tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post8438745322364284844..comments2024-01-15T20:15:13.053-08:00Comments on Saberpoint: Why The Civil War Was Not About SlaveryStogiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-17623739110624501882014-09-03T15:09:58.931-07:002014-09-03T15:09:58.931-07:00The Civil War was WHAT?
Not about slavery?
Ar...The Civil War was WHAT?<br /><br />Not about slavery? <br /><br />Are you mental? First all, SOuthern leaders BRAGGED OUT THE ASS<br /><br />BRAGGED. OUT. THE ASS it was about spread of slavery.<br /><br />Watch my lips, cause Im going to show you idiots the speech and documents. BRAGGED OUT THE ASS the civil war about about spread of slavery.<br /><br />They didn't imply it, they did not infer suggest or hint. THEY BRAGGED OUT THE ASS, over and over, in context, that they fought to SPREAD SLAVERY. S P R E A D slavery.<br /><br />See their five ultimatums, written into the Confederate Constitution itself.<br /><br />See Southern newspapers BRAGGING OUT THE ASS in headlines, they were fighting to SPREAD SLAVERY.<br /><br />See David Atchison, General of Law and Order in Kansas, appointed by Davis, backed by Davis, BRAG OUT THE ASS he was killing to spread slavery. He specifically said his red flag was to show the blood he would spill to SPREAD SLAVERY. <br /><br />And he hired 1700 men, before the Civil War, to help him kill. See his speech. Go on, see his speech.<br /><br />For years leading up to Civil War, Southern leaders demanded the spread of slavery -- by violence if need be. And then they killed, as promised, to spread slavery.<br /><br />Learn of Jeff Davis OWN writing, where he claimed blacks are inferior beings -- not persons --and that the "intolerable grievance" was the resistance to the spread of slavery into KANSAS.<br /><br />Never mind Kansas had just voted >95% to keep slavery out. Davis demanded the spread of slavery there, and hired David Atchison to do the killing. See Atchison's speech to his killers, you might learn something <br /><br />Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10206503506011763393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-52921203181643967202013-01-15T01:13:10.804-08:002013-01-15T01:13:10.804-08:00I almost never drop comments, however i did a few ...I almost never drop comments, however i did a few searching <br />and wound up here "Why The Civil War Was Not About Slavery".<br /><br />And I do have 2 questions for you if it's allright. Could it be only me or does it look like a few of the responses appear like left by brain dead people? :-P And, if you are posting at other sites, I would like to keep up with anything fresh you have to post. Would you list of all of all your shared pages like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?<br /><i>My webpage</i> : <b><a href="http://www.unlockjailbreaks.com" rel="nofollow">app</a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-10327518054643871642013-01-10T04:01:59.839-08:002013-01-10T04:01:59.839-08:00Іt's nearly impossible to find well-informed p...Іt's nearly impossible to find well-informed people in this particular subject, however, you seem like you know what you're <br />talking about! Тhаnks<br /><br />Look into my ѕitе - <a href="http://gofindhere.com/?module=EmmettXUIZ&params=35643" rel="nofollow">Hahn\u0027S macaw</a><br /><i>Feel free to surf my web-site</i> - <b><a href="http://gserver.sampos.ch/wiki/index.php?title=Benutzer:ChanelMcke" rel="nofollow">williams sonoma home outlet bedding</a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-10221667466759735582013-01-04T08:06:40.215-08:002013-01-04T08:06:40.215-08:00Heya i am for the first time here. I cаmе аcross t...Heya i am for the first time here. I cаmе аcross thіs boаrd аnԁ I in finding <br />It гeallу uѕeful & it helpeԁ me out <br />muсh. I'm hoping to offer something back and aid others like you helped me.<br /><br />Also visit my homepage; <a href="http://www.vapornine.com" rel="nofollow">vapornine</a><br /><i>my page</i> :: <b><a href="http://www.vapornine.com" rel="nofollow">vapornine</a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-2409069103985729372012-12-17T15:31:53.548-08:002012-12-17T15:31:53.548-08:00Sincе the admin of this ѕite іs working, no doubt ...Sincе the admin of this ѕite іs working, no doubt <br />very shoгtly іt wіll be rеnowned, ԁue to <br />іts quality cоntents.<br /><br />Hегe is my pagе :: <a href="http://galaxys3.fr" rel="nofollow">galaxy s3</a><br /><i>Stop by my weblog</i> <b><a href="http://galaxys3.fr" rel="nofollow"></a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-38742851157868743232012-12-17T11:26:02.939-08:002012-12-17T11:26:02.939-08:00Ηеllo, just wanted tо tell you,
I enjoyеd this poѕ...Ηеllo, just wanted tо tell you,<br />I enjoyеd this poѕt. It was inspiгing.<br />Keep on pоsting!<br /><br />Feеl free tо viѕit my web sіte <a href="http://www.zulutradeonline.com" rel="nofollow">zulutrade opiniones</a><br /><i>My page</i>: <b><a href="http://www.zulutradeonline.com" rel="nofollow"></a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-75490033839169385542012-12-17T08:28:40.305-08:002012-12-17T08:28:40.305-08:00Thank you fоr the gοod wrіtеup.
