Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Terrible Truth About Abraham Lincoln and the Confederate War
Snap Out of it, America! ^ | 1/20/14 | Michael Hutcheson

Posted on 01/20/2014 1:42:16 PM PST by mhutcheson

Abraham Lincoln President Lincoln has been all but deified in America, with a god-like giant statue at a Parthenon-like memorial in Washington. Generations of school children have been indoctrinated with the story that “Honest Abe” Lincoln is a national hero who saved the Union and fought a noble war to end slavery, and that the “evil” Southern states seceded from the Union to protect slavery. This is the Yankee myth of history, written and promulgated by Northerners, and it is a complete falsity. It was produced and entrenched in the culture in large part to gloss over the terrible war crimes committed by Union soldiers in the War Between the States, as well as Lincoln’s violations of the law, his shredding of the Constitution, and other reprehensible acts. It has been very effective in keeping the average American ignorant of the real causes of the war, and the real nature, character and record of Lincoln. Let us look at some unpleasant facts.

In his first inaugural address, Lincoln stated clearly that (1) he had no legal authority to interfere with slavery where it existed, (2) that he had no inclination or intention to do so even if he had the legal authority, (3) that he would enforce the Fugitive Slave Act, returning runaway slaves escaping to the North to their masters in the South, and (4) that he fully supported the Thirteenth Amendment then being debated in Congress which would protect slavery in perpetuity and was irrevocable. He later famously stated, “Do not paint me with the Abolitionist brush.”

Although there was some opposition to slavery in the country, the government was willing to concede everything the South wanted regarding slavery to keep it in the Union. Given all these facts, the idea that the South seceded to protect slavery is as absurd as the idea that Lincoln fought the war to end slavery. Lincoln himself said in a famous letter after the war began that his sole purpose was to save the Union, and not to either save or end slavery; that if he could save the Union without freeing a single slave, he would. Nothing could be clearer.

For decades before the war, the South, through harsh tariffs, had been supplying about 85% of the country’s revenue, nearly all of which was being spent in the North to boost its economy, build manufacturing, infrastructure, railroads, canals, etc. With the passage of the 47% Morrill Tariff the final nail was in the coffin. The South did not secede to protect slavery, although certainly they wished to protect it; they seceded over a dispute about unfair taxation, an oppressive Federal government, and the right to separate from that oppression and be governed “by consent”, exactly the same issues over which the Founding Fathers fought the Revolutionary War. When a member of Lincoln’s cabinet suggested he let the South go in peace, Lincoln famously replied, “Let the South go? Where, then, would we get our revenue!” He then launched a brutal, empirical war to keep the free and sovereign states, by force of arms, in the Union they had created and voluntarily joined, and then voluntarily left. This began his reign of terror.

Lincoln was the greatest tyrant and despot in American history. In the first four months of his presidency, he created a complete military dictatorship, destroyed the Constitution, ended forever the constitutional republic which the Founding Fathers instituted, committed horrendous crimes against civilian citizens, and formed the tyrannical, overbearing and oppressive Federal government which the American people suffer under to this day. In his first four months, he

  1. Failed to call Congress into session after the South fired upon Fort Sumter, in direct violation of the Constitution.
  2. Called up an army of 75,000 men, bypassing the Congressional authority in direct violation of the Constitution.
  3. Unilaterally suspended the writ of habeas corpus, a function of Congress, violating the Constitution. This gave him the power, as he saw it, to arrest civilians without charge and imprison them indefinitely without trial---which he did.
  4. Ignored a Supreme Court order to restore the right of habeas corpus, thus violating the Constitution again and ignoring the Separation of Powers which the Founders put in place exactly for the purpose of preventing one man’s using tyrannical powers in the executive.
  5. When the Chief Justice forwarded a copy of the Supreme Court’s decision to Lincoln, he wrote out an order for the arrest of the Chief Justice and gave it to a U.S. Marshall for expedition, in violation of the Constitution.
  6. Unilaterally ordered a naval blockade of southern ports, an act of war, and a responsibility of Congress, in violation of the Constitution.
  7. Commandeered and closed over 300 newspapers in the North, because of editorials against his war policy and his illegal military invasion of the South. This clearly violated the First Amendment freedom of speech and press clauses.
  8. Sent in Army forces to destroy the printing presses and other machinery at those newspapers, in violation of the Constitution.
  9. Arrested the publishers, editors and owners of those newspapers, and imprisoned them without charge and without trial for the remainder of the war, all in direct violation of both the Constitution and the Supreme Court order aforementioned.
  10. Arrested and imprisoned, without charge or trial, another 15,000-20,000 U.S. citizens who dared to speak out against the war, his policies, or were suspected of anti-war feelings. (Relative to the population at the time, this would be equivalent to President G.W. Bush arresting and imprisoning roughly 150,000-200,000 Americans without trial for “disagreeing” with the Iraq war; can you imagine?)
  11. Sent the Army to arrest the entire legislature of Maryland to keep them from meeting legally, because they were debating a bill of secession; they were all imprisoned without charge or trial, in direct violation of the Constitution.
  12. Unilaterally created the state of West Virginia in direct violation of the Constitution.
  13. Sent 350,000 Northern men to their deaths to kill 350,000 Southern men in order to force the free and sovereign states of the South to remain in the Union they, the people, legally voted to peacefully withdraw from, all in order to continue the South’s revenue flow into the North.
These are just a few of the most egregious things Lincoln did during his despotic presidency. He set himself up as a tyrannical dictator with powers never before utilized or even imagined by any previous administration. During this four years of terrible war he was one of the greatest despots the world has ever known, his tyranny focused against his own countrymen, both North and South. He was called a despot and tyrant by many newspapers and citizens both North and South, until he had imprisoned nearly all those who dared to simply speak out against his unconstitutional usurpations of power. Those who disagreed with him were branded as “traitors”, just as were the brave and honorable men in the states which had legally seceded from the Union over just such issues as these criminal abuses of power by the Federal government.

