Some other inaccuracies... or perhaps misconseptions is a better word... first, you assume that taking part in a war for independance is a violation of ones obligation... that is often a matter of interpretation.  To a Mason like George Washington, he was not being disloyal to England... rather he was upholding his obligation by being loyal to "the country in which he lived"... ie Virginia (and, later, America).  Second, You seem to assume that Masons were united in their opinions.  They were not.  In each of the conflicts you mention there were Masons on both sides... all of whom felt that they were living up to their obligations.  (Freemasonry was just as divided as the rest of society). Yes, today we celebrate those "famous Masonic Leaders", Washington, Franklin and Handcock... that's because they won.  If the Americans had lost the war for independance you would probably read all about those "famous Masonic Leaders": Bannister Tarlton, Phillip Skeen, and General Cornwallis.  As Lexicon says... you can not make the assumption that Freemasonry is involved in independance movements... only individual Freemasons.  Freemasonry is often "involved" on both sides.