The Touchy Subject of Black Confederate Soldiers
- Thread starter mikegriffith1
- Start date
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Sure I have. It's just not one that pro-Confederate people like to hear. They want to hear that slavery was benevolent and they were fighting a noble lost cause.
They were fighting because a few rich people wanted to own slaves and they were terrified of black people.
Well, no, what the North wanted to do was end slavery and then try to go back to "normal" as quickly as possible.
The problem was, they didn't want to try anyone, not just Davis. Lee, Stephens, most of the traitors were never imprisoned at all, and then Andrew the Feckless gave everyone a pardon.
This was a historical mistake we are still paying for today.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Even though the guilt of the treasonous Jefferson Davis isn't the topic of this thread, there's this little tidbit I reminded myself of.
querythepast.com
Jefferson Davis fled to Quebec in 1867, after he was released on bail, and stayed there until Confederates were pardoned.
This is not a guy who wanted his day in court. This is a guy who hid in another country until the coast was clear.
nationalpost.com
A mere 14 years later, the lands of Canada would seem just as welcoming to a man who could not have been more opposite to John Henry Hill. In fact, it was a man who had given up his political career, his fortune and even his freedom to ensure that men like Hill remained enslaved.
Article content
In May, 1867, few Canadians noticed when a train trundled into Montreal carrying Jefferson Davis, the deposed president of the Confederate States of America.
Article content
Davis was a marked man blamed by Northerners and Southerners alike for the deadliest war in U.S. history, and after a harrowing train journey through New York — where he would have needed to avoid the gaze of war widows and crippled veterans alike — Davis was just happy to be in a country where nobody recognized him.
Article content
“My trip was so devoid of incident that like the weary knife grinder, I have no tale to tell,” he wrote in a letter to his brother.
A Confederate in Canada
Davis “retired within the car. Three cheers more and one for Mrs. Davis were then given, and the cars moved away toward Lennoxville, where he and his family alighted and were again the recipients of a hearty reception from the crowd awaiting him.”
querythepast.com
Jefferson Davis fled to Quebec in 1867, after he was released on bail, and stayed there until Confederates were pardoned.
This is not a guy who wanted his day in court. This is a guy who hid in another country until the coast was clear.
The time Confederate leader Jefferson Davis came to Canada to give the new country defence tips
At the time, Jefferson Davis was a marked man blamed by Northerners and Southerners alike for the deadliest war in U.S. history
nationalpost.com
A mere 14 years later, the lands of Canada would seem just as welcoming to a man who could not have been more opposite to John Henry Hill. In fact, it was a man who had given up his political career, his fortune and even his freedom to ensure that men like Hill remained enslaved.
Article content
In May, 1867, few Canadians noticed when a train trundled into Montreal carrying Jefferson Davis, the deposed president of the Confederate States of America.
Article content
Davis was a marked man blamed by Northerners and Southerners alike for the deadliest war in U.S. history, and after a harrowing train journey through New York — where he would have needed to avoid the gaze of war widows and crippled veterans alike — Davis was just happy to be in a country where nobody recognized him.
Article content
“My trip was so devoid of incident that like the weary knife grinder, I have no tale to tell,” he wrote in a letter to his brother.
No, you haven't answered my questions. Here they are again...third time.
Three specific questions you have not even attempted to answer. If your scared just say so, I understand. Adding lies to your ignorance doesn't help.
Quantrill
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Sure I have. YOu just didn't like the answers.
Right, so now, tell me if Cross-dressing Jeffy was so keen to fight the charges of treason in court, why did he flee to Canada and stay there until the government decided to drop the matter?
mikegriffith1
Mike Griffith
- Thread starter
- #346
Quantrill, I assure you that you're wasting your time with JoeB131. No, he didn't answer your questions, though he claims he did. He does this all the time.
Beyond his refusal to respond factually and credibly, just keep in mind that he has publicly said in this very forum that "Hitler wasn't the problem" but the Jews were, that the Nazis had valid reasons for hating the Jews, that the Jews sabotaged Germany after WWI (a scurrilous Nazi lie), that there is a worldwide Zionist conspiracy, that Israel knowingly attacked the USS Liberty in 1967, that Jews controlled the Navy Court of Inquiry investigation into the USS Liberty incident (I've never been able to get him to tell me how they supposedly did this), that Mao and Stalin were good leaders overall, that Mao and Stalin did not murder tens of millions of people, that Red China was less oppressive than Free China, that U.S. intelligence was stalking and harassing the paranoid and mentally disturbed Iris Chang (his go-to source on the Nanking Massacre), that Hamas's rule in Gaza has been better than Jewish rule in Israel, that Hamas is the victim and Israel is the aggressor, etc., etc.
