Need some help on the Civil War issue!
- Thread starter bc2208
- Start date
-
- Tags
- u.s. civil war
fedup100
Banned
- Joined
- May 19, 2007
- Messages
- 3,376
get the book "The South Was Right" by The Kennedy brothers. Your professor is either ill informed or a traitor. The civil war was fought over states rights. The traitor Lincoln added the slavery issue as a PC sure fire way to win support for his issues.
Lincoln never freed any of the slaves in the North and because he changed the constitution, he in essence placed all the citizens into slavery. and sent the hordes of IRS agents to eat out their substance.
Lincoln never freed any of the slaves in the North and because he changed the constitution, he in essence placed all the citizens into slavery. and sent the hordes of IRS agents to eat out their substance.
There's plenty of good reading on this topic at America's Caesar. In particular, read Lincoln's Address to Congress in Special Session where he describes his actions as preserving the union. Vallandigham's and Breckinridge's responses are also useful for understanding opposing points of view.
freedom-maniac
Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Messages
- 2,593
Lincoln also censored newspapers critical of his administration.
american.swan
Member
- Joined
- May 22, 2007
- Messages
- 3,989
Books!
Lies My Teacher Told Me!!!!
Lincoln Unmasked!!
Lies My Teacher Told Me!!!!
Lincoln Unmasked!!
AlabamaWildMan
Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2007
- Messages
- 186
Lincoln stated if he could've held the Union together by ending Slavery...he would. If he could keep the Union together WITHOUT ending slavery...he would. He really didn't care one way or the other about slavery.
IF you really want to understand the one behind Lincoln's "Enmacipation" -- look up one "Robert Dale Owen".
The War of Northern Aggression was fought for ONE Reason -- STATES RIGHTS !!
Some of the Southern States wanted to break free from the Union (which was a promise given Before the states signed-on to The Constitution). Lincoln was terrified that once The South became a Soverign Nation, some European Nations might recognize it as just that....Lincoln's pride just couldn't handle, or allow, that possibility.
fedup100
Banned
- Joined
- May 19, 2007
- Messages
- 3,376
Lincoln never freed one slave in the north. The north had slaves too. It is a historical fact, google it. Most of the slaves in the south actually fought for the South and when they were freed, again most stayed where they were.
The thieteenth amendment changed all americans from sovereigns to citizens. Citizens have limited rights.
http://www.kennedytwins.com/
Most Civil War History is untrue. Like most history, it is written by the victor. The story told is that millions of Southern men went to war over an issue that only affected six percent of the population. Such absurdity is readily refuted. The deception must not continue.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1077/is_4_55/ai_59110854
Did Lincoln REALLY Free The Slaves? - Excerpt
Ebony, Feb, 2000 by Lerone Bennett, Jr.
New Book Says Most Famous Act In American History Never Happened
THE presidential campaign of 1860 was over, and the victor was stretching his legs and shaking off the cares of the world in his temporary office in the state capitol in Springfield, Illinois. Surrounded by the perks of power, at peace with the world, the president-elect was regaling old acquaintances with tall tales about his early days as a politician. One of the visitors interrupted this monologne and remarked that it was a shame that "the vexatious slavery matter" would be the first question of public policy the new president would have to deal with in Washington.
The president-elect's eyes twinkled and he said he was reminded of a story. According to eyewitness Henry Villard, President-elect Abraham Lincoln "told the story of the Kentucky Justice of the Peace whose first case was a criminal prosecution for the abuse of slaves. Unable to find any precedent, he exclaimed angrily: `I will be damned if I don't feel almost sorry for being elected when the niggers is the first thing I have to attend to.'"
This story, shocking as it may sound to Lincoln admirers, was in character. For the president-elect had never shown any sincere sympathy for Blacks, and none of his cronies was surprised to hear him suggest that he shared the viewpoint of the reluctant and biased justice of the peace. As for the N-word, everybody knew that old Abe used it all the time, both in public and in private. (Since Lincoln supporters are in a state of constant denial, I have not used elision in reporting his use of the offensive word n--r.)
