New Website on the American Civil War

[mikegriffith1]

I have finally created a new website on the American Civil War. My site presents a view of the Civil War that is rarely discussed in our history books, a view that steers a middle course between the pro-Southern Lost Cause narrative and the standard pro-Northern narrative that dominates our history books.

The American Civil War: An Alternative View

 

[JoeB131]

Wow, is this going to be another website where half the links don't work and the others say absolutely crazy shit like Abe Lincoln was a space alien?

 

[The Duke]

I have finally created a new website on the American Civil War. My site presents a view of the Civil War that is rarely discussed in our history books, a view that steers a middle course between the pro-Southern Lost Cause narrative and the standard pro-Northern narrative that dominates our history books.

The American Civil War: An Alternative View

I like Civil War stuff. I'm in!
TNHarley will check it out too.

 

[JoeB131]

Okay, so I did look it up.

Wow. So John Wilkes Booth was innocent. Who knew?

And McClellan was supposedly a good general, even though he putzed around for two years before they put Grant in there, and he made short work of the Rebels.

Oh, yeah, and even though the South started this shit by attacking Ft. Sumter, it was the "Radical Republicans" who stirred up hate by saying that enslaving and raping other human beings was wrong.

Got it.

 

[rightwinger]

Okay, so I did look it up.

Wow. So John Wilkes Booth was innocent. Who knew?

And McClellan was supposedly a good general, even though he putzed around for two years before they put Grant in there, and he made short work of the Rebels.

Oh, yeah, and even though the South started this shit by attacking Ft. Sumter, it was the "Radical Republicans" who stirred up hate by saying that enslaving and raping other human beings was wrong.

Got it.

About what I expected
Crazy revisionist history

 

[JoeB131]

About what I expected
Crazy revisionist history

Well, in Mike's crazy world

The Rape of Nanking wasn't that bad.
Japan was justified in bombing Pearl Harbor
A vast conspiracy killed JFK
Vietnam was a good idea
Evolution isn't a real thing
George Custer was a brilliant officer
The Shroud of Turn is real.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Wow, is this going to be another website where half the links don't work and the others say absolutely crazy shit like Abe Lincoln was a space alien?

Folks, just a heads-up about this wingnut and anti-Semite JoeB131: Just last year he said "Hitler wasn't the problem." He claims that the Jews wrecked Germany after WWI and that the Nazis' hatred of the Jews was therefore understandable. He says there's a worldwide Zionist conspiracy. He's argued that there would have been no wars in the Middle East if those lousy, rotten Jews had not been given the tiny homeland of Israel in 1948.

I think you get the idea. And, of course, "rightwinger" endorses JoeB131's nuttiness.

 

[JoeB131]

Folks, just a heads-up about this wingnut and anti-Semite JoeB131: Just last year he said "Hitler wasn't the problem." He claims that the Jews wrecked Germany after WWI and that the Nazis' hatred of the Jews was therefore understandable. He says there's a worldwide Zionist conspiracy. He's argued that there would have been no wars in the Middle East if those lousy, rotten Jews had not been given the tiny homeland of Israel in 1948.

I think you get the idea. And, of course, "rightwinger" endorses JoeB131's nuttiness.

Buddy, Israel is about as popular as jock itch right now.

 

[TNHarley]

I like Civil War stuff. I'm in!
TNHarley will check it out too.

This didnt even page me. I just happened to click on the thread lol.

 

[TNHarley]

So John Wilkes Booth was innocent. Who knew?

Not innocent. Justified.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Wow, is this going to be another website where half the links don't work and the others say absolutely crazy shit like Abe Lincoln was a space alien?

Wait are you saying Lincoln WASN''T AN ALIEN sent fight the vampire menace by the Illuminati?

 

[1srelluc]

About all I concern myself with anymore is the war in my AO and what I can dig-up concerning my ancestors who fought in it as part of the 33rd Virginia Inf..

33rd Virginia Infantry Regiment - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

BTW....Happy Lee/Jackson Day.

 

[ding]

Not innocent. Justified.

No, John Wilkes Booth's assassination of Abraham Lincoln is widely condemned as unjustified, driven by his fervent Confederate sympathies, racism, and opposition to abolition and Black civil rights, with Booth viewing himself as a hero ending a tyrant's rule, while history views him as a murderer. His justification, based on ending "tyranny" and saving the South, contrasts with public and historical condemnation of his treasonous act, which aimed to disrupt the Union and uphold slavery.

Booth's Justifications (From His Perspective):

• Tyrant & Tyranny: Booth saw Lincoln as a dictator crushing the South and sought to end his "tyranny," comparing himself to historical liberators like Brutus.
• Confederate Cause: As a staunch supporter, he viewed Lincoln as the primary obstacle to the Confederacy and believed his death could help the South.
• Racism & White Supremacy: He was enraged by Lincoln's support for Black citizenship and voting rights, viewing these as threats to white Southern society.
• "Higher Law": Booth believed he was acting on a moral imperative, following a "higher law" to preserve the South's way of life, including slavery.

Why It's Considered Unjustified:

• Political Violence: Assassination is universally condemned as a criminal act, not a legitimate form of political protest or change.
• Treason: Booth's act was a politically motivated, treasonous act against the United States government, not a justifiable act of war or rebellion.
• Impact: Lincoln's assassination plunged the nation into further chaos and grief, hindering Reconstruction efforts rather than saving the South.
• Moral Condemnation: The vast majority of Americans, both then and now, view Booth as a murderer and traitor, not a hero.

In essence, Booth's motivations stemmed from extreme pro-slavery, pro-Confederate ideology, but his actions are seen as a criminal act of political assassination, lacking any valid justification.

 

[TNHarley]

No, John Wilkes Booth's assassination of Abraham Lincoln is widely condemned as unjustified, driven by his fervent Confederate sympathies, racism, and opposition to abolition and Black civil rights, with Booth viewing himself as a hero ending a tyrant's rule, while history views him as a murderer. His justification, based on ending "tyranny" and saving the South, contrasts with public and historical condemnation of his treasonous act, which aimed to disrupt the Union and uphold slavery.

Booth's Justifications (From His Perspective):

• Tyrant & Tyranny: Booth saw Lincoln as a dictator crushing the South and sought to end his "tyranny," comparing himself to historical liberators like Brutus.
• Confederate Cause: As a staunch supporter, he viewed Lincoln as the primary obstacle to the Confederacy and believed his death could help the South.
• Racism & White Supremacy: He was enraged by Lincoln's support for Black citizenship and voting rights, viewing these as threats to white Southern society.
• "Higher Law": Booth believed he was acting on a moral imperative, following a "higher law" to preserve the South's way of life, including slavery.

Why It's Considered Unjustified:

• Political Violence: Assassination is universally condemned as a criminal act, not a legitimate form of political protest or change.
• Treason: Booth's act was a politically motivated, treasonous act against the United States government, not a justifiable act of war or rebellion.
• Impact: Lincoln's assassination plunged the nation into further chaos and grief, hindering Reconstruction efforts rather than saving the South.
• Moral Condemnation: The vast majority of Americans, both then and now, view Booth as a murderer and traitor, not a hero.

In essence, Booth's motivations stemmed from extreme pro-slavery, pro-Confederate ideology, but his actions are seen as a criminal act of political assassination, lacking any valid justification.

 

[ding]

Not innocent. Justified.

Historically and in modern contexts, individuals holding racist, white supremacist, or extreme neo-Confederate views have argued that John Wilkes Booth was justified in killing Abraham Lincoln.

This justification is rooted in the same motivations that drove Booth: intense racism, belief in white supremacy, and hatred for the abolition of slavery.

Key Aspects of the Justification

• "Tyrant" Narrative: Racists often frame Booth as a patriot and Lincoln as a "tyrant" who destroyed the South and violated constitutional rights (specifically by freeing slaves and violating the rights of white Southerners to hold people in bondage).
• White Supremacy: Booth was a staunch white supremacist who stated that the country was "formed for the white, not for the black man". His act is celebrated by modern extremists who share the view that white domination is a natural order that was unjustly ended by Lincoln.
• Reaction to Voting Rights: Booth was specifically triggered by Lincoln’s 1865 speech advocating voting rights for Black Americans, particularly those who served in the Union army, yelling, "That means ****** citizenship... Now, by God, I'll put him through".
• Historical Admiration: In the immediate aftermath of the assassination, some Southerners celebrated the murder, with diarists writing "All honor to J. Wilkes Booth" and calling it a "just reward" for Lincoln.
• Modern Neo-Confederate Views: Some extremist groups continue to defend the Confederacy and view its defeat as a tragedy, often viewing figures like Booth as misguided heroes rather than terrorists.

While many Southerners did not support the assassination at the time, seeing it as a "depraved act" that hurt the South, the narrative that Booth was justified is a persistent, if extremist, viewpoint.

 

[TNHarley]

Historically and in modern contexts, individuals holding racist, white supremacist, or extreme neo-Confederate views have argued that John Wilkes Booth was justified in killing Abraham Lincoln.

This justification is rooted in the same motivations that drove Booth: intense racism, belief in white supremacy, and hatred for the abolition of slavery.

Key Aspects of the Justification

• "Tyrant" Narrative: Racists often frame Booth as a patriot and Lincoln as a "tyrant" who destroyed the South and violated constitutional rights (specifically by freeing slaves and violating the rights of white Southerners to hold people in bondage).
• White Supremacy: Booth was a staunch white supremacist who stated that the country was "formed for the white, not for the black man". His act is celebrated by modern extremists who share the view that white domination is a natural order that was unjustly ended by Lincoln.
• Reaction to Voting Rights: Booth was specifically triggered by Lincoln’s 1865 speech advocating voting rights for Black Americans, particularly those who served in the Union army, yelling, "That means ****** citizenship... Now, by God, I'll put him through".
• Historical Admiration: In the immediate aftermath of the assassination, some Southerners celebrated the murder, with diarists writing "All honor to J. Wilkes Booth" and calling it a "just reward" for Lincoln.
• Modern Neo-Confederate Views: Some extremist groups continue to defend the Confederacy and view its defeat as a tragedy, often viewing figures like Booth as misguided heroes rather than terrorists.

While many Southerners did not support the assassination at the time, seeing it as a "depraved act" that hurt the South, the narrative that Booth was justified is a persistent, if extremist, viewpoint.

LOL what a crock. Lincoln didnt even free any slaves.
Lincoln WAS a tyrant. By any definition of the word.
Your copy/paste revisionism is revisionist, you militant pagan.

 

[ding]

LOL what a crock. Lincoln didnt even free any slaves.
Lincoln WAS a tyrant. By any definition of the word.
Your copy/paste revisionism is revisionist, you militant pagan.

Historian On John Wilkes Booth Killing Lincoln: 'He Was Motivated By Racism'

Adam Goodheart, author of 1861: The Civil War Awakening, addressed the plot to kill President Abraham Lincoln on the 150th anniversary of his assassination at the hands of John Wilkes Booth.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[1srelluc]

The above is why I don't involve myself in general CW discussions.

 

[ding]

Lincoln WAS a tyrant.

Racists often frame Booth as a patriot and Lincoln as a "tyrant" who destroyed the South and violated constitutional rights.

 

[TNHarley]

Racists often frame Booth as a patriot and Lincoln as a "tyrant" who destroyed the South and violated constitutional rights.

Thats literally what he did.