The declaration was a diagnosis of a mental problem the government of England had developed.
The soon-to-follow Constitution was the original effort at a cure for the governmental sickness that had grown to the point of abusing the populace by denying civil rights, while at the same time exhibiting an imperialistic empire mentality toward the rest of the world.
It had gotten so bad, in the England that our forefathers left, that the law there had become "the King can do no wrong" (see also post explaining another myth "the Queen has no legs" here).
That mentality is manifesting itself within the United States following 9/11, and will continue to be spread by the main stream media, a lackey of concentrated power, unless and until the subject of State Crimes Against Democracy (SCAD) is well understood:
The first step toward SCAD detection and prevention is facing up to the nature and magnitude of the threat. Recently, many mainstream scholars and journalists have concluded that American democracy is becoming increasingly corporatist, imperialistic, and undemocratic ...(State Crimes Against Democracy, quoting American Behavioral Scientists, February 2011, Vol. 53, No. 6, page 818). Concerning 9/11 and the official Bush II Commission's report, journalists and scholars have not been properly focused:
However, mainstream authors have seldom considered the possibility that authoritarian tendencies in American politics are being systematically engineered by top-ranking civilian and military officials. Rather than thinking in terms of high crimes, their diagnoses have blamed abstract institutional weaknesses or isolated failures of leadership.
In contrast, the upshot of the foregoing analysis is that SCADs are surface indications of a deeper, invisible level of politics ... in which officials at the highest levels of government use deception, conspiracy, and violence to shape national policies and priorities.
The ellipses of due diligence riddling the official account of the 9/11 incidents continue being ignored by scholars of policy and public administration. This article introduces intellectual context for examining the policy heuristic "State Crimes Against Democracy" (SCAD) (deHaven-Smith, 2006) and its usefulness for better understanding patterns of state criminality of which no extant policy analytic model gives adequate account.This article then introduces papers included in this symposium examining the chimerical presence and perfidious legacy of state criminality against democracy.(SCADs of Inblot Denial, quoting American Behavioral Scientists). The American rebellion was against the behavior of an imperialistic king who was generating what behavioral scientists call Ruling Group Mind:
Research on TMT and SJT strongly suggests that defending the current U.S. political system and its prerogatives post-9/11 requires individual and collective denial to block out any and all information undermining the government's account of 9/11 and hence the archetypal image of "America Under Attack." When a particular mindset governs the collective consciousness to promote a particular agenda, such as the U.S. government's account of 9/11 parroted by the mainstream media without judicious investigation, the result is what McMurry (2007) refers to as a "ruling group-mind" (RGM) ...(State Crimes Against Democracy - 4, citing the Journal of American Behavioral Scientists). Are we becoming the place where "the king can do no wrong" on certain issues we do not like to face?
Lets start with the question: "Why did the king who can do no wrong violate federal law (NFPA 921) by destroying the evidence?", as pointed out by Fire Chief Bill Manning, editor of Fire Engineering Magazine in January of 2002?