Abraham Lincoln = America's greatest war criminal!, page 6
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 21 times


reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 06:01 PM by sr_robert1
reply to post by SLAYER69



The forts that were fired upon were in the Confederate States. A bunch of foreigners were holed up there and refused to leave. They were then forced out. I don't see any problem with that.


reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 08:04 PM by HothSnake
reply to post by daddio



I agree that Lincoln was the first President to enact war powers, and send us into a state of perpetual war and martial law. These are facts, but I think that he was trying, in the end, to set things right again. He had planned to bring the southern states back into fold, without holding them responsable for the war. He was against the plans that were later implemented after his death, which essentially created a slave colony out of the South and destroyed the Bill of Rights, supplanting these sacred rights with the 14th Amendent, turning us all into the unwitting slaves of the bankers. What he did with the greenback was the correct course to take, and it ended up being his death nail. In the end, I don't blame Lincoln for the war. The whole thing was being manipulated by the European powers long before he took office. Like everyone else, he was an unwitting participant in the evil plans of the banking elite of the world. I think that he realized this, thus his quotes above point to the fact that he had caught on to their plans and tried to thwart them. That's why he had to go. The historical evidence suggests that there were a lot more participants involved in the planning and demise of Abraham Lincoln than John Wilkes Booth.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by HothSnake]


reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 08:58 PM by Freeborn
reply to post by HothSnake



That's right, blame it all on those pesky Europeans.

Of course some European countries tried to manipulate or influence events, (with little success}, and some tried to profit, (a common practice throughout human history), but at the end of the day it was an 'American' thing between American people.

Despite what some wish, you can not blame us for all of the world's ill's!



reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 09:33 PM by HothSnake
reply to post by Freeborn



I don't blame the European people per say, but the controllers of said society. You can't ignore the manipulation of America and its wars by the European money powers. Even a cursory examination of history shows their behind-the-scenes manipulation of just about every major conflict, including the American war for independance, which was mostly a sham.

You have the first Bank of the U.S., the second BUS, and now the Federal Reserve system, whose major share holders were affiliated with the Bank of England and its corolaries. You have WWI, WWII, etc., all European conflicts fought for European interests.

We Americans have never really controlled our own destiny. Even today we are all over world fighting phony wars to secure oil rights for BP and the opium trade, just like the European contrived and manipulated opium wars of old, where the Eastern American establishment was used to fight. Truth be told that the whole slave trade of the world was created and funded by the British for the very purpose of maintaining the opium trade in India and China. The Southern slave-owning establishment was instrumental within the British scheme of dominating the economies of the world.

Remember, it wasn't me that said it, but that European Otto Von Bismarck. I don't blame all Europeans, just their controllers.


reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 09:53 PM by thegagefather
Originally posted by Nosred
Lincoln belongs in category with Hitler, Lenin, and Mao. They all killed their own countries people and left their nations in ruins. You only find glorifications of Lincoln nowadays but would you have found anything critical of Hitler in Nazi Germany? You still won't find any truth on Mao in China. In conclusion, Abraham Lincoln was just another Republican warmonger.


First of all, you're ignorant for comparing Adolf Hitler to Lenin and Zedong. Obviously you don't know anything about what you're talking about.

Secondly:

Hitler wasn't fighting a civil war, Hitler was was committing genocide of the highest degree, and really if you think the two have a lot in common why dont you point some of these common grounds out?

Third:

You honestly think there wasn't people who were "thinking critically" of Hitler in Nazi Germany? Once he began his mad slaughter of his own and all other people free thinking wasn't on option. Should the people who realized what he was doing was the worst type of atrocity walked up to the Nazi regime have said "stop doing this, Hitler?" No, because if they weren't brutally slaughtered on the spot they would have been sent to a Death Camp. Or maybe they should have formed a militia and have been gassed, bombed, or burned to death.

And lastly...

(Taken from wikipedia)

"Mao remains a controversial figure to this day, with a contentious and ever-evolving legacy. He is officially held in high regard in China where he is known as a great revolutionary, political strategist, military mastermind, and savior of the nation. Many Chinese also believe that through his policies, he laid the economic, technological and cultural foundations of modern China, transforming the country from a backward agrarian society into a major world power. Additionally, Mao is viewed by many in China as a poet, philosopher, and visionary, owing the latter primarily to the cult of personality fostered during his time in power.[3] As a consequence, his portrait continues to be featured prominently on Tiananmen and on all Renminbi bills."


On a final note, if Abraham Lincoln had anything in common at all with Mao or Lenin it was seeing the possibility to change a nation for the better and acting on it from a leadership position. You should do some research before you condemn a President as a war criminal.

You're a fool.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by thegagefather]


reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 10:15 PM by Lilitu
Originally posted by StinkyFeet

Source

That sounds pretty racist and hateful to me. Our anestors were pieces of work. Yikes!



Consider the source. That site is owned by European (read WHITE) Americans United. A white supremacists group.

www.europeanamericansunited.org


reply posted on 14-10-2009 @ 11:33 PM by AlienEyes
reply to post by Nosred



I do not defend Lincoln, nor ANY OTHER President, HOWEVER, he would not be required to 'declare war' because it would be considered a 'police action'. Upon the event a civil uprising occurred, martial law would be enacted by executive action as a matter of course.



reply posted on 15-10-2009 @ 09:42 AM by Ray Amuro
Originally posted by plumranch
reply to
post by Nosred







To this day as many think it was a slavery issue as think it was a states rights or a taxation issue.

Apparently Lincoln thought it was very important:




[edit on 13/10/09 by plumranch]

yeah just like Bush thougt it was very important to invade Irak to find weapon of destruction and free Iraki people...
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7  >>    ^^TOP^^



Did Carl Sagan know something?
  Posted 19 days ago with 277 member flags
Earthly coincidences...or not.
  Posted 15 days ago with 122 member flags
The Mysterious Death of Marilyn Monroe
  Posted 18 days ago with 86 member flags
Denver Airport Allows Camera Crew in Underground Facility
  Posted 17 days ago with 83 member flags
10 People Whose Warnings Went Unheeded
  Posted 3 days ago with 77 member flags