get hurt in that conflict.

RICK:

I think we”re having too much fun today.

DAVID:

But, I have fun with academics when they start sounding highfalutin; and yet, it’s so easy to pick apart {what they say.}

TIM:

Wait a second; “highfalutin?” What kind of academic are you?

DAVID:

Yeah, exactly.

RICK:

Now, wait a minute. That’s language I understand right there.

Battles of the Revolution

DAVID:

See, it”s so easy. So, back to Quebec; we agree that’s north. Canada is in the North, not the South.

How about Concord and Lexington, two battles?

TIM:

Sure, in the North.

DAVID:

How about the Road to {inaudible}.

RICK:

Way North, going to be there for the reenactment. Yeah.

DAVID:

How about the Siege of Boston?

TIM:

Well, here’s what’s even interesting; like how would we define “South” because the Battle of Yorktown, the last major battle of the Revolution–

DAVID:

I would call that the South because I think people divide the South into Confederate States and Non-Confederate states.

TIM:

But, as a Texan, I feel like it’s pretty far north.

DAVID:

Oh, that’s north of the Mason-Dixon line because it’s north of Waco. Anything north of Waco is the Mason-Dixon line.

TIM:

Wait a second; no, Fort Worth we’re over there.

DAVID:

That’s right.

Civil-War Lines During the Revolution?

TIM:

You had to go a little further; but, this is. If we’re dividing North and South based on Civil-War lines, why are we doing that in the Revolution?

DAVID:

Well, because they’re talking “North” and “South” like there was a difference between it. And so, I’m going to give him I’m going to give him his thinking that he thinks there’s a North. He thinks there’s a South.

TIM:

But again, this is where I would ask a question to make him defend that because, I”m not even acknowledging that”s the way this is right now.

DAVID:

Right, but I’m going to say even based on his logic, the battles in what he might call the “Northern states” is more than two-to-one in favor than the Southern states, because you’ve got Yorktown, Richmond, Charleston, Cowpens, Kings Mountain. And, you’re stretched after that to find southern battles. Everything else is in the North.

New York City, Harlem Heights, Long Island, Princeton, and Trenton; all those battles crossing the Delaware, that’s not the South. So, that’s the first major problem that”s easy to point out. This guy who might be a really smart person in other areas, certainly is not accurate on this.

British Terrorism

And, the same with terrorism, suggesting that it was more in the South than in the North. I’ll point out that the British did a really good job of terrorism; like when they came into New York City in 1777, and took 19 churches and burned them to the ground. I would point out that terrorism is a lot higher when you have the British killing 4,335 Americans with guns, but killing 11,400 in prisoner-of-war camps.

You don’t find those numbers on the American side. I mean, just go through all the numbers. This does not make sense, this article.

It”s another shot to make America look bad, the Founding Fathers look like terrorists, and the American Revolution look like an act of terrorism. This is crazy stuff.

RICK:

And, even the thing about “lynchings and ambushes and murders” and all that, I mean, Â there probably is all of that in war. I would think.

DAVID:

But, on a daily basis, and in the South, oh no. No, that’s going to be really hard to prove. And, this is where if I had this guy in front of me, I would say, “You made the claims; prove the claims and give the data on that. I want you to show me a lynching every day that happened in the South.”

We Should Be Asking These Questions

RICK:

Right. It”s just like Tim says when he’s teaching at Patriot Academy every time. Tim, you’re always talking about how the first question should be How do you know that?

Where did you learn that? How did you come to that conclusion? I mean, we should be asking this guy those questions; but, he’s not on the program today so we can’t.

DAVID:

But, those are the questions that should be asked. Anybody that reads an article like this, don’t start thinking, Oh, there was terrorism in the American Revolution. What’s going on today is not different from the Revolution. Don’t start thinking that because you read this; his is where you start asking questions and say, “Prove it to me.”

RICK:

Good question. All right. We’re going to take a quick break.

We’ve got more questions coming up. Stay with us. You’re listening to WallBuilders Live!

Liberties and Freedom Are Worth Defending

Samuel Adams said, “The liberties of our Country and the freedom of our civil Constitution are worth defending against hazards. And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.”

We Want To Hear Your Vet Story

Rick:

Hey friends! If you have been listening to WallBuilders Live for very long at all, you know how much we respect our veterans and how appreciative we are of the sacrifice they make to make our freedoms possible. One of the ways that we love to honor those veterans is to tell their stories here on WallBuilders Live. Â Once in awhile, we get an opportunity to interview veterans that have served on those front lines that have made incredible sacrifices have amazing stories that we want to share with the American people.

One of the very special things we get to do is interview World War II veterans. You’ve heard those interviews here on WallBuilders Live, from folks that were in the Band of Brothers, to folks like Edgar Harrell that survived the Indianapolis to so many other great stories you heard on WallBuilders Live.

You have friends and family that also served. Â If you have World War II veterans in your family that you would like to have their story shared here on WallBuilders Live, please e-mail us at [email protected]. Â Give us a brief summary of the story and we’ll set up an interview. Thanks so much for sharing here on WallBuilders Live!

Greatest Political Privilege

President Calvin Coolidge said, “The more I study the Constitution, the more I realize that no other document devised by the hand of man has brought so much progress and happiness to humanity. To live under the American Constitution is the greatest political privilege that was ever accorded to the human race.”

RICK:

Welcome back to WallBuilders Live Foundations of Freedom Thursday today. Next question comes from Joe; it says, “The way I understand it, WallBuilders teaches that the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence cannot be separated, and I agree 100%.

“So, my question is: Why is there so much talk about abortion being a state issue? Why is not abortion covered by the “right to life” in the Declaration of Independence? And, why is it not considered murder?”

All right, David and Tim, so if we say, “Look, the Declaration is part of the Constitution; it is the foundation and the original founding document.” Why can’t we refer to the fact that we’re all supposed to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

An Attempt to Remove Foundational Principles

TIM:

That is a great question, and I actually would agree completely with the assessment as no, it seems like this should be something the Declaration has already resolve this problem. But, even if you go back historically throughout our nation, we even mentioned in the last segment related to war, where the question or that the writer of the article seemed to confuse even Civil War terms with the American Revolution, the War for Independence here in America. It would seem in this situation, if you look through history, there’s people that have constantly, in order to promote their agenda, have tried to remove the Declaration and those foundational principles.

Where even for many of the Founding Fathers, when they’re arguing against slavery, they argued, “Look; we’ve already acknowledged in America that all men are created equal, that we are all equal in God’s eyes.” Well, this was a leading argument from abolitionists. And then, there were people that were not in favor of ending slavery, and they said, “Well, we’re not following the Declaration; we follow the Constitution.”

And so, people that tried to remove inalienable rights generally want to do away with the Declaration because the Constitution doesn’t specifically specify those rights, except for the Bill of Rights, which does say that government cannot touch these things. But, it’s the Declaration that does defend this position of life.

Now, the Founding Fathers were very clear about this idea that life is something that certainly is the very first of the inalienable rights that God gives to you. So, this is what used to be known as the “laws of nature” and “natural law.”

The Founding Fathers and Abortion

DAVID:

Well, let me add in that not only were they clear about that; but, they dealt with the issue of abortion in their day. It’s not like they didn’t know abortion existed and didn”t know what to do with it or that this wasn’t something they considered. It was in the law books that you could not kill an unborn child.

TIM:

Yeah ,there could not be intentionality of you extinguishing the life within you or somebody else. And, granted medically, it was very different back then; but, they knew chemicals that you could drink or potions, whatever it is, things that you could do to your body that would terminate or kill the life that was growing inside of you. And so, they had laws saying that you’re not allowed to intentionally do this; doctors can’t prescribe this.

And so, this was something they actually did deal with, and they acknowledged that life is a gift from God. Well, if you back up even to the area back to the Civil War; there was a reason we had to amend the Constitution to protect the rights of black citizens in America, black Americans. Whether you look at the 13th, 14th, or 15th Amendments, the things that were done to protect what should have already been God-given rights that American citizens possessed, there were people arguing against that.

And, this is where people that try to separate the Declaration and Constitution, generally are trying to separate the idea that our rights come from God because people that don’t want to follow the Declaration, only the Constitution, they don’t even want to acknowledge where the Bill of Rights comes from. Why do we believe in protecting the freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, petition, or the rights of self-defense or private property? Why do we believe in protecting those things?

God-given Rights

Well, the reason historically was because we believed that God had given us those abilities. He had given us those choices, those freedoms. And, this is where we very much disconnected the idea that the foundation upon which the Constitution was built was the Declaration.

But again, people just like in the Civil War who were in favor of slavery, those that are in favor of abortion today want to say, “Well, the Declaration isn”t really what we follow,” or, “That’s not really what they meant or thought because it doesn’t explicitly say that in the Constitution.” This is a very flawed argument. Nonetheless, this is where they generally come from.

DAVID:

And so, when you look at that, our position is that this is not a states-rights issue. We would say, “This is an inalienable right that is given by God.” However, here’s the deal.

When the Supreme Court steps in and says, “Not only do we ignore the Declaration, we’re ignoring the Constitution on this,” then how do you get back? And, the way you get back is–let’s just make the assumption. This is not true; but, for this discussion, we’re going to say that half the United States is blue, and half the United States is red.

And, the blue part tends to like abortion; the red part tends not to like abortion. So, if we just got this back to being a states-rights issue, you could probably end maybe half the abortions in America, which is an improvement. But, it needs to go all the way back to where it’s an inalienable right where you don’t have the abortion.

State”s Rights?

TIM:

Although, presumably many people would travel to different states to have that abortion, and there would be people funding that bus trip or whatever else. So, this really doesn’t–saying, “Let’s make it a states-rights issue or something where the states can determine their own sovereignty and if they’re gonna have these laws or not,” does not resolve this problem. And, this was even part of the reason the South wanted to secede, is they thought the federal government was going to come in and say what they could do and then start controlling them.

And, back in the Civil War, southern states said, “Wait a second; no, we’re not gonna let you tell us that we’re not allowed to have slaves. We have the right to have slaves because the Constitution doesn’t tell us we can’t; it’s our state”s right.”

Well this is part of the big argument of the states-rights issue. And, a lot of people, even looking at the Civil War want to say, “Wait a second; it wasn’t just slavery.” Although, I would argue, “Show me show me an issue bigger than slavery that they were concerned about whether states rights.”

In fact, go back and read the Constitution of the Confederate States when they separate, when they secede, what they said in their constitution. Show me the Constitution from the South that does not mention slavery: protecting slavery, promoting it, having more slave states. This was the significant right they were the most concerned with.

Now, there were other things that were outflows as well.

The Same Train of Thinking Today

DAVID:

This is exactly what New York recently did where they said, “You’re not going to be able to take the right to abortion away from us. We have it in our state constitution.” And, that’s the same thing the southern states did.

They put it in their state constitution said, “You’ll never take this away from us.”

TIM:

And, by the way, we’re not we’re not bashing southern states in this point because hopefully we’ve moved beyond that. We are Texans; we love Texas and love the South. We like the South a lot more in the North.

I mean, we think that God created all the world; but, we think Texas is his favorite place. And so, we definitely are people that —

RICK:

He might have created people equally. He did not create places equally.

TIM:

There you go; that’s it. So, we love the South. And, I mean, honestly if there was a Civil War again that–God would have to intervene in dramatic fashion for the South not to win because we’re awesome and shoot guns, and we’re good shots.

DAVID:

But, we’re not going there.

TIM:

But, yes, God forbid. We never want to have that happen again. The point is, we”re not trying to bash the South; it’s something that just, historically when you see states that try to say, “We don’t care about God-given, inalienable rights; we want to do whatever we want to do in states,” they have a very flawed perspective of where rights come from and what we have fundamentally understood for the history of our nation.

RICK:

Guys, quick break. We’ve got time for one more question today. Stay with us; you’re listening to WallBuilders Live!

Be At All Times Armed

Thomas Jefferson said, “The constitutions of most of our states, and of the United States, assert that all power is inherent in the people that they may exercise it by themselves that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed. That they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of press.”

Moment From American History

This is Tim Barton from WallBuilders with another moment from American history. After the final victory at Yorktown the Continental Army awaited the outcome of peace negotiations with Great Britain.

Pastor Israel Evans, a chaplain in the army, proposed to George Washington that they build a structure where church services can be held during the months of waiting. Washington approved the plan and urges officers to ensure that the soldiers attend that service.

Pastor Evans further knew if we were to secure the liberties they had fought for, sound education would be crucial.

He declared, “Every parent and every friend to the freedom of his country ought to be attentive to the improvement of our youth and the principles of freedom and good government. And then the people will stand fast in their liberty for a long time.” Our schools today need to return to teaching the principles of freedom and good government in order for America to survive and prosper. For more information about Pastor Israel Evans and other colonial Patriots go to WallBuilders.com

President Thomas Jefferson said, “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. And if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

RICK:

Welcome back to WallBuilders Live on this Foundations of Freedom Thursday. We have time for one more question today that comes from Denise, and it’s about Trump’s emergency declaration. It says, “Is what and how President Trump is handling the emergency declaration constitutional or unconstitutional? Either way, can you provide the information in the Constitution where it’s stated?”

Are Trump”s Emergency Declarations Constitutional?

DAVID:

That”s really easy; it’s not in the Constitution stated that way. So, what you do is you say, “What are the responsibilities of the executive in the Constitution? What are the responsibilities of Congress and the courts, et cetera?”

And, the executive does have the responsibility of preserving the sovereignty of the United States; the borders the United States are part of that. That goes all the way back to when we had border violations under John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. I mean, this goes all the way back.

So, that’s more of the understood responsibilities and one of the constitutional delineations of one of the things the president supposed to do. Further, within that general, broad thing we say, “Okay, the emergency declaration, is that in the scope of protecting the borders, which is one of those constitutional responsibilities, protecting the sovereignty the United States?” And, the answer becomes yes, it is within that.

Now, how he’s doing that, is that within the scope of what’s allowed? Well, you then go back to Article 1, which gives Congress the power to legislate in 15 different areas.

And so, is legislating in regard to borders and border security something Congress can do? Yes, and they did back in 1974 when they gave the president the right to declare emergencies whenever it was perceived that there was something that was threatening the sovereignty United States.

So, Congress had that authority to create such a law. The president is acting under such a law. So, while there is not a specific authorization in the Constitution to do this, in scope it’s within the general boundaries.

Now, if something came along that said that the president declared an emergency order to make sure that all public schools teach 12 different courses. No, that’s not within the scope. You can’t do that under the Constitution; Congress can’t do that statutorily.

But, in this case, this general topic is something that is covered in the scope; so, I don’t necessarily see a problem with him doing this within the scope of the Constitution. You can argue about the politics or whether it’s good or not. But, at least for constitutional authority, I think it’s fine.

Faithfully Executing Laws

RICK:

Yes, and I would throw in there it’s also a part of faithfully executing the laws and seeing that they are executed because these are laws that Congress did pass. He’s seeing them through, following the laws that they actually passed, including the broad definition that they gave him for declaring an emergency like this. So, it’s a very interesting topic, and there’s some good material out there on it as well; be sure watch our Facebook pages for those.

We”ll Answer More Questions Like: Was the Revolution Terrorism?

We’re out of time, guys. We had a lot more questions to; but we just don’t have time to get to them today. So, we’re going to do that on our next Foundations of Freedom Thursday.

Make sure you’re listening again, folks. Also, we want to encourage you to visit our website today WallBuildersLive.com. You can actually make contributions there; that’s what makes this show possible as a listener-supported program.

We’re asking you to come alongside us and help make the program not only possible, but make the program grow. And, when you invest in WallBuilders Live, that’s what happens. It allows more people to get equipped, inspired, share these ideas, and get people to actually study the Constitution again.

It makes a big difference and also helps us and in doing the leadership training that we do with young people, pastors, legislators, and all the different activities of WallBuilders. So, if you’d like to be a part of the solution, go to WallBuildersLive.com today to make that contribution, and it will be an investment in freedom. Thanks so much for listening today. You”ve been listening to WallBuilders Live!

Abraham Lincoln said, “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts. Not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”

Was The American Revolution An Act Of Terrorism?Â Foundations Of Freedom Thursday!

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

Leave A Comment Cancel reply