[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Pious Perverts See other Pious Perverts Articles Title: NO SUCH THING AS CONSPIRACY? here's "honest shecky" LINCOLN! If you read Lincoln's first inaugural address with any care at all, you'll see that it was simply a declaration of war against the South. It was also filled with lies and specious reasoning. In 1861, the official government-charter for the U.S. was the U.S. Constitution. In writing it, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 (some of the most-canny politicians in the country) had pointedly omitted from it the "perpetual union" clause which had been a main feature of the unworkable Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union--the U.S.-government charter which had preceded the Constitution. Under the Articles, no state could secede lawfully unless all states seceded simultaneously. But the Constitution--which Lincoln had just taken an oath to uphold--did not contain that clause (or any other like it); so any state could secede lawfully at any time. And the Southern states did secede lawfully. Honest Abe flat-out lied when he said that was not so in his inaugural address; and he subsequently used his blatant lie to slaughter 623,000 Americans and Confederates--primarily in order to perpetuate himself in political office. Lincoln had said he would go to war to "preserve the Union." But in order to start the war, he would somehow have to maneuver the South into firing the first shots, because Congress did not want war and would not declare war of its own volition. The most-likely hot-spot in which Lincoln could start his war was Charleston Harbor, where shots had already been fired in anger under the Buchanan administration. But the newly-elected governor of South Carolina, Francis Pickens, saw the danger--that Lincoln might, as an excuse, send a force of U.S. Navy warships to Charleston Harbor supposedly to bring food to Maj Anderson's Union force holed up in Fort Sumter. So Gov Pickens opened negotiations with Maj Anderson, and concluded a deal permitting Anderson to send boats safely to the market in Charleston once a week, where Anderson's men would be allowed to buy whatever victuals they wished. (This arrangement remained in effect until a day or so before the U.S. Navy warships arrived at Charleston). Maj Anderson wrote privately to friends, saying that he hoped Lincoln would not use Fort Sumter as the excuse to start a war, by sending the U.S. Navy to resupply it. Before his inauguration, Lincoln sent a secret message to Gen Winfield Scott, the U.S. general-in-chief, asking him to make preparations to relieve the Union forts in the South soon after Lincoln took office. Lincoln knew all along what he was going to do. President Jefferson Davis sent peace commissioners to Washington to negotiate a treaty with the Lincoln administration. Lincoln refused to meet with them; and he refused to permit Secretary of State Seward to meet with them. After Lincoln assumed the presidency, his principal generals recommended the immediate evacuation of Maj Anderson's men from Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor--which was now located on foreign soil. To resupply it by force at this point would be a deliberate act-of-war against the C.S.A. It turned out that Lincoln's postmaster general, Montgomery Blair, had a brother-in law, Gustavus V. Fox, who was a retired Navy-captain and wanted to get back into action. Fox had come up with a plan for resupplying Fort Sumter which would force the Confederates to fire the first shots--under circumstances which would make them take the blame for the war. Lincoln sent Fox down to Fort Sumter to talk with Maj Anderson about the plan; but Anderson wanted no part of it. Lincoln had Fox pitch the plan to his Cabinet twice. The first time, the majority said that Fox's plan would start a war and were unenthusiastic about it. But the second time, the Cabinet members got Lincoln's pointed message, and capitulated. Meanwhile, Congress got wind of the plan. Horrified, they called Gen Scott and others to testify about it; Scott and the other witnesses said they wanted no part of the move against the Confederacy in Charleston; and nor did Congress. Congress demanded from Lincoln--as was Congress's right--Fox's report on Maj Anderson's reaction to the plan. Lincoln flatly and unconstitutionally refused to hand it over to them. Lincoln sent to Secretary Cameron (for transmittal to Secretary Welles) orders in his own handwriting (!) to make the warships Pocahantas and Pawnee and the armed-cutter Harriet Lane ready for sailing, along with the passenger ship Baltic--which would be used as a troop ship, and two ocean-going tugboats to aid the ships in traversing the tricky shallow harbor-entrance at Charleston. This naval force was to transport 500 extra Union-soldiers to reinforce Maj Anderson's approximately-86-man force at Fort Sumter--along with huge quantities of munitions, food, and other supplies. The Confederacy would, of course, resist this invasion--in the process firing upon the U.S. flag. The unarmed tugs would, of necessity, enter the harbor first, whereupon they would likely be fired upon by the C.S.A., giving Lincoln the best-possible propaganda to feed to the Northern newspapers, which would then rally the North to his "cause." Lincoln sent orders for the Union naval-force to time its sailing so as to enter Charleston Harbor on 11 or 12 April. Next, Lincoln sent a courier to deliver an ultimatum to Gov Pickens on 8 April, saying that Lincoln intended to resupply Fort Sumter peaceably or by force. There was no mistaking the intent