It in tгuth was on...Thank you fоr the gοod wrіtеup.<br />It in tгuth was once a leisurе account <br />it. Lοok complex tο mοre introducеd аgгеeable from yоu!<br />Вy the way, how cаn we keep up а cοrrespοndence?<br /><br /><br />Alѕo visit my web blog - <a href="http://Pikavippii.net" rel="nofollow">pikavippi</a><br /><i>Here is my blog post</i> ; <b><a href="http://pikavippii.net" rel="nofollow"></a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-6718975035626651302012-12-17T05:52:09.011-08:002012-12-17T05:52:09.011-08:00Hοwdy ωould уou minԁ
statіng whiсh blog platform ...Hοwdy ωould уou minԁ <br />statіng whiсh blog platform you're using? I'm going to <br />start my own blοg in the near future but ӏ'm having a difficult time choosing between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal. The reason I ask is because your design seems different then most blogs and I'm looking fοr something <br />uniquе. P.S My apologieѕ for gеtting off-tоpіс but Ι hаd to asκ!<br /><br /><br />Also visit my homepage <a href="http://pikavippis.net" rel="nofollow">pikavippis.net</a><br /><i>my website</i> :: <b><a href="http://pikavippis.net" rel="nofollow"></a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-14862078237657765912010-12-23T08:00:18.508-08:002010-12-23T08:00:18.508-08:00Seeker, I have deleted more of your frenzied comme...Seeker, I have deleted more of your frenzied comments and will continue to do so. You are barred from further discussion here.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-51717585145676350812010-12-22T11:23:40.045-08:002010-12-22T11:23:40.045-08:00Well said, Anon!Well said, Anon!Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-6700931465137210032010-12-21T20:13:30.182-08:002010-12-21T20:13:30.182-08:00As was previously mentioned, anyone how honestly b...As was previously mentioned, anyone how honestly believes the North invaded the South to end slavery must explain why 1.) The North had no problem with 2 of their own states being slave states at the same time 2.) Why these 2 slave states would fight to end slavery while being slave states themselves 3.) Why the North would allow West Virginia to join the Union AS A SLAVE STATE. I mean, if the reason they were fighting the war was to end slavery, you'd think the prerequisite for joining the union would be that you have to be a slave free state, right? <br /><br />Try to explain that before you explain anything else. <br /><br />On second thought, don't bother, because the war was not about slavery. Those 3 facts alone prove this to be true and renders any argument that the North invaded the South to end slavery as plain and simply ignorant and moronic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-43431405578348233542010-12-09T17:12:28.707-08:002010-12-09T17:12:28.707-08:00Seeker, your last three or four posts were increas...Seeker, your last three or four posts were increasingly strange and far-fetched, so I have deleted them. I will delete any more comments that you make in this thread.<br /><br />Go peddle crazy somewhere else, we're all stocked up here.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-78026725930500388242010-12-09T12:29:50.386-08:002010-12-09T12:29:50.386-08:00seeker,
I went to school in south Mississippi and ...seeker,<br />I went to school in south Mississippi and never, ever heard of any of the doguma that you are preaching. In fact, we did away with conventional textbooks in the 50's in Mississippi as they kept talking about the history of the US after 1865, the teachers in graded school indicated that the US ended after the War. In that time I never heard of any of what you are talking about, only that a region had decided that its interest were different from the rest of the country and exercised their desire for self determination, only to be forced back into the US and watch as the US tried to eliminate other groups, such as the Indians. As to the continued influence of the South, I think you are way out there on that one. We definitely feel like a step child and still desire to be left alone and have out own country. It sounds like you desire the same thing, so get with your little liberal friends on work on the deal. Or are you afraid we will start slavery again? <br /><br />The fact is that it takes a considerable number of folks to have slavery. Certainly the slave were concentrated in the South, but the North kept the institution going with funding, insurance, a ready market and so forth. It was not in the Norths best interest to eliminate slavery and they didn't. It died out with the War and laws only solidified what had already occurred. Now, tell me what is so bad about slavery. Most