Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN: AMERICA’S GREATEST WAR CRIMINAL
Southern Caucus ^ | ? | Ron Holland

Posted on 11/19/2001 6:28:43 AM PST by tberry

ABRAHAM LINCOLN: AMERICA’S GREATEST WAR CRIMINAL

By Ron Holland

from Southern Caucus http://www.southerncaucus.org

Abraham Lincoln should without a doubt be named America’s greatest war criminal. His war of invasion not only killed over 600,000 innocent Americans but it was obvious from his earlier speeches that he had previously advocated the prevalent constitutional right of democratic, state by state secession. Lincoln’s War also effectively overthrew the existing decentralized, limited federal government that had existed and governed well in the US since established by America’s founding fathers. Lincoln bastardized a respected federal government with limited powers into a dictatorial, uncontrollable Washington federal empire.

Because of Lincoln, the former American constitutional republic fell from a dream of liberty and limited government into the nightmare big government we have today without the earlier checks and balances of state sovereignty. After Lincoln, In foreign policy, the US forgot George Washington’s warning about neutrality and we became an aggressive military abroad until today we have troops defending the Washington Empire in over 144 nations around the world.

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connections as possible. It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances, with any portion of the foreign world.—George Washington

Lincoln shares his war criminal actions with other well know tyrants that waged war on their own people. History shows us that politicians make war against their own citizens even more than against foreign nations. The reasons are often to establish and preserve their power base, as was the case in the Russian Revolution and the Mao Revolution. For others, like Hitler, it was misguided super patriotism and racism that brought death to tens of millions. Sadly, in the case of Abraham Lincoln’s war against the Confederacy and Southern civilians, it was all for money, company profits and government tariff revenues. A simple case of political pay back in return for the Northeastern manufacturing interests that supported the Republican Party and his campaign for the presidency. Early in his career, Abraham Lincoln was an honorable statesman who let election year politics and the special interests supporting his presidential campaign corrupt a once great man. He knew what he was doing was wrong and unconstitutional but succumbed, as in the case of many modern day politicians, to the allure of money, power and ego.

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right - a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit. -- Abraham Lincoln January 12, 1848

This quote above shows Lincoln as a statesman 12 years before he plunged the United States into its most disastrous war. Suffering a death toll so high in death rates as a percentage of total population, his act of carnage ranks with the political genocides of Stalin, Lenin and Mao during their communist revolutions. A death toll so great that it dwarfs the American deaths in all of our many declared and undeclared wars before and since this American holocaust of death and destruction.

From the following quote you can see that later Lincoln radically adjusted his rhetoric to meet the needs and demands of his business establishment supporters and financial supporters.

No state, upon its own mere motion, can lawfully get out of the Union. Plainly, the central idea of secession, is the essence of anarchy. --Abraham Lincoln

Why the complete change in rhetoric and actions? Simple, to preserve high tariffs and corporate profits for the Northeastern business establishment. Lincoln who earlier in his career had obviously favored the right of peaceful secession, provoked a war that killed 600,000 Americans, as a pay back to the eastern manufacturing establishment that bankrolled his presidential campaign. These special interests would have suffered serious financial loss if a low tariff Confederate States of America were allowed to peacefully, democratically and constitutionally secede from the United States in lawful state constitutional conventions of secession which were identical to the ratification conventions when they had joined the Union. Thus the real reasons for the death and destruction of Lincoln’s War were covered up and hidden by historians who continue, even today, to deny the truth and hide the ultimate costs of Lincoln’s American holocaust. While Lincoln’s death toll is small in comparison to total deaths by Mao, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler, there are many similarities between these men. In the Russian Civil War, from 1917 - 1922 around 9 million died under Lenin and we must add another 20 million under Stalin from 1929 to 1939. The Mao communist regime in China killed 44 to 70 million Chinese from 1949 – 1975.

Still the US constitutional republic, as established by our founding fathers, was in effect destroyed by Lincoln’s unconstitutional war just as surely as Mao and Lenin over threw the existing Chinese and Russian governments. The multitude of Lincoln apologists would say that this is just another Confederate argument certainly not accepted by most historians. I might counter that the opinions and books of these "so called" establishment historians who live off my tax dollars through government funding at liberal controlled universities and think tanks are prejudiced towards Lincoln and Washington DC. They are no different from the official government historians in China, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Their job is to lie to the American people and cover up a true and honest account of our history in order to support the government and political system in power.

History shows us that a fair and honest discussion of Lincoln’s wartime actions will not be possible as long as the Washington political establishment remains in power. Since Lincoln, the Washington Empire has reigned supreme and omnipotent and for this reason, establishment historians have never honestly debated the Lincoln war crimes.

Consider this. Was a fair and honest account of Lenin or Stalin written and published during the Soviet Communist regime? Of course not. Could a less than worshipful history of Hitler’s Third Reich have been published until after 1945? No! Even today, with only nominal communist control of China, an honest appraisal of Mao’s revolution and crimes against the Chinese people still is not possible. It is no different today in the United States than it is in Red China or was in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. Just as Lenin’s statue could not be toppled in Red Square until after the fall of the Soviet Communist government, or the truth about Hitler couldn’t be told until after defeat of Nazi Germany, it is the same here in the United States. It is my hope that someday, in the not too distant future, a true account of the war crimes of Lincoln will be discussed, debated and even acknowledged. The Lincoln Memorial should be remodeled to show the horrors of "Lincoln the War Criminal" with the opportunity for all to visit Washington and learn how war crimes, genocide and holocaust are not just crimes that foreign politicians commit. Government and political tyranny can and has happened here just like in Germany, China and the Soviet Union and that through education and honest history, it will never happen here again.

In the future, may we have the opportunity to learn about the Nazi holocaust at the United States National Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington and then have the chance to visit the Lincoln War Crimes and American Holocaust Museum a few blocks away. One will state for all the world that NEVER AGAIN will a tyrant or government be allowed to target, exterminate and destroy an ethnic, racial or religious minority. The other will pledge NEVER AGAIN in America will we allow a president or government to make unconstitutional war against Sovereign states or their citizens and then cover up the truth up for over 145 years.

We should start today with an honest appraisal of what Lincoln really did to Dixie, how our black and white innocent noncombatants suffered under his total war policy against civilians. Finally we should address the cost in lives, lost liberty and federal taxes the citizens of the US have had to endure because our limited constitutional republic was destroyed.

Abraham Lincoln was a great man, a smart politician and he could have been an excellent president, had he considered the short-term costs of his high tariff and the long time price every American had to pay for his war of invasion. It is time to stop worshipping Lincoln and educate the public about the war crimes he committed against the citizens of the Southern States so this WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial
KEYWORDS: abelincoln; dixie; dixielist; goebbels; mediawingofthednc; presidents; prozacchewables; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 461-468 next last
To: 4ConservativeJustices
"An inference from the doctrine that a single State has the right to secede at will from the rest is that the rest would have an equal right to secede from it; in other words, to turn it, against its will, out of its union with them. Such a doctrine would not, till of late been palatable anywhere, and nowhere less so than where it is now most contended for..." - James Madison

No. No honorable person would.

281 posted on 11/21/2001 2:11:07 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: bluecollarman
Here is a link to a website that provides evidence that you are wrong about Grant and slavery. That Grant, in fact, owned a slave only once in his life. That he freed that slave before the war. And that any slaves owned by his inlaws which Mrs. Grant had use of were freed long before the end of the war. I would challenge you to provide any evidence at all that the information on this site is incorrect and that Grant did own slaves after the war ended. Any evidence at all.
282 posted on 11/21/2001 2:16:16 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
"An inference from the doctrine that a single State has the right to secede at will from the rest is that the rest would have an equal right to secede from it; in other words, to turn it, against its will, out of its union with them. Such a doctrine would not, till of late been palatable anywhere, and nowhere less so than where it is now most contended for..." - James Madison

That's a good quote.

Here's another:

"If all the states, save one, should assert the power to drive that one out of the Union, it is presumed the whole class of seceder politicians would at once deny the power, and denounce the act as the greatest outrage upon State rights. But suppose that precisely the same act, instead of being called "driving the one out," should be called "the seceding of the others from that one," it would be exactly what the seceders claim to do; unless, indeed, they make the point, that the one, because it is a minority, may rightfully do, what the others because they are a majority may not rightfully do. These politicians are subtle, and profound, on the rights of minorities. They are not so partial to that power, which made the Constitution, and speaks from the preamble, calling itself "We the People."

A. Lincoln, 7/4/61

Lincoln was probably familar with Madison's position.

Walt

283 posted on 11/21/2001 2:35:45 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
I think this thread is just about done.

All the same old tripe has been trumped by resort to the historical record, unresponded to.

What's next?

Walt

284 posted on 11/21/2001 2:38:17 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: tberry
As a history teacher I can say this is complete bulls**t. I pray that people that write stuff like this never make it into the classroom and teach this garbage. We should have respect for the great men of our nation's history.
285 posted on 11/21/2001 2:59:32 AM PST by mrfixit514
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
I could quote them, but chose not to cut & paste a 4 page missive. I'd rather post one or two quotes that you might actually read. I guess I'll round up a few more quotes regarding secession. Do you consider Northerners honorable and worthy of quoting regarding secession?
286 posted on 11/21/2001 3:25:06 AM PST by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
It's called "documentation", 4CJ. Also known as "supporting evidence". A lot of your fellow southern sympathizers should try it some time. I've seen some of the most outrageous claims come from some of them.
287 posted on 11/21/2001 3:34:58 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: mrfixit514
"As a history teacher I can say this is complete bulls**t."

All this shows is that you had to buy the bullsh*t or you would never have become a legitimate reviser of history and goberment corrupter of our youth.

288 posted on 11/21/2001 3:38:11 AM PST by tberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
I could quote them, but chose not to cut & paste a 4 page missive.

You can't find anything as pithy in four pages as George Washington saying that the "goal of every true American is the consolidation of our national union"?

I''m not surprised.

Walt

289 posted on 11/21/2001 3:38:51 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: tberry
All this shows is that you had to buy the bullsh*t or you would never have become a legitimate reviser of history and goberment corrupter of our youth.

I don't have time; but someone should go back and count all the posts that called you out for what you are. I liked the one with the picture of Homer Simpson's brain the best.

Doh!

Walt

290 posted on 11/21/2001 3:40:50 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
No not because I say it is. Because the SCOTUS said it was. Suspension of habeas corpus, suspension of the First Amendment, military tribunals, all crimes that can be traced to lincoln, were found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court
291 posted on 11/21/2001 4:14:56 AM PST by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: billbears
No not because I say it is. Because the SCOTUS said it was.

Now we are getting somewhere. The Supreme Court also said that secession was illegal. If you accept the other Supreme Court rulings as valid then you must accept also their decision on Texas v. White. True?

I'll add that the Supreme Court ruled that suspending habeas corpus in Indiana were wrong because Indiana was not in rebellion and the civil and federal courts were freely operating. At that time Lincoln had been operating on the authority that congress gave him to suspend habeas corpus whenever he felt it necessary. The Supreme Court has never ruled on the issue of whether Lincoln was wrong in suspending habeas corpus in Maryland in 1861.

292 posted on 11/21/2001 4:25:49 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
I accept their ruling in 69 as valid, because I can do little else. My point is the REASON behind the ruling. In all the other rulings, the SCOTUS found lincoln at fault. Yes? If the same court found his actions DURING the war at fault, logically one could assume that over time they would find that his actions in starting the war would be at fault. However, to do that, detractors of the court would start pointing fingers at others within the administration for possible criminal charges. Namely, one Chief Justice Chase.
293 posted on 11/21/2001 4:59:31 AM PST by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: tberry
Hey you, What are you nuts posting this on here? Should change the title to "BILL CLINTON: AMERICA'S GREATEST WAR CRIMINAL!"
294 posted on 11/21/2001 5:03:47 AM PST by KLT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
I don't agree that there is a logical conclusion between one and the other, especially since Lincoln was faced with a rebellion he did not start.
295 posted on 11/21/2001 5:16:07 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
A very good and unbiased history of what REALLY happened is the book "Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men, A History of the America Civil War", by Jeffry Rogers Hummel
296 posted on 11/21/2001 5:22:00 AM PST by seditious1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
"I don't have time; but someone should go back and count all the posts that called you out for what you are

Doesn't hurt my feeling that all you nationalistic, flag waving, "America can do no wrong", fascists try to intemidate and discourage anyone that disagrees with you. That's the way biggots have always worked.

What we are seeing on FR now is not conservative or Constitutional but simply more macho bravado. Compare what Freepers views were two months ago with the crap we are reading today and you will think liberal aliens have taken over all the Freeper intellect.

You can call me what you like but the one thing I will not call you is "Conservative."

297 posted on 11/21/2001 5:38:37 AM PST by tberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: seditious1
I'm stuck at work today. How about a summary of their thesis for me?
298 posted on 11/21/2001 5:42:10 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: billbears
In all the other rulings, the SCOTUS found lincoln at fault.

What crime was Lincoln charged with?

Walt

299 posted on 11/21/2001 5:58:09 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
It wasn't a crime necessarily as what he did was found unconstitutional. The 1866 case, the Milligan case(and I imagine what you are already going to say) where Taney ruled on habeas corpus in Maryland, the Indiana case. All of them, the Court found lincoln had committed unconstitutional acts, not necessarily crimes. And you will notice I did not use that word, you did
300 posted on 11/21/2001 6:27:26 AM PST by billbears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320 ... 461-468 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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