of that message. Lincoln had set the perfect trap. He had given President Davis just enough time to amass his forces and fire upon the U.S. Navy. But if Davis acquiesced instead, Lincoln need merely begin sending expeditionary forces to recapture all of the former Union-forts in the South now occupied by Confederate forces; sooner or later Davis would have to fight; and the more forts he allowed Lincoln to recapture in the interim, the weaker would be the military position of the C.S.A. As a practical matter, Davis was left with no choice. Accordingly, the C.S.A., when informed that the U.S. Navy was en route, demanded that Maj Anderson surrender the fort forthwith. Anderson refused; Beauregard's artillery bombarded Fort Sumter into junk (miraculously without loss of life during the bombardment); and Anderson then surrendered with honor intact. The U.S. Navy arrived during the bombardment--but because elements of the force had been delayed for various reasons, did not join in the fight. The Navy was allowed to transport Anderson's men back to the U.S. Thereafter Lincoln wrote to Fox, pronouncing the mission a great success. Lincoln ended his letter by saying, "You and I both anticipated that the cause of the country would be advanced by making the attempt to provision Fort Sumter, even if it should fail; and it is no small consolation now to feel that our anticipation is justified by the result." Folks, that ought to be plain enough for anybody to understand. Poster Comment: Now, if we're to accept the childish assertion that "conspiracies don't exist" we must decide at which point after "honest shecky" Lincoln's "suicide" the govt metamorphosed into an unflaggingly honest and ethical entity and so many Americans became unnaturally evil, trying to smear govt with false accusations of involvement in many horrible acts against the rights of people. Either way Mary Surratt, the first woman executed by NewFedGov Bank, Inc. was wrongfully hanged by a military tribunal that conspired to wrench jurisdiction over her and other civilians away during peace time, constitutionally guaranteed rights notwithstanding. And if real conspiracies don't exist (although the tribunal believed they did, at least in the death of the president) she could not have planned with others the assassinations of Lincoln, Johnson, and Seward. In my opinion: The "pious perverts" here at 4 have made such ridiculous assertions that the possibility of the members simply being politically naive "does not exist". When honest but uninformed people are confronted with the truth they either stop being uninformed or they stop being honest. I personally believe that those to whom I'm alluding were neither honest or uninformed before they were confronted with truths that directly refute their Pollyanna propaganda about "The Honest US Government-Clean Hands And Clean Drawers Just Like Mom Always Insisted On For Those Sudden Unexpected Hospital Visits!". (FROM THE MR. ROGERS BOOK ON ETHICAL GOVERNMENT IN PRACTICE) The fact that congress has compelling proof of conspiracies within and without the govt is evidenced by the laws they passed, e.g. those to bind the CIA from murdering civilians and foreign heads of state. Any who believe or, who expect us to believe that "conspiracies don't exist" when congress knows damned well that they do cannot explain how congress could pass criminal statutes and penalties proscribing conspiracies, unless congress is engaging in an ongoing conspiracy to punish acts that simply do not take place, just as the aforementioned military tribunal did. Either way, the proof of existence of conspiracies, specifically govt conspiracies is manifest and indisputable. And, even the most absurd posts we've seen here inadvertently support the existence of conspiracies by govt. Hollywood regularly treats the viewing public to films about govt conspiracies, such as Executive Action, Three Days of the Condor, Enemy Of The State and The Hunt For Red October. If we're expected to believe that the films (in which known details are amazingly accurate) simply manufacture the criminal misdeeds of govt then it would seem unlikely that that the US Armed Forces would ever cooperate in the making of such films (no more submarines, flattops or specialized weapons on loan) and no honorable vet would ever lend his name to the credits as "technical adviser" any more than they'd assist with a film by The Communist Party USA. And, if Hollywood was so vile as to criminally misrepresent the govt in virtually every such film would Hollywood have the special permits required to possess working machine guns, rocket launchers and state of the art weapons and electronics that only the military may legally possess? If commies or militant Muslims decide to start a film company to undermine the US Govt with vicious lies (and no Tom Clancy-type authors upon whom to rely) would they be issued such permits? Former Navy SEALs "Dick" Marcinko and Jesse Ventura would bust guts "laffing" at our silly little girl dilettantes' assertions that all conspiracies should be dismissed until the entire govt confesses and demands to be executed, and then only after their supporters here at 4 have had a chance to float a trial balloon about "massive psychosis" afflicting every self confessed conspirator. HAH! "I'd let the govt wrongfully prosecute my Mommy and send her to Gitmo before admitting that I'm wrong!"_Turdle Limpet. _____________________________________________ "ARE THOSE DIAMONDS IN YOUR POCKET OR ARE YOU HAPPY TO SEE ME?" Rebbe HOUNDDAWG Q. Schwartz, DIAMONDS UNLIMITED, LLC Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.