In one of the supreme ironies of history, the man who told this story was forced by circumstances to attend to what he called "the nigger question." And within five years he was enshrined in American mythology as "the great emancipator" who freed Blacks with a stroke of the pen out of the goodness of his heart.
Since that time, the mythology of "the great emancipator" has become a part of the mental landscape of America. Generations of schoolchildren have memorized its cadences. Poets, politicians, and long-suffering Blacks have wept over its imagery and drama.
No other American story is so enduring.
No other American story is so comforting.
No other American story is so false.
Abraham Lincoln was not "the great emancipator."
The testimony of sixteen thousand books and monographs to the contrary notwithstanding, Lincoln did not emancipate the slaves, greatly or otherwise. As for the Emancipation Proclamation, it was not a real emancipation proclamation at all, and did not liberate African-American slaves. John F. Hume, the Missouri antislavery leader who heard Lincoln speak in Alton and who looked him in the eye in the White House, said the Proclamation "did not ... whatever it may have otherwise accomplished at the time it was issued, liberate a single slave."
Sources favorable to Lincoln were even more emphatic. Lincoln crony Henry Clay Whitney said the Proclamation was a mirage and that Lincoln knew it was a mirage. Secretary of State William Henry Seward, the No. 2 man in the administration, said the Proclamation was an illusion in which "we show our sympathy with the slaves by emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
The same points have been made with abundant documentation by 20th-century scholars like Richard Hofstadter, who said "it did not in fact free any slaves." Some of the biggest names in the Lincoln establishment have said the same thing. Roy P. Basler, the editor of the monumental Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, said the Proclamation was "itself only a promise of freedom...." J. G. Randall, who has been called "the greatest Lincoln scholar of all time," said the Proclamation itself did not free a single slave. Horace White, the Chicago Tribune correspondent who covered Lincoln in Illinois and in Washington, said it is doubtful that the Proclamation "freed anybody anywhere."
There, then, the secret is out! The most famous act in American political history never happened.
Sandburg wrote tens of thousands of words about it.
Lindsay wrote a poem about it.
Copland wrote a musical portrait about it.
King had a dream about it.
But the awkward fact is that Abraham Lincoln didn't do it. To paraphrase what Robert McColley said about the abortive emancipating initiative of Thomas Jefferson, never did man achieve more fame for what he did not do and for what he never intended to do. The best authority, Lincoln himself, told one of his top aides that he knew that the Proclamation in and of itself would not "make a single Negro free beyond our military reach," thereby proving two critical and conclusive points. The first is that Lincoln himself knew that his most famous act would not of itself free a single Negro. The second and most damaging point is that "the great emancipator" did not intend for it to free a single Negro, for he carefully, deliberately, studiously excluded all Negroes within "our military reach."
The thieteenth amendment changed all americans from sovereigns to citizens. Citizens have limited rights.
http://www.kennedytwins.com/
Most Civil War History is untrue. Like most history, it is written by the victor. The story told is that millions of Southern men went to war over an issue that only affected six percent of the population. Such absurdity is readily refuted. The deception must not continue.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1077/is_4_55/ai_59110854
Did Lincoln REALLY Free The Slaves? - Excerpt
Ebony, Feb, 2000 by Lerone Bennett, Jr.
New Book Says Most Famous Act In American History Never Happened
THE presidential campaign of 1860 was over, and the victor was stretching his legs and shaking off the cares of the world in his temporary office in the state capitol in Springfield, Illinois. Surrounded by the perks of power, at peace with the world, the president-elect was regaling old acquaintances with tall tales about his early days as a politician. One of the visitors interrupted this monologne and remarked that it was a shame that "the vexatious slavery matter" would be the first question of public policy the new president would have to deal with in Washington.