Four months after Fort Sumter, when Lincoln finally called Congress back into session, no one dared oppose anything he wanted or speak out against him for fear of imprisonment, so completely had he entrenched his unilateral power and silenced his other many critics. The Union army, under Generals Grant, Sherman, Sheridan and President Lincoln, committed active genocide against Southern civilians---this is difficult for some to believe, but it is explicit in their writings and dispatches at the time and indisputable in their actions. Tens of thousands of Southern men, women and children---civilians---white and black, slave and free alike---were shot, hanged, raped, imprisoned without trial, their homes, lands and possessions stolen, pillaged and burned, in one of the most horrific and brutal genocides ever inflicted upon a people anywhere; but the Yankee myth of history is silent in these well-documented matters. For an excellent expose of these war crimes and their terrible extent, see War Crimes Against Southern Civilians by Walter Brian Cisco (Pelican Publishing Co. 2007, ISBN 9871589804661).

Only after the Union had suffered two years of crushing defeats in battle did Lincoln resolve to “emancipate” the slaves, and only as a war measure, a military tactic, not for moral or humanitarian purposes. He admitted this, remarking, “We must change tactics or lose the game.” He was hoping, as his original draft of the document shows, that a slave uprising would occur, making it harder for Southerners to continue the war. His only interest in freeing the slaves was in forcing the South to remain in the Union. His Emancipation Proclamation was denounced by Northerners, Southerners and Europeans alike for its absurdity and hypocrisy; for, it only “freed” the slaves in the seceded states---where he could not reach them---and kept slavery intact in the North and the border states---where he could have freed them at once.

The Gettysburg Address, the most famous speech in American history, is an absurd piece of war rhetoric and a poetry of lies. We were not “engaged in a great Civil War, to see whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, can long endure.” The South was engaged in a War of Independence from a tyrannical North, and after having legally seceded, wished only “to be let alone.” The North was engaged in a war of empire, to keep the South involuntarily under its yoke. Government “of the people, by the people and for the people” would not have “perished from the earth” had the North lost the war; on the contrary, it perished in the United States when the North won the war; for, freely representative government, by consent of the governed, is exactly what the South was fighting for and exactly what Lincoln’s military victory destroyed.

The checks and balances of powers, the separation of powers, the constitutional constraints so carefully and deliberately put into place by the Founding Fathers, had all been destroyed in Lincoln’s first months. The Republic which the Founders gave us had been completely destroyed and a new nation-state was set up; one in which the free and sovereign States would afterward be only vassals and tributaries, slaves to an all-powerful, oppressive Federal government. This new nation-state is completely different in both nature and consequence to the original American Republic. One only has to look around today to see the end results and legacy of Lincoln’s war, his destruction of freedom, and his institution of despotic, centralized governmental power and tyranny.

In retrospect, it is a tragedy that John Wilkes Booth did not act four years earlier. Slavery would have ended naturally, as it has everywhere else (except in African and Arab states); the American Republic, liberty, and 700,000 lives would have been saved, and untold thousands of those young men would have lived to contribute their ingenuity, inventions, creativity and talents to the political, economic, literary, scientific and social legacy of our people. And the greatest despotic tyrant in American history would never have gained the foothold of power or been able to establish the oppressive and omnipotent Federal government we all suffer under today.