#9. To: HOUNDDAWG (#0)
The Synagogue of Satan 1821-1875 "...1861 One month after the inauguration of President Abraham Lincoln (16th President of the United States from 1860 till his assassination in 1865), the American Civil War gets underway at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, after South Carolina leaves the Union. Slavery has always been cited as the cause of the war but this was simply not the case, as President Lincoln himself stated, “I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the state where it now exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so...My paramount objective is to save the Union and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it.” The real reason for the war is that the Southern States were in a dire economic situation due to the actions of the Northern States. Northern industrialists had used trade tariffs to prevent the Southern States from buying cheaper European goods. Europe subsequently retaliated by stopping cotton imports from the South. Thus the South had been forced to pay more for goods whilst having their income slashed. This is when the money changers saw the opportunity to divide and conquer America by plunging it into Civil War. This is confirmed by Otto Von Bismarck when he was Chancellor of Germany (1871 - 1890), who stated the following in 1876, “The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe, these bankers were afraid that the United States if they remained as one block and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds’ predominated. They foresaw the tremendous booty if they could substitute two feeble democracies, indebted to the financiers, to the vigorous Republic, confident and self-providing. Therefore they started their emissaries in order to exploit the question of slavery and thus dig an abyss between the two parts of the Republic.”...." http://www.iamthewitness.com/boo...ue.of.Satan/1821-1875.htm Thomas J. DiLorenzo: The Truth About the 14th Amendment "...On January 22, 1861, the New York Times announced that slavery would indeed be a "very tolerable system" if only slaves were allowed to legally marry, be taught to read, and to invest their savings. In short, the cartoonish notion that the Republican party was so incensed over racial discrimination in the South after the war that, in a fit of moral outrage, it trashed all constitutional precepts to dictatorially adopt the Fourteenth Amendment, should not be taken seriously. As Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America, it was obvious to all that racial prejudice was stronger in the North than it was in the South. "The prejudice of race," wrote Tocqueville, "appears to be stronger in the states that have abolished slavery than in those where it still exists." If the Republican party was so sensitive about racial discrimination in the post-war era it would not have sent General Sherman out west just three months after the war ended to commence a campaign of genocide against the Plains Indians. The very same army that had recently conquered and occupied the Southern states — led by Generals Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan — mass murdered Indian men, women, and children during the winters, when families would be together, with massive Gatling gun and artillery fire. In a letter to his son a year before he died (1889), Sherman expressed his regret that his armies did not murder every last Indian in North America. The Fourteenth Amendment has had precisely the effect that its nineteenth-century Republican party supporters intended it to have: it has greatly centralized power in Washington, D.C., and has subjected Americans to the kind of judicial tyranny that Thomas Jefferson warned about when he described federal judges as those who would be "constantly working underground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric." It's time for all Americans to reexamine the official history of the "Civil War" and its aftermath as taught by paid government propagandists in the "public" schools for the past 135 years." www.constitution.org/14ll/truth_14th.htm 14th Amendment Truth: YOU ARE REALLY A SLAVE - YouTube conspiracy? what conspiracy??
#16. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt, christine (#9)
Outstanding contribution! Thank you from the bottom of my shrunken black Grinch heart!
Thanks for posting this, the Thomas J. DiLorenzo archives at Lew Rockwell are priceless info on the real "Honest Abe" Lincoln.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||