The president-elect's eyes twinkled and he said he was reminded of a story. According to eyewitness Henry Villard, President-elect Abraham Lincoln "told the story of the Kentucky Justice of the Peace whose first case was a criminal prosecution for the abuse of slaves. Unable to find any precedent, he exclaimed angrily: `I will be damned if I don't feel almost sorry for being elected when the niggers is the first thing I have to attend to.'"
This story, shocking as it may sound to Lincoln admirers, was in character. For the president-elect had never shown any sincere sympathy for Blacks, and none of his cronies was surprised to hear him suggest that he shared the viewpoint of the reluctant and biased justice of the peace. As for the N-word, everybody knew that old Abe used it all the time, both in public and in private. (Since Lincoln supporters are in a state of constant denial, I have not used elision in reporting his use of the offensive word n--r.)
In one of the supreme ironies of history, the man who told this story was forced by circumstances to attend to what he called "the nigger question." And within five years he was enshrined in American mythology as "the great emancipator" who freed Blacks with a stroke of the pen out of the goodness of his heart.
Since that time, the mythology of "the great emancipator" has become a part of the mental landscape of America. Generations of schoolchildren have memorized its cadences. Poets, politicians, and long-suffering Blacks have wept over its imagery and drama.
No other American story is so enduring.
No other American story is so comforting.
No other American story is so false.
Abraham Lincoln was not "the great emancipator."
The testimony of sixteen thousand books and monographs to the contrary notwithstanding, Lincoln did not emancipate the slaves, greatly or otherwise. As for the Emancipation Proclamation, it was not a real emancipation proclamation at all, and did not liberate African-American slaves. John F. Hume, the Missouri antislavery leader who heard Lincoln speak in Alton and who looked him in the eye in the White House, said the Proclamation "did not ... whatever it may have otherwise accomplished at the time it was issued, liberate a single slave."
Sources favorable to Lincoln were even more emphatic. Lincoln crony Henry Clay Whitney said the Proclamation was a mirage and that Lincoln knew it was a mirage. Secretary of State William Henry Seward, the No. 2 man in the administration, said the Proclamation was an illusion in which "we show our sympathy with the slaves by emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."
The same points have been made with abundant documentation by 20th-century scholars like Richard Hofstadter, who said "it did not in fact free any slaves." Some of the biggest names in the Lincoln establishment have said the same thing. Roy P. Basler, the editor of the monumental Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, said the Proclamation was "itself only a promise of freedom...." J. G. Randall, who has been called "the greatest Lincoln scholar of all time," said the Proclamation itself did not free a single slave. Horace White, the Chicago Tribune correspondent who covered Lincoln in Illinois and in Washington, said it is doubtful that the Proclamation "freed anybody anywhere."
There, then, the secret is out! The most famous act in American political history never happened.
Sandburg wrote tens of thousands of words about it.
Lindsay wrote a poem about it.
Copland wrote a musical portrait about it.
King had a dream about it.
But the awkward fact is that Abraham Lincoln didn't do it. To paraphrase what Robert McColley said about the abortive emancipating initiative of Thomas Jefferson, never did man achieve more fame for what he did not do and for what he never intended to do. The best authority, Lincoln himself, told one of his top aides that he knew that the Proclamation in and of itself would not "make a single Negro free beyond our military reach," thereby proving two critical and conclusive points. The first is that Lincoln himself knew that his most famous act would not of itself free a single Negro. The second and most damaging point is that "the great emancipator" did not intend for it to free a single Negro, for he carefully, deliberately, studiously excluded all Negroes within "our military reach."
Dieseler
Member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,199
Check out this guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUKpbNgnuEM
Dr. Paul approves of his book obviously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUKpbNgnuEM
Dr. Paul approves of his book obviously.
DirtMcGirt
Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2007
- Messages
- 2,721
Northern States were passing laws to Free Slaves before the Civil War started...