TOPICS: Government; History; Military/Veterans; Politics
KEYWORDS: civilwar; confederacy; constitution; dixie; federalgovernment; kkk; kukluxklan; lincoln; ntsa; presidents; slavery; tyrant; war; warcriminal; whitesupremacists; worstpresident
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 441-444 next last
To: rockrr

“The fort belonged to the federal government. It didn’t matter where it was located.”

Of course, you have no problem at all then with the US maintaining control of Guantanamo; and you hold the view that Cuba would have no right at all to fire on Guantanamo, or try to interfere with its operation. The ONLY reason Cuba does not attack Guantanamo is because we would kick Cuba’s ass. South Carolina wasn’t so intimidated by Lincoln.


201 posted on 01/20/2014 5:53:10 PM PST by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: mhutcheson

If the CSA hadn’t fired on Ft Sumter would Lincoln have been able to deploy troops to punish them?

I think if the CSA had merely ignored the presence of this fort and the authority of Lincoln’s government the dispute might’ve been settled without a war.

It was only the overt act of attacking Ft Sumter that allowed Lincoln to cast the CSA as the aggressors. Without this I doubt that the citizens of the north would’ve been willing to go to war.


202 posted on 01/20/2014 5:53:14 PM PST by John Semmens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Inyo-Mono

I’m sorry; it’s facts like these which the liberal posters here just refuse to see.


203 posted on 01/20/2014 5:55:41 PM PST by mhutcheson (To all who have replied to "Confession")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: ought-six

Oh, my mistake. I thought you said: “Good God, man; if you can’t get the basic term correct please cease making any comment relative thereto.”


204 posted on 01/20/2014 5:55:41 PM PST by anton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: John Semmens

Your observation is one that has tortured the American soul for 150 years. “What if’s” can be as tragic — or even more tragic — than the original question.


205 posted on 01/20/2014 5:59:28 PM PST by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: ought-six
The ONLY reason Cuba does not attack Guantanamo is because we would kick Cuba’s ass.

If Cuba did attack the U.S. base at Gitmo whose side would you take?

206 posted on 01/20/2014 6:00:06 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: anton

Right! That’s exactly what I said! If you can’t properly use the term or terms you think you have to use to make your point, STOP before you make a hash of your point and an ass of yourself.


207 posted on 01/20/2014 6:01:51 PM PST by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: rockrr

Lincoln wasn’t honorable, he was a ruthless tyrant who wrongly imprisoned people for daring to publicly express opposition to the war. If Obama did the things that Lincoln did, you would be yelling for his head.


208 posted on 01/20/2014 6:03:45 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The War on Drugs has been used as an excuse to steal your rights. Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: ought-six
South Carolina wasn’t so intimidated by Lincoln.

Perhaps they should have been.

209 posted on 01/20/2014 6:04:09 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
If it was going to be a goner in the South why did the South hold on to segregation? The DixieCrats came up with the KKK to first intimidate Catholics and Jews then branched out to murder blacks. Then along came that separate but equal nonsense. All under Democrats. If the CW or as I call it the war of secession didn't happen, slavery would have continued much longer in the South.

The CW has been over for 150 years and people are still fighting it; on both sides they push their arguments. The media yells that Bengazi is old news. More knowledgeable historians have pummled the CW for years. I'm out of it.

210 posted on 01/20/2014 6:05:23 PM PST by SkyDancer (Imagine a world without politicians, lawyers and federal judges.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan
Your opening comment re. slavery tells me you won't read this but I'm posting it anyway.

Reparations for slavery?

When a black woman is one of the richest people in America?

When a black man was Secretary of State??

When a black woman was Secretary of State?

When black men have sat -- and do sit -- on the Supreme Court??

When a black would-be despot sits in the White House?????

When countless black men have risen to the top of the ranks of the richest in professional sports and show business?? Men like Hank Aaron. Men like Bill Cosby who... (Never mind. As we all know, Bill's either an Uncle Tom or Oreo Cookie, depending on which black race pimp you listen to.)

And, how about Liberation Theology?

Liberation from WHAT? The chance to achieve and succeed??

Give me a break!!

Let me make it clear right up front: I am NOT a racist. I supported Herman Cain in his run for the Senate and supported him in his run for the WH. And if Allen West goes for it, he, too, has my support.

I also consider Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams two of the finest economists and minds extant today. In case you don’t know them, both are black.