of the people that I have seen in our poor areas would be much better off as slaves. Slavery was the norm until about 1880. It is still used in some areas and will be back when our tech industry dies. Which might not be too far down the road with our current administration. So why are you so upset with slavery??david7134https://www.blogger.com/profile/09312542857203326560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-7869095665763232492010-12-09T10:43:15.521-08:002010-12-09T10:43:15.521-08:00Seeker, no I never heard of the South's "...Seeker, no I never heard of the South's "ultimatums." I doubt that anything like that ever existed, except in the fevered minds of fanatics like yourself. <br /><br />You seem to want to overwhelm this discussion with numerous unsupported statements and opinions as if the sheer volume of your words will transform history into something that supports your biases and preconceived notions.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-5045557016257035912010-12-09T09:41:00.646-08:002010-12-09T09:41:00.646-08:00Stogie, in re-reading your response, you say you &...Stogie, in re-reading your response, you say you "never heard" of the Southern Ultimatums, and that the South would have no more claim on the territories, once it seceded.<br /><br />First, it's clear everyone believes their own BS. And everyone thinks the other guy's history is BS. You are that way, and so am I. Depends on what we are told, and what social rewards we get for it. <br /><br />That is why I focus on the South's words, the South's ultimatums, the South's speeches, books,newpapers, documents, threats, promises, etc.<br /><br />Just because you never heard of the Southern Ultimatums, means only that you haven't been exposed to the South's own words in this regard.<br /><br />SOuthern leaders meeting in Montgomery issued the Ultimatums, and they were reported in Southern newspapers. These were the core issues, not only because they were ULtimatums, but the Southern newspapers called them "THE TRUE ISSUE".<br /><br />Obviously someone thought they were the core issues, someone thought they were the true issues.<br /><br />These were the South's own ultimatums, they were not dreamed up by historians later, they reported in the SOuthern newspapers, proudly and loudly, at the time.<br /><br />If these were not the Ultimatums, surely someone then could have said so. They were the headlines in the leading Southern newspapers. If they were fraudulent or mistaken, it would be a simple matter to correct them.<br /><br />But the Ultimatums were nothing more than the persistent, upfront, candid, and obvious demands from the last 50 years. <br /><br />They were the distillation of the core issue, and everyone knew it.<br /><br />Even some Northern papers said the Ultimatums should be obeyed, to avoid war. They did not say "WOW, we never heard of these before!" <br /><br />Everyone knew those were the issues.<br /><br />You say you never heard of them. Of course you haven't heard of them expressed that way. How could you? <br /><br />They were the central issue - but you can't find them in US text books.<br /><br />And you are an educated, well read person! What does that say about our educational system?<br /><br />Only politically correct things that don't embarrass the Southern states can be put in US text books. So they aren't there. <br /><br />Along with most of the basic truths, they aren't there.<br /><br />No wonder this is not in US text books -- there are thousands upon thousands of other embarrassing truths that have never, and will never, make it into US text books, because of the strangle hold the Confederate states still use to suppress these things.<br /><br />But they are in Southern documents, Southern newspapers, Southern books, Southern speeches, Southern declarations, Southern history books, of that period.<br /><br />Strange then that you keep them out of your books NOW, out of your web sites NOW, out of your view NOW.<br /><br />They were exlaimed loudly and proudly then -- but hidden and denied now. What's that tell you?<br /><br />These truths just got edited out. If Google had not digitized 100 million (or whatever) pages of antebellum books and newspapers, we would never have heard of these things, even now.<br /><br /><br />You should have learned about your own ultimatums in your own schools, along with other basic truths. And you would have, if they had been there.<br />xSeekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10206503506011763393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-80330141422442110292010-12-09T08:43:40.376-08:002010-12-09T08:43:40.376-08:00Seeker, a few more points.
1. The tariff wasn'...Seeker, a few more points.<br />1. The tariff wasn't always mentioned by the Southern states as a reason for secession,but it was clearly a reason for the North's invasion: the loss of hundreds of millions in revenue.<br /><br />2. Answer the question: Did the North ever put forth any morally responsible plan for ending slavery,, i.e. through compensation of slave owners and integration and assimilation of the slaves? The answer is NO they didn't. The abolitionists of the time insisted on immediate and uncompensated emancipation, which would have been economically disastrous to the slave owners and slaves. The North did not have a moral stand on slavery or a moral solution.<br /><br />Other causes for the South's secession:<br />1. The flooding of the mails with pamphlets and circulars urging slaves to murder their masters, poison wells and other mayhem.<br /><br />2. Refusal of some Northern states to extradite members of John Brown's murderous gang who had seized the arsenal at Harper's Ferry.<br /><br />3. The funding of abolitionist terrorism by Northern rich men.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-23410964751420958592010-12-09T08:18:52.866-08:002010-12-09T08:18:52.866-08:00Seeker, your second comment above continues to be ...Seeker, your second comment above continues to be just your unproven opinion, and it does not square with the facts. You are a great example of a Northern myth-maker, however; since your side was evil, immoral and tyrannical, you have to create out of thin air a wild scenario that not even modern (biased) historians believe.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-35098732150715842632010-12-09T08:16:03.041-08:002010-12-09T08:16:03.041-08:00Seeker, so far you have quoted a newspaper editori...Seeker, so far you have quoted a newspaper editorial as the source of your wild claims. So did some newspaper editor speak for the South? No, he spoke for himself. <br /><br />The rest of your ambiguous rant indicates the only thing you should be "seeking" is professional help, i.e. as in a psychiatrist.<br /><br />Answer the question: if the South fought to "spread" slavery, where were they going to spread it to, having seceded from the Union?<br /><br />Answer the question: where outside of the South would slavery have proven economically feasible?<br /><br />You are so full of it, Seeker, a modern day fanatic in the tradition of John Brown.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-42192254886937307602010-12-08T15:41:10.851-08:002010-12-08T15:41:10.851-08:00David and Stogie --
You are both educated men, co...David and Stogie --<br /><br />You are both educated men, correct? YOu both have read exentensively about the Civil War -- but also about the period leading up to it, correct?<br /><br />These Ultimatums were in Southern newspapers the entire time. Everyone alive in 1861, who knew the issues, knew either about these Ultimatums directly, or they knew the fundamental position of the South about the spread of slavery.<br /><br />This was no secret -- to anyone. Nothing hush hush about it. <br /><br />But far more importantly, this is the FUNDAMENTAL history of the entire US from 1800-1861. This was not some unspoken hidden disptue. <br /><br />This was the basic issue, it's what the 1820 "Compromise" was about, the 1850 "Compromise". Its what Lincoln Douglas debates, and Dred Scott decision was about.<br /><br />Everything revolved around the spread of slavery, one way or another. <br /><br />And the South was not in the least embarrassed to say so. In this case, they said so very clearly in their own Ultimatums. <br /><br /> But in all years, in all issues, they spoke of the spread of slavery. How they (slave owners) have every right to spread slavery and take their slaves anywhere they want.<br /><br />In fact, SOuthern leaders said God told them to spread slavery, not just to the rest of the continental USA - but to spread GOD's form of slavery to all the world!<br /><br />And God's slavery, according to Vice President Stephens, was perpetual slavery of the inferior black race, by white men.<br /><br />You can discount such utterances as the folly of one man. <br /><br />But the South's Ultimatums were not by one man, they were by the leaders in Montgomery. And it was the fundamental issue from 1800 on.<br /><br />You may agree that they had rights to take their slaves, and to sell children, and to force slavery down the throats of citizens who hated slavery.<br /><br />You may disagree that they had the right.<br /><br />But that was the issue. That is what THEY said the issue was. <br /><br />Read any newspaper from any day, in the antebellum South, and much of it will be about some aspect of the spread of slavery.