Mach
Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2008
- Messages
- 4,137
Lincolnism
Here's a couple of things to see.......... and hear.......
http://www.mises.org/media.aspx?action=showname&ID=425
http://www.mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=207&sortorder=issue
Here's a couple of things to see.......... and hear.......
http://www.mises.org/media.aspx?action=showname&ID=425
http://www.mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=207&sortorder=issue
american.swan
Member
- Joined
- May 22, 2007
- Messages
- 3,989
I have read two books with different views.
The first book I read was The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History endorsed by Ron Paul. This book was very clear that the war was over states rights and slavery had little to nothing do with it.
I just finished Lies My Teacher Told Me and this book is clear using historical record also that slavery was the reason for the war.
Lincoln quote, often misquoted out of context and often only partial
Lincoln...
(this is what is on many websites and in many high school history books. But Lincoln continues his speech by saying)
Read Lincoln's Second Inaugural address which Lincoln declares that the pain the North and South experience in the War was to perhaps destroy all the wealth gained by slavery.
Soldiers going to war in 1862 sang the following song as they marched....written in the summer of 1862.
Strange that Northern troops would sing about ending slavery, when they knew full well they were just trying to save the Union, cause that's what the war was over.
Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy said,
The Confederacy denied states rights to their own states.
In February 1864, President Davis despaired:
Armed guerrilla actions by Union supporters plagued the Southern Army throughout the war. The South seriously lost the war because it's own population was divided.
Even the battle at the Alamo was over freedom to own slaves. The moment the Republic of Texas was set up, their first action was to order all free blacks out of Texas.
Quote from Lies My Teacher Told Me
Following are the lyrics...why not sing the song now...you know the tune. Many all white student groups in the author's university refuse to sing the rude lyrics, but in 1864 this was a political 'pop' song.
You really need to read Lies My Teacher Told Me.
The first book I read was The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History endorsed by Ron Paul. This book was very clear that the war was over states rights and slavery had little to nothing do with it.
I just finished Lies My Teacher Told Me and this book is clear using historical record also that slavery was the reason for the war.
Lincoln quote, often misquoted out of context and often only partial
Lincoln...
(this is what is on many websites and in many high school history books. But Lincoln continues his speech by saying)
Read Lincoln's Second Inaugural address which Lincoln declares that the pain the North and South experience in the War was to perhaps destroy all the wealth gained by slavery.
Soldiers going to war in 1862 sang the following song as they marched....written in the summer of 1862.
Strange that Northern troops would sing about ending slavery, when they knew full well they were just trying to save the Union, cause that's what the war was over.
Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy said,
The Confederacy denied states rights to their own states.
In February 1864, President Davis despaired:
Confederate troops had to be stationed in eastern Tennessee to keep it from seceding to the Union. There are more examples of this.
Armed guerrilla actions by Union supporters plagued the Southern Army throughout the war. The South seriously lost the war because it's own population was divided.
Even the battle at the Alamo was over freedom to own slaves. The moment the Republic of Texas was set up, their first action was to order all free blacks out of Texas.
Quote from Lies My Teacher Told Me
Following are the lyrics...why not sing the song now...you know the tune. Many all white student groups in the author's university refuse to sing the rude lyrics, but in 1864 this was a political 'pop' song.
You really need to read Lies My Teacher Told Me.
If you want something to appreciate about Lincoln with your teacher....Lincoln was a poor man who taught himself to read and educated himself (no school, thank you) and became President of this country. He was intelligent and educated enough to write the Emancipation Proclamation. Can any avg public high school student hold a candle to that? Ask your teacher about it. 
As for what he did with his presidency, not so great imo. He could have chosen diplomacy over war or he could have followed the Articles of Confederation which did allow states to secede from the Union. Being part of the union was voluntary, he made it "mandatory".
As for what he did with his presidency, not so great imo. He could have chosen diplomacy over war or he could have followed the Articles of Confederation which did allow states to secede from the Union. Being part of the union was voluntary, he made it "mandatory".
WilliamC
Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
- Messages
- 6,682
Dieseler
Member
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2007
- Messages
- 5,199
And heres the link to a speech by him, I should have put his name in my previous post.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUKpbNgnuEM
CJLauderdale4
Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,363
What he means is that the President cannot create law, freeing slaves, by simply delivering some proclamation. This had to be done by the Congress amending the Constitution with the 13th Amendment.
Moreover, the 14th Amendment, part of the post-war amendments, is what declared ALL people living in the States, U.S. Citizens. As U.S. Citizens, they all "deserve" equal protection under the law, which now expands FEDERAL jurisdiction to ALL people.
Prior to this, the States had jurisdiction. Today, they still do, however, a U.S. Citizen can take their appeals to Federal courts. Prior to the Civil War and the 14th Amendment, Federal courts would not entertain cases within State's jurisdiction.
So not only do we get "equal protection", we get equal shafting by the IRS, BATF, FBI, etc....
Gee...thanks Abe.
Also lookup the vote on the post-war amendments, and mention to your professor that the Southern States were re-admitted to the Union after the war, yet NOT ALL STATES' representatives (from the South) were present when the post-war amendments were voted on in Congress. So how could there be a majority in Congress to approve the amendment if there wasn't a quorum of Reps and Senators??
Don't forget to look up info on how Lincoln exiled his Presidential opponent from the South in 1864 (dictatorship??).
Ok, Vallendingham was exiled in 1863, and then in definace, returned to Ohio to run against Lincoln. Supposedly, Lincoln ignored him and he didn't get the nomination to run against Lincoln as a Democrat...
http://lanepl.org/Blount/JBCOLS/documents/3FBC152EDB45EA17ABE023A52FDEB2AE781A9B99.html
Last edited:
James Madison
Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2008
- Messages
- 5,121
I guess I was one of the lucky ones. My high school government teacher actually told us that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery-not any of that politically correct BS that you usually get.
For your question, talk about how Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus illegally and when the courts tried to intervene he just ignored them. You could also bring up Lincoln exiling Rep. Clement Vellandingham from the country when he spoke out against him. I would just tell him the victors of history write the history books. If the North wouldn't have one, we'd have an entirely different opinion of Lincoln just as if Germany had won WWII the text books would have praised Hitler as "the savior of humanity". It all depends what side you're on.
For your question, talk about how Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus illegally and when the courts tried to intervene he just ignored them. You could also bring up Lincoln exiling Rep. Clement Vellandingham from the country when he spoke out against him. I would just tell him the victors of history write the history books. If the North wouldn't have one, we'd have an entirely different opinion of Lincoln just as if Germany had won WWII the text books would have praised Hitler as "the savior of humanity". It all depends what side you're on.
This was on the wtprn site today
http://mp3.wtprn.com/Badnarik08.html
Sometimes this Stang guy goes overboard and says some outlandish things.
http://mp3.wtprn.com/Badnarik08.html
Sometimes this Stang guy goes overboard and says some outlandish things.
american.swan
Member
- Joined
- May 22, 2007
- Messages
- 3,989
Maybe you should read Lies My Teacher Told Me
Abraham Lincoln was a freak of nature. They want to deify this man. Despicable.
Source: http://members.aol.com/RVSNorton/Lincoln.html
American school children have always been taught (or indoctrinated into believing) that Lincoln was a great man. He was a murderer and a psychopath.
Read the parable of the wheat and the tares. Lincoln was one of the tares (in my opinion)
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=13&version=50
Matthew 13:24-43; New King James Version
Source: http://members.aol.com/RVSNorton/Lincoln.html
American school children have always been taught (or indoctrinated into believing) that Lincoln was a great man. He was a murderer and a psychopath.
Read the parable of the wheat and the tares. Lincoln was one of the tares (in my opinion)
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=13&version=50
Matthew 13:24-43; New King James Version
Similar threads