Sowell, Williams and Cain – among others -- have spoken out against those fellow blacks who castigate and vilify America for a slavery now long in our past. And ALL thinking men and women oppose the periodic calls for reparations. (When he ran, I supported Alan Keyes. I even spoke in his stead on the RTKABA at a Capitol rally and was asked to fill in for him on his radio show at the time. Sadly, while I still consider Alan a good man, I have had to rethink my support since he came out FOR reparations.)

The fact is that the modern descendants of slaves brought here in chains in admittedly miserable, soul-gutting conditions now calling for reparations need to remember something:

They should not only be glad to be in America, they should be glad to be ANYWHERE!

Had their ancestors NOT been brought OUT of Africa – many by Muslim slave raiders --the blood of those ancestors would have run into the earth over there several centuries ago, victims of the OTHER black tribes that captured them in one of the interminable tribal conflicts STILL ravaging that sad continent and these modern day would-be "plaintiffs" would not even exist.

And I would remind you that slavery is STILL practiced in parts of Africa (mainly by – American BLACK muslims LISTEN UP!! -- MUSLIMS) and Asia today. How ironic that disgruntled American blacks are embracing a system that participated mightily in their initial bondage – and would, if Islam takes root here, probably put any who cling to their Christianity back INTO BONDAGE – or to the sword. In fact, as the majority of muslims consider black folks as “sub-human”, many of you black muzzies will get the axe.

95% of the African slaves who were transported across the Atlantic went to South and Central America, mainly to Portuguese, Spanish and French possessions, and that less than 5% of the slaves who crossed the Atlantic went to the United States, it was remarkable that the vast majority of academic research, films, books and articles concerning the slave trade concentrated only on the American involvement, as though slavery was a uniquely American aberration.

And should the great-great-great grandchildren of SLAVE OWNING BLACKS also be subject to PAYING these reparations? If so, how do we find THEM?

And I have traced MY family back to the SLAVS. Although the term looks to be related to “slave,” depending on your source, it either means “glory” or “worshipper.” But my family research indicates that many of my of my ancestors LIVED lives of virtual slavery to some despot or other. Do I qualify for reparations? From whom?? And it begs a question: Are most of us now living here headed into a modern form off that servitude? But that’s a topic for another discussion.

The official US Census of 1830 lists 3,775 free blacks who owned 12,740 black slaves. Furthermore, the story outlines the history of slavery here, and the first slave owner, the Father of American slavery, was Mr Anthony Johnson, of Northampton, Virginia. His slave was John Casor, the first slave for life. Both were black Africans. The story is very readable, and outlines cases of free black women owning their husbands, free black parents selling their children into slavery to white owners, and absentee free black slave owners, who leased their slaves to plantation owners. -"Selling Poor Steven", American Heritage Magazine, Feb/Mar 1993 (Vol. 441) p 90

Of course, a full telling of Black History would not be complete without a recitation of the origin of slavery in the Virginia colony: Virginia, Guide to The Old Dominion, WPA Writers' Program, Oxford University Press, NY, 1940, p. 378

A few more salient points on the subject:

Until the US declared independence, the Colonies were REQUIRED by the King of England to embrace slavery.

The Northwest Ordinance (1789) prohibited slavery in federal territories.

A law prohibiting the importation of slaves into the US became effective in 1808.

Beginning in 1820, the Democratic Congress started passing laws allowing and encouraging slavery.

It was only after the Republican Party (many of whom were southern Blacks) was formed some 40 years later that the anti-slavery movement was able to move forward.

And the holier-than-thou Northern liberals are strangely silent on recent archeological evidence from NEW YORK CITY clearly tracing the financing of the slave trade to NORTHERN BUSINESSMEN!!

At the height of his remarkable boxing career, Muhammad Ali (born Cassius Clay), once declared, “I’m glad my great-grandpa got on that boat.”

And speaking of ancestors, my paternal grandmother’s daddy joined with the 80th Ohio Volunteer Infantry early in the War Between the States (re-upped twice) and fought on the Union side at Chickamauga, Vicksburg, Jackson then joined up with Sherman for that infamous march to the sea through Georgia. My wife’s great-great grandpappy ALSO fought for the Union. While I revere the memory of my ancestors, inasmuch as that conflict was less about slavery than it was the economic exploitation and abuse of the South by the North, I fear they MAY have been on the wrong side.

Author Robert Hitt Neill tells of attending a Tennessee Mountain Writer’s Conference years ago with several other authors. Among them was Alex Hailey, celebrated author of “Roots.” Watching a TV news show, a group of them watched a demonstration in a Southern state against the “Rebel” flag incorporated into that state’s flag. The very next report covered a famine in Africa. Graphic images showed dead bodies, starving children with distended tummies and runny noses and dying people covered with flies, too weak to brush them away.