<br /><br />Most of the hard hitting speeches in Congresss, in the Senate, were one way or another about the spread of slavery. The Lincoln Douglas debates -- were about the spread of slavery.<br /><br />The Compromises of 1820 and 1850 were about the spread of slavery.<br /><br />Yet you never heard of this issue?<br /><br />You don't need to read the South's own ultimatums, as presented loudly and proudly by the Southern newspapers.<br /><br />If you simply know the basic history of USA from 1800-1860, that is what it was about. The SPREAD of slavery.<br /><br />Jeff Davis even said he wanted to re-unite the nation, as a slave nation, North and South. <br /><br />There are many things the South has to pretend never existed, or willfully ignore the South's own Ultimatums, speeches, declarations, newspapers, books, ect.<br /><br />The Southern Ultimatums are just one of them.Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10206503506011763393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-19723418429931553672010-12-08T15:01:52.477-08:002010-12-08T15:01:52.477-08:00Stokie -- sure, all this comes from Southern sourc...Stokie -- sure, all this comes from Southern sources.<br /><br />You never heard of the Ultimatums?<br /><br />I'm not surprised. YOu are of course a person of honor and character, you are not frivilous or evasive. If the South issued Ultimatums to spread slavery, and you knew of it from reliable Southern sources, you would pay attention to that.<br /><br />Its no surprise you didn't hear of it, or many other things. This is a very embarrassing set of Ultimatums. It does not fit in with the politically correct myths that have passed for history in our text books and in popular culture representations, such as movies and books.<br /><br />This is the Southern leaders demanding the spread of slavery. Period.<br /><br />They were issued by Southern leaders themselves, reported by Southern newspapers loudly and proudly.<br /><br />You can look up Richmond Enquirer March 23, or see the link at the bottom.<br /><br />As you can see, th Richmond newspaper called the Southern Ultimatums "THE TRUE ISSUE!!" There was nothing in there that surprised them, at all.<br /><br />Quoted as follows, my comments are in ( ).<br /><br />1) That African slavery in the Territories shall be recognized and protected by Congress and the Territorial Legislatures.<br /><br />(This is a violent assault on state's rights --Kansas must accept slavery, though the people there just voted 98%-2% to reject slavery AND they fought a 4 year war against slavery.)<br /><br />2)That the right to slaveholders of transit and sojourn in any State of the Confederacy, with their slaves and other property, shall be recognized and respected.<br /><br /><br />3) That the provision in regard to fugitive slaves shall extend to any slave lawfully carried from one State into another, and there escaping or taken away from his master.<br /><br />(Again, a violent assault on state's rights, no state could have it's own laws about who the bounty hunters can grab, or what proof is needed to show they are indeed run away slaves.)<br /><br />4)That no bill or ex post facto law by Congress or any State, and no law impairing or denying the right of property in negro slaves, shall be passed.<br /><br />=============== END QUOTE<br /><br />Let's be candid -- these Ultimatums are not only to spread slavery, but are all an assault on state's rights to decide for themselves. No state -- NORTH or South -- could have any laws about slavery at all.<br /><br />These were all about SLAVERY. The SPREAD of slavery. And how states could not do anything about it, in their OWN state!<br /><br />Do you notice what is NOT there? Not a word about tariffs. Not a word about taxes. Not a word about anything -- but slavery.<br /><br />Every one of the Ultimatums were about slavery. <br /><br />And this was not just a few radical nut jobs -- these were the leaders in Montgomery, defined by your own leading newspaper. <br /><br />This was nothing unusual. These demands were common knowledge, North and South, it was just articulated here by the Southern leaders, and the Southern newspapers. No one would have batted an eye at these, at all.<br /><br />These were just the demands the South had from 1800 on, this is what the South Slave power demanded in 1820, and then again in 1850, this was yet another in a series of demands to spread slavery further and further.<br /><br />But I do give you credit for putting like this in your blog.<br /><br />If you want a link, here is one<br /><br />http://civilwarcauses.org/richmond.htmSeekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10206503506011763393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-35087532124784963742010-12-08T13:37:49.807-08:002010-12-08T13:37:49.807-08:00Stogie,
This guy named seeker is obviously a nut. ...Stogie,<br />This guy named seeker is obviously a nut. I have read on the War of Northern Aggression for about 50 years, even the literature that was available before the take over by the liberals/progressives/Marxist, in that time I have never seen any mention of "ultimatums" by the South. Perhaps the guy is mistaking the conflict in Kansas/Nebraska as an attempt at violent spread of slavery, but most of what I have seen suggest that the South knew the end was near for the slave economy and was looking for ways to make the shift. Any reading would indicate that the real villian in all this was Lincoln. Everything that he touched was done so with evil intent.david7134https://www.blogger.com/profile/09312542857203326560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-69014123523827684822010-12-08T09:18:16.659-08:002010-12-08T09:18:16.659-08:00Seeker, I forgot to address one of your major fals...Seeker, I forgot to address one of your major falsehoods, that "the violent spread of slavery was the reason for the Civil War." The statement is so preposterous that you should be embarrassed, but it does prove your extreme bias for the North.<br /><br />The South did not want to "spread slavery by violence," they wanted to secede and be left alone. After secession, they would have no more legal right to the western territories -- so how could secession help them "spread slavery"? Ridiculous.<br /><br />Further, the plantation system did not work well outside the South, where neither the climate nor the soil supported cotton, tobacco or sugar cane, the main crops produced by plantations (sugar was in Cuba and elsewhere, not in the US). Therefore, there was no economic reason to "spread slavery" beyond the South. Some Southerners did want access to the western territories as a place to free slaves so they could support themselves farming; however, the white populace in those areas strongly resented blacks, either free or slave, and wouldn't allow it. So your argument about "the violent spread of slavery" is a transparent lie with no basis in reality.<br /><br />However, with the South gone,the South could now open its ports to free trade, ending the tariffs that funded Northern interests and industries. The result would be a massive transfer of international trade from Northern ports to Southern ones and this would have been financially devastating to Northern ambitions and Northern corporatism. <br /><br />This is also an important reason why Lincoln would not freely give up Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. To do so would end Northern collection of the tariff in that port.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-16621859001977548492010-12-08T09:06:43.159-08:002010-12-08T09:06:43.159-08:00Seeker, you have made a lot of accusations and cla...Seeker, you have made a lot of accusations and claims without a single web link or a single example. Therefore your arguments have no substance and no credibility whatsoever. <br /><br />Lincoln himself said in his first inaugural that he had no right to interfere in slavery in the states where it now existed. He also stated that the issue of slavery had no bearing on his TRUE GOAL, which was to impose the Union on 11 states that no longer wanted it.<br /><br />I know of no "ultimatums" that the South gave to the North; I only know that the South exercised its commonly agreed-upon right to secede from the Union. Lincoln then started the war by invading the South. The real cause of the war was Yankee imperialism and greed. They wanted the huge tax revenues that the South provided through the North's imposed tariffs. Early after the first states seceded, Lincoln was asked why he just didn't let the South go. "Let them go! Let them go!" he replied, "Who is going to pay my tariff?"<br /><br />As far as the "cornerstone" speech, it was the opinion of one man, VP Stevens; he did not speak for the South or the Confederacy. As for Lincoln's "cornerstone" speeches, the man was a white supremacist, racist and white separatist who was totally flexible on the issue of slavery as long as the Union was preserved. He in fact agreed with Steven's "cornerstone" speech except for the slavery part. He wanted all blacks deported to Africa or South America.<br /><br />As far as Lee's management of his father-in-law's slaves, yes he did discipline slaves who tried to run away or who refused to work. So what? Did George Washington treat his slaves any different? Or Thomas Jefferson? Or the hundreds of black slave owners throughout the South?<br /><br />You are a non-serious student of the Civil War, a modern day Yankee fanatic. Go away.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-12225750516510511312010-12-07T16:34:34.883-08:002010-12-07T16:34:34.883-08:00Let me ask you bluntly, with all due respect.
Are...Let me ask you bluntly, with all due respect.<br /><br />Are you afraid to look at, and acknowledge, the South's own Ultimatums, the South's own documents, the South's own speeches, the South's own books, the South's own Declarations, from that period?<br /><br />Because if you just want to rant, and try to impress your like-minded friends, that's fine.<br /><br />I can understand that. Denial has it's place. Without it, most of us would go stark raving mad.<br /><br />Particularly those who have their ego invested in insisting the violent spread of slavery was not the sole reason for the Civil War.<br /><br />How do we know the violent spread of slavery was the sole reason for the Civil War?<br /><br />Well, the Southern leaders said so. Loudly, proudly, over time, collectivelly, repeatedly, by deed and word. By unmistakable, undeniable assertions, books, newspaper articles, declarations, ultimatums, promises, threats, and speeches.<br /><br />By their own declarations before during and after the war.<br /><br />By their own conduct, their own writings, and their own insistance.<br /><br />You do have a point, however pathetically twisted it is. The North did not fight to end slavery, any more than the FDR and the Allies fought to end the Nazi death camps.<br /><br />By your logic, FDR and the Allies didn't care about the death camps, because they didn't fight the war to end them.<br /><br />That of course is your cop out.<br /><br />The South very clearly fought the war to spread slavery, and if you have any doubt, check out their own Ultimatums.<br /><br />And the North very clearly fought to stop the violent spread of slavery and the illegal violent rebellion that was started to spread slavery.<br /><br />Go on, check them out.<br /><br />Really, check out the South's own ultimatums. I didn't write them. The Southern leaders did.<br /><br />Wouldnt you WANT to know what the SOuthern Ultimatums were?<br /><br />Wouldn't you be naturally curious what the SOUTHERN newspapers reported about them? What Northern newspapers said about them?<br /><br /> I didn't gleefully report them -- the Southern newspapers did.<br /><br />Have you read them? Do you want to?<br /><br /><br />These weren't some fringe group writing these SOuthern Ultimatums, some Nathan Forrest type of insane child selling lunatic. These were the cream of the Southern manhood, the very same men who created the CSA.<br /><br />In fact, these Southern Ultimatums were from Montgomery, BY the Southern Founding Fathers. Hard to get more elite than that. These Southern Ultimatums came from the Mouth of the South -- the Confederate leaders.<br /><br />And those Ultimatums were ALL about the spread of slavery. The VIOLENT spread of slavery. <br /><br />The spread of slavery AGAINST the will of the people. <br /><br />Have you read the Ultimatums?<br /><br />No, of course not. You would have to actually study the Confederate founding fathers. And the reports coming from Montgomery. <br /><br />And the gleeful Southern newspapers reporting the Ultimatums as "The TRUE ISSUE".<br /><br />I don't think you have done that. <br /><br />At all.<br /><br />Go find your Southern Ultimatums. Your leaders issued them. Your newspapers gleefully reported them as "THE TRUE ISSUE".<br /><br />And why you are at it, check out the Cornerstone speeches (yes, more than one) Jeff Davis broadside of Jan 5, 1863, and Lee's handwritten account books.Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10206503506011763393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22117033.post-53179706541115515162010-12-07T08:56:33.567-08:002010-12-07T08:56:33.567-08:00Thanks Bubber, I intend to do exactly that!Thanks Bubber, I intend to do exactly that!Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.com