Skip to content

The Character Assassination of John Adams

September 19, 2009


Editor’s note: See NewsReal’s previous posts on the John Adams Project here, here, here,  and here.

One would hope that a group called the John Adams Project would in some way seek to honor the legacy of its eponymous founding father. Unfortunately, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)-sponsored John Adams Project represents a hideous slander of the diplomat and former President of the United States.

The ACLU so named its pet project to defend accused Guantanamo terrorists, offering the laughable explanation that the historical Adams performed a similar service by defending British soldiers before the Revolutionary War. This should be insulting to anyone who respects the military. There are enormous differences between those British soldiers — who were accused of shooting colonists in the Boston massacre — and terrorists who are accused of plotting against modern-day American citizens. The ACLU brass behind the project is either terribly ignorant of history or is well aware of its own malicious duplicity. But the bottom line is clear: ACLU leftists with a profoundly anti-American agenda are trying to hijack our nation’s heritage.

To start, Adams defended the British soldiers before the thirteen colonies had declared their independence; thus, the motherland and the colonies were not formally at war at the time of the trial. By contrast, we are currently at war with the jihadists who seek to destroy us.

Moreover, when Adams took on the job of defending the British soldiers, it was determined that the soldiers had likely been provoked by the aggressive Boston mob that was haranguing and attacking them, and that the soldiers likely feared for their lives. The rationale of self-preservation is much more acceptable to sensible people, than is the declaration of an all-out war on all citizens of the West. In addition, the soldiers were guarding what was technically part of their empire.

A man of passion and integrity, Adams represented the British soldiers because he was the best man suited to do so; those soldiers had not been running amok in the streets, shooting randomly at civilians, or calling for the death of Western civilization.

“One of the best pieces of service I ever rendered my country” — That is the quote, attributed to the historical Adams, that the ACLU’s John Adams Project features on its homepage. What the ACLU doesn’t mention is that Mr. Adams’ strategy was successful because he was able to convince a jury that the British soldiers had acted out of fear for their lives. Did the Guantanamo terrorists take to the battlefield because they similarly felt their lives were threatened by Americans? No. They were adhering to the dictates of jihad, Islam’s longstanding war of aggression against the so-called “infidel” world.

Most disgraceful of all are the particulars of how the John Adams Project has pursued its stated goal of “helping” the Guantanamo detainees. Specifically, its operatives have taken clandestine photos of CIA officials and made them available to accused foreign terrorists — with no regard whatsoever for the safety of those intelligence agents.

The fact that former President Jimmy Carter supports the John Adams Project should immediately raise a red flag. Carter’s entire political life has been a testament to the senselessness of appeasement and cultural self-flagellation. Moreover, his public support for the murderous terrorist group Hamas, coupled with his ceaseless condemnations of Israel’s efforts to defend itself against terorism, show him to be a man of very poor judgment indeed.

  1. carterthewriter permalink
    September 19, 2009 9:39 am

    I am amazed at all these people who have gain power in our country who remain anti-American and have the gall to spend our money doing it.

  2. Keith permalink
    September 20, 2009 3:18 am

    How the level of general disrespect from many parties of the left in regards to the history of this incredibly great and generous nation, makes me feel like I’m imploding.

    Perhaps we might consider ‘tea bagging’ the ACLU offices around the country.

  3. September 20, 2009 5:57 am

    Here’s a project for these bunch of traitors-Lock them up in Gitmo.

  4. Jack Hampton permalink
    September 20, 2009 8:02 am

    It is my sincere Prayer that these vile traitors will one day soon be held accountable for there actions.

  5. discerning curmudgeon permalink
    September 20, 2009 9:33 am

    Same character assassination continues ad nauseum to Thomas Jefferson;there is not a scintilla of evidence that he had any improper relations with house servants,nor fathered any of their children! All a con on the American public, courtesy the Leftist/Socialist cadres that have taken over universities,mainstreammedia,public schools, and so forth.After all,one of the Communist strategies is to get the masses anesthesized through diversions:pornography,gambling,games,et al, kill critical thinking(watch Gary Cooper in the Fountainhead; individual vs Collectivism) and denouncing/debasing the Founding Fathers among a thousand other Stalinesque activities to erase any form of pride in culture/nationalism of countries. Read the Black Book of Communism(Harvard University Press)to open the eyes..and the audacity/joke of giving prizes to PC authors who fabricate tat TJ fathered 7 children is a travesty! Disgusting. Illustrates that these “awards”are a farce.

  6. Eric Kirk permalink
    September 21, 2009 5:07 pm

    Moreover, when Adams took on the job of defending the British soldiers, it was determined that the soldiers had likely been provoked by the aggressive Boston mob that was haranguing and attacking them, and that the soldiers likely feared for their lives.

    So, if I understand the logic, it was different because “it was determined” that the soldiers were likely innocent? If it was determined before Adams even represented them, then why did they even need a trial? So, what determinations must be made for modern day defendants before they’re entitled to representation? Who makes these determinations? A court of law? Does a defendant need a trial to determine whether he is worthy of representation? Sounds like something right from Stalin to me.

    You may appreciate Adams’ choice in retrospect, but many of his fellow colonists at the time thought he was a traitor. As bad as the Jihadists are, they aren’t occupying our country. Adams’ stand for the principle of law and due process was brave, as is the ACLU’s.

    • VNVet permalink
      September 29, 2009 10:28 am

      What your peabrain doesn’t comprehend is that there was no war going on. Your critical thinking is clouded by your love of the communist organization ACLU. If the war had been going on Adams wouldn’t have been representing British soldiers. During the actual Revolutionary War the British committed various atrocities, some almost as bad as the Jihadists, but Adams had no interest in voluteering to represent them. Oh the ACLU is sooo brave for being anti-American. Sooo brave for opposing and trying to dismantle Christianity. They’re sooo brave for representing NAMBLA. They’re an abomination and need to be relegated to the communist ashheap of history.

      • Eric Kirk permalink
        September 29, 2009 4:55 pm

        That’s lame. War was imminent and any colonist with a brain knew it. He was a “traitor” by modern conservative standards, your mental gymnastics of denial notwithstanding.

        See, what conservatives often have a hard time understanding is that under the English common law principle of due process, government does not grant rights. They are inherent, “endowed by the creator” or providence. You get them just by being born human. Hence the word “inalienable.” You don’t get to pick and choose who has those basic rights.

        Moreover, the society at large has a right to due process simply because we have determined that the adversarial process involving professional legal representation is the best, though far from perfect, means of arriving at a truth. You don’t get to decide guilt except through due process.

        So yes, the ACLU is brave for swimming against a current of conservative ideology which threatens to undo 900 years of evolving common law, individual rights, and due process.

        Incidentally, we are not at war. I realize conservatives don’t much pay attention to the Constitution these days, but it does in theory still require an act from Congress.

Comments are closed.