Mr. Hailey intoned in a low, serious voice, “Every time an American black sees a story like that, they should find a Confederate flag and kiss it.” He then pointed to the TV screen and continued, “Because these would be me and my descendants, except for American slavery. I thank God that my family and I are here instead of there.”

Next problem!

Dick Bachert

AFTERWORD:

A few additional facts on the subject:

Until the US declared independence, we were required by the King of England to embrace slavery.

The Northwest Ordinance (1789) prohibited slavery in federal territories.

A law prohibiting the importation of slaves into the US became effective in 1808.

Beginning in 1820, the Democratic Congress started passing laws allowing and encouraging slavery.

It was only after the Republican Party (many of whom were southern Blacks) was formed some 40 years later that the anti-slavery movement was able to move forward.

211 posted on 01/20/2014 6:06:04 PM PST by Dick Bachert (Ignorance is NOT BLISS. It is the ROAD TO SERFDOM! We're on a ROAD TRIP!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

“If Cuba did attack the U.S. base at Gitmo whose side would you take?”

Because I hate communism I’d of course side with the US. But I also think our occupation of Guantanamo is illegal since Cuba cancelled the lease, which it had evey right to do.


212 posted on 01/20/2014 6:07:05 PM PST by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Sadly, while I still consider Alan a good man, I have had to rethink my support since he came out FOR reparations.)

I didn't know he had done that. Very disappointing.

213 posted on 01/20/2014 6:10:34 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: ought-six

Haha! I was being sarcastic. If you can’t handle a little misuse of language, how are you going to deal with people who actually hate the Constitution? Get over it. And, stop acting like a big ole girl.


214 posted on 01/20/2014 6:14:42 PM PST by anton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Lincoln did what he had to do.

So, will you be among those that someday say “Obama did what he had to do?”

There is no excuse for tyranny, for ignoring the Constitution and only those who stand to gain will readily agree to do what he had to do.


215 posted on 01/20/2014 6:15:05 PM PST by X-spurt (CRUZ missile - armed and ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mhutcheson

I couldn’t read the whole thing; I was becoming nauseous. What I take away from the first few paragraphs, though, is that if the south had not seceded and then fired on Ft. Sumpter and started a war, everything would be hunky-dory! They’d still have their “peculiar institution” and they’d all be as happy as a clam.....except for the blacks, of course.

Where has this genius BEEN all these years?! I spent 4 years in the U.S. Military, much of it with southern guys; and because of the type of work we did, nearly all of them had had some college before enlisting, and many of them were graduates; and I NEVER heard a one of them come off with ANY of the drivel THIS guy is spewing. There were frequent debates and latrine arguments among us GIs, but none of that “overtaxed” baloney or anything else ever came up.

I have read dozens of books on all aspects of the Civil War; and seen numerous movies, documentaries, etc. about it, and I don’t recall ever hearing this stuff. Where has all this information been buried all these years?


216 posted on 01/20/2014 6:19:15 PM PST by Tucker39 ("Having their conscience seared with a hot iron.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: X-spurt

It never fails to amuse me - people who are apologists for a treasonous rebellion who crapped all over the US Constitution yet condemn a man who took liberties with it in order to defend and protect our nation.


217 posted on 01/20/2014 6:19:24 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: anton

Some sarcasm. You need to go back to school and learn what it actually is.


218 posted on 01/20/2014 6:20:35 PM PST by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: BurningOak

How many of the Southeners who fought actually held slaves? I suspect damn few if any other than a few self appointed high ranking Officers.

So what other than their liberty and freedom inspired all those? Can anyone explain that?


219 posted on 01/20/2014 6:26:54 PM PST by X-spurt (CRUZ missile - armed and ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Tucker39

“I have read dozens of books on all aspects of the Civil War; and seen numerous movies, documentaries, etc. about it, and I don’t recall ever hearing this stuff. Where has all this information been buried all these years?”

Exactly my point; the genocide, the terrible war crimes, the imprisonment of editorial writers without trial, or even charge, is ignored by the film makers and historians. Now-—you sound like a reasonable person-—so I challenge you to refute a single fact laid out in my article. Do your own research. Come to see the light. Try the book mentioned in the essay, as well as “When In the Course of Human Events” by Adams, a northern historian (Rowman and Littlefield) and “The Real Lincoln” by DiLorenzo (Three Rivers Press).


220 posted on 01/20/2014 6:28:25 PM PST by mhutcheson (To all who have replied to "Confession")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 441-444 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson