A “TYRANNICAL, MURDEROUS WAR”
by Michael Gaddy, ©2015, blogging at The Rebel Madman
(Dec. 14, 2015) — I want to bring back some of the articles I have done in the past on this new (for me) forum. Below is one of a series I believe to be most critical to understanding how we got to this point in history. Obviously, many of the things we were all taught in the Public Fool System are patently false because these historically incorrect stories support our current government and its state of constant war. We should examine our current history with a strong knowledge of the past and skepticism about what we are told that takes us to what has become perpetual war. MG
(Author’s note: All too many Americans accept the unconstitutional tyrannical government we have today, which saw its genesis in Abraham Lincoln and his Republican Party minions, because somehow it was/is a fair trade-off for freeing an oppressed race of people. Nothing could be more historically false.)
“Mr. Pendleton, if the Republicans lose their little war; they’re voted out in the next election and they return to their homes in New York, or Massachusetts or Illinois, fat with their war profits; if we lose, we lose our country, we lose our independence, we lose it all.” ~General Thomas Jonathan Jackson (Stonewall) 1862.
At some point in late 1862, the Abraham Lincoln led republican administration realized that their unconstitutional, immoral war perpetrated on the people of the South was generating a tremendous loss of life and property and at some point history would demand an explanation for what could only be considered treason. They also realized that should they lose this war there would certainly be legal repercussions for their blatant disregard for the limits of the Constitution. Lincoln, after all, had ordered up an Army of 75,000 soldiers to invade citizens of his own country.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. ~Article 3 Section 3, Constitution FOR the United States. (Emphasis added)
When their unconstitutional, immoral war(s) are killing thousands each and every week, tyrants are forced to seek some form of legal high ground on which to base the reasoning for their crimes. Sometimes this requires the refutation of what one might have claimed previously.
“Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that–
I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.
Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them;” ~Abraham Lincoln’s first inaugural address.
Killing all these people and destruction of private property, not to mention shutting down newspapers in the North, imprisoning members of the Maryland State Legislature and issuing an arrest warrant for the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, all because they dared challenge the war on constitutional principles, Lincoln was forced to come up with justification based on the very moral principles he had abandoned when he started his war. But, Lincoln and the Republicans had to be very careful for there were several states in the North which were most intolerant of all persons of African descent, free or slave.
“[R]ace prejudice seems stronger in those states that have abolished slavery than in those where it still exists, and nowhere is it more intolerant than in those states where slavery was never known.”
“So the Negro [in the North] is free, but he cannot share the rights, pleasures, labors, griefs, or even the tomb of him whose equal he has been declared; there is nowhere where he can meet him, neither in life nor in death.
In the South, where slavery still exists, less trouble is taken to keep the Negro apart: they sometimes share the labors and the pleasures of the white men; people are prepared to mix with them to some extent; legislation is more harsh against them, but customs are more tolerant and gentle.” ~Alexis De Tocquville Democracy in America, p 343
“Both Indiana (1816) and Illinois (1818) abolished slavery by their constitutions. And both followed the Ohio policy of trying to prevent black immigration by passing laws requiring blacks who moved into the state to produce legal documents verifying that they were free and posting bond to guarantee their good behavior. The bond requirements ranged as high as $1,000, which was prohibitive for a black American in those days. Anti-immigration legislation passed in Illinois in 1819, 1829, and 1853. In Indiana, such laws were enacted in 1831 and 1852. Michigan Territory passed such a law in 1827; Iowa Territory passed one in 1839 and Iowa enacted another in 1851 after it became a state. Oregon Territory passed such a law in 1849. Blacks who violated the law faced punishments that included advertisement and sale at public auction (Illinois, 1853).” ~Slavery in the North (North of Slavery. The Negro in the Free States 1790-1860, University of Chicago Press)
So, Lincoln fell upon the idea of the Emancipation Proclamation; moral high ground on which to base his tyrannical, murderous war. Not a child goes through the Public Fool System without hearing of the Great Emancipator and his Emancipation Proclamation, but how many are told of the conditions of the Free Blacks in the North, the duplicity of Lincoln witnessed by his statements in his inaugural address or the horrid treatment of those in the North who dared oppose Lincoln’s unconstitutional acts? Is withholding the truth any different than lying?
Conveniently, for those who worship at the feet of Lincoln and the unconstitutional government that has existed since what was actually the Second War for Independence in this country, left out of most descriptions of the Emancipation Proclamation is the fact it only freed the slaves in the parts of states where Lincoln had no control. It did not free any Blacks in the Border States or in the areas of the Southern States controlled by the Northern Army. Lincoln, acting through his military subordinates such as Benjamin “Beast” Butler in New Orleans, continued to use Blacks as slave labor to construct forts and other “needful” buildings.
“Despite this expansive wording, the Emancipation Proclamation was limited in many ways. It applied only to states that had seceded from the Union, leaving slavery untouched in the loyal border states. It also expressly exempted parts of the Confederacy that had already come under Northern control. Most important, the freedom it promised depended upon Union military victory.
Although the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery in the nation, it captured the hearts and imagination of millions of Americans and fundamentally transformed the character of the war. ~National Archives and Records Administration
There we have it; the official government position from the National Archives, a branch of the central government. THE TRUTH DOES NOT MATTER ONLY HOW DO YOU FEEL OR THINK about any issue; in fact it is not important you even know the truth, especially if it has to do with overreaching, therefore unconstitutional government.
The Emancipation Proclamation, a piece of intentionally deceptive legislation continues to this day to capture “the hearts and imagination of millions of Americans” but in so doing it obfuscates the truth and does absolutely nothing to correct the inaccuracies of revisionist history taught to our children and the adults of this country. More importantly it carries with it the automatic acceptance of a highly centralized and despotic government structure that is diametrically opposed to the true intent of our Constitution as ratified.
During the Reconstruction era in the South, the right to vote and own property was removed from anyone who had given “support” to the government of the Confederacy. Yankees near-do-wells came in droves to the Southern states to see they were properly chastised and punished for daring to stand for “consent of the governed.” Of course many of these people came from Northern states that did not allow Blacks to vote.
“Following the Civil War, Radical Republicans in Congress introduced a series of laws and constitutional amendments to try to secure civil and political rights for black people. This wing of the Republican Party was called “radical” because of its strong stance on these and other issues. The right that provoked the greatest controversy, especially in the North, concerned black male suffrage: the right of the black man to vote.
In 1867, Congress passed a law requiring the former Confederate states to include black male suffrage in their new state constitutions. Ironically, even though African American men began voting in the South after 1867, the majority of Northern states continued to deny them this basic right.” (Emphasis added) ~Constitutional Rights Foundation, African Americans and the 15th Amendment.
These wonderful Yankees sent their holier-than-thou hypocrites into the South as teachers to indoctrinate the young people into acceptance of the tyrannical Reconstruction Act of 1867 and the casus belli of the war: freeing the Black man. Of course they were also there to teach the young people that the unconstitutional, highly centralized, tyrannical, despotic government they were living under was for the greater good of all.
Today, our children are still taught the above by those indoctrinated in the so called field of education and many so-called intelligent adults regurgitate the government provided pablum on demand. Again, it is all about the emotions of the situation and the truth is often irrelevant. We now see the manifestation of that doctrine in what is called “Common Core.”
“… [E]very man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late. We can give but a faint idea when we say it means the loss of all we now hold most sacred … personal property, lands, homesteads, liberty, justice, safety, pride, manhood. It means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the War, will be impressed by all influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, our maimed veterans as fit objects for their derision, it means the crushing of Southern manhood … to establish sectional superiority and a more centralised form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties.” ~Gen. Patrick Cleburne C.S.A. … 2 Jan 1864
(To be continued)
In Rightful Liberty