Finally, he will never stop replying. He seems to feel he always has to have the last word. On the few occasions when I reply to him anymore, I reach a point where I stop replying because I know he's never going to stop and because I think it's clear to objective readers that he has failed to refute my arguments.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Yes, I refuse to answer the same questions 20 times because some racist thinks they are 'clever'.
And here comes Mikey's long whine of butthurt. Anything that hurts his white, Christian sensibilities.
Actually, I usually mop the floor with you, because you are kind of a loon.
Did OJ ever find the real killer on that golf course?
I agree. He, JoeB131, is unteachable and ignorant, yet claims to have some sort of degree in history. A bad combination. He loves to ask questions expecting you to answer, but ignores questions to him because the answer reveals his ignorance.
We are getting into the 'legal aspects' of the war, which again he doesn't understand. As a nation, the U.S. has always prided itself as a Nation of Laws. And once the War was over, and Yankees began wanting to try and hang the leaders of the Confederacy, for treason and war crimes, etc., the law came into play. The mob rule of military tribunals was out and the courts were in. Of course they got away with hanging a few before the tribunals were out. Legal murder.
Definitions of words now became important. Domestic Law and International Law became important factors. All this and more would be introduced now before you can take these out and just hang them. As a nation of law, the U.S. must prove to its own people that all was legal. They had the military victory at a terrible price, but they wanted, needed, the legal victory. And it's this that the lawyers were encountering. And grappling with that caused several Yankee prosecutors to resign from the case.
And of course 'secession' was front and center of it all. Was it legal or not? It would impact how you applied 'treason'.
Appreciate the advice. At some point I will take it.
Quantrill
No, you haven't.
Once Davis was allowed bail on May 13, 1867 he did go to Canada. But he would return back to Richmond when he was required to be in court.
Though out on bail, Davis life was still in danger from vengeful Yankees. "Later that year, on hearing of a somewhat credible plot to assassinate Davis as he travelled from Canada to Richmond to attend court in November, O'Conor merely warned his client to take care and to travel under an assumed name." (Secession On Trial, Cynthia Nicoletti, Cambridge University Press, 2017, p. 282)
A lot of Yankee assholes, like yourself were not willing for the Law to be exercised. "Underwood faced considerable criticism for granting Davis's bail application. An anonymous New Yorker angrily reminded the judge that there are 100,000 graves of soldiers crying out for revenge and he a traitor is allowed to walk the streets on his own recognizance. Revenge. Revenge. Deep and complete. Will be carried out on [Davis's] d....d soul." (Nicoletti, p. 189)
Both Davis and his family were at risk.
Quantrill
gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 80,631
- 44,796
- 2,605
Excellent column on Lincoln’s war of aggression.
…
Let’s start by getting the terminology right. It wasn’t a “civil war.” A civil war is a conflict in which two or more factions fight for control of the same government. That’s not what happened. The South wasn’t trying to take over the North. Their sole objective was to leave the Union.
Slavery was certainly a major element of the conflict. But reducing the bloodiest war in American history—700,000 dead, which in per-capita terms would be about seven million today—to a single cause is not just intellectually lazy and dishonest. It’s dangerous.
The North had industrialized, with about ten times as many factories as the South, and a growing urban working class fed by massive immigration from Ireland and Germany…
The South was the opposite. It was an agricultural export economy. Cotton was the big commodity—by the 1860s, cotton alone accounted for almost 60% of all US exports. The fiber mainly went to Britain’s mills in Manchester. The South was plugged into the global economy in a way that the North was not, and Southern planters wanted what any export economy wants: free trade. Low tariffs, open ports, and the ability to buy manufactured goods from whoever offered the best price, which was usually Britain.
Tariffs: How the North Looted the South
…before the war started, before anybody fired a shot—Congress passed the Morrill Tariff. This raised duties back to their highest levels since the Tariff of Abominations. It passed because Southern representatives of seven states had already left Congress following their secession. Think about the timing. The South walks out, and the very first thing the North does is jack up tariffs to benefit Northern industry. If you’re a Southerner, that tells you that the moment you lose your political voice, the Northern majority will use the federal government to loot you. Which is, of course, exactly what Calhoun had warned about thirty years earlier.
…The South could see that slavery was uneconomic and on its way out. Fighting a bloody civil war to maintain slavery never made sense, and no other country fought a war to abolish slavery. It would have died of its own dead weight. Brazil was the last major country to abolish it, peacefully, in 1888.
…
The Lincoln Myth: What He Actually Said and Believed
Now we come to Abraham Lincoln, who may be the most successfully mythologized political figure in American history. And I say that as someone who considers most political figures to have feet of clay.
…
Britain—An Underrated Element
This is the part they definitely don’t teach in American schools, and it may be the most important part of the whole story. Perhaps for the same reason that the importance of the French Army and Navy aren’t recognized in winning the Revolutionary War.
Great Britain in 1861 was the world’s superpower. The Royal Navy controlled the seas. The British Empire spanned the globe. And the British textile industry—the engine of the world’s largest economy—ran on Southern cotton. About 80 percent of the cotton feeding British mills came from the American South. When the Union Navy blockaded Southern ports, it was like cutting off Britain’s oxygen supply. Hundreds of thousands of British textile workers faced unemployment. The economic pressure on the British government to do something was enormous.
The Real Causes of the American War of Secession - LewRockwell
The Real Causes of the American War of Secession
By Doug Casey…
Let’s start by getting the terminology right. It wasn’t a “civil war.” A civil war is a conflict in which two or more factions fight for control of the same government. That’s not what happened. The South wasn’t trying to take over the North. Their sole objective was to leave the Union.
Slavery was certainly a major element of the conflict. But reducing the bloodiest war in American history—700,000 dead, which in per-capita terms would be about seven million today—to a single cause is not just intellectually lazy and dishonest. It’s dangerous.
The North had industrialized, with about ten times as many factories as the South, and a growing urban working class fed by massive immigration from Ireland and Germany…
The South was the opposite. It was an agricultural export economy. Cotton was the big commodity—by the 1860s, cotton alone accounted for almost 60% of all US exports. The fiber mainly went to Britain’s mills in Manchester. The South was plugged into the global economy in a way that the North was not, and Southern planters wanted what any export economy wants: free trade. Low tariffs, open ports, and the ability to buy manufactured goods from whoever offered the best price, which was usually Britain.
Tariffs: How the North Looted the South
…before the war started, before anybody fired a shot—Congress passed the Morrill Tariff. This raised duties back to their highest levels since the Tariff of Abominations. It passed because Southern representatives of seven states had already left Congress following their secession. Think about the timing. The South walks out, and the very first thing the North does is jack up tariffs to benefit Northern industry. If you’re a Southerner, that tells you that the moment you lose your political voice, the Northern majority will use the federal government to loot you. Which is, of course, exactly what Calhoun had warned about thirty years earlier.
…The South could see that slavery was uneconomic and on its way out. Fighting a bloody civil war to maintain slavery never made sense, and no other country fought a war to abolish slavery. It would have died of its own dead weight. Brazil was the last major country to abolish it, peacefully, in 1888.
…
The Lincoln Myth: What He Actually Said and Believed
Now we come to Abraham Lincoln, who may be the most successfully mythologized political figure in American history. And I say that as someone who considers most political figures to have feet of clay.
…
Britain—An Underrated Element
This is the part they definitely don’t teach in American schools, and it may be the most important part of the whole story. Perhaps for the same reason that the importance of the French Army and Navy aren’t recognized in winning the Revolutionary War.
Great Britain in 1861 was the world’s superpower. The Royal Navy controlled the seas. The British Empire spanned the globe. And the British textile industry—the engine of the world’s largest economy—ran on Southern cotton. About 80 percent of the cotton feeding British mills came from the American South. When the Union Navy blockaded Southern ports, it was like cutting off Britain’s oxygen supply. Hundreds of thousands of British textile workers faced unemployment. The economic pressure on the British government to do something was enormous.
The Real Causes of the American War of Secession - LewRockwell
mikegriffith1
Mike Griffith
- Thread starter
- #351
The arguments about the Morrill Tariff are off the mark. The Morrill Tariff rates were significantly lower than the tariff rates between 1825 and 1830, which had sometimes been over 50%. Yes, the Morrill Tariff raised existing rates substantially, but the Morrill rates did not come close to being as high as the rates in force from 1825 to 1830. Also, unlike previous protectionist tariff bills, the Morrill bill extended protection to every major farm product, which would help some sectors of the Southern economy.
I do agree that Southern fury over the Morrill Tariff was probably the second major reason the seven Deep South states seceded, but it had nothing to do with the secession of the four Upper South states. Some of the Southern objections to the Morrill Tariff were invalid, but some were valid.
Of course, if the seven Deep South states had not seceded, the Morrill Tariff never would have passed the Senate in the first place. The Democrats won enough Senate seats in the 1860 election to maintain control of the Senate.
Last edited:
JoeB131
Diamond Member
they didn't hang enough of the bastards.
The main reason why the peace after WWII lasted is that there was REAL ACCOUNTABILITY for the Nazi and Japanese leaders. They had trials, the world saw the evil they did, and then they ended up at the business end of a noose.
Except he didn't come back until the charges were dropped. I mean, not as hilarious as the time he tried to escape from Richmond dressed as a woman.
Um, okay, but the point was, he fled to Canada, and I doubt he'd have come back if they were seriously going to put him on trial.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
You leave out the fact that 'economy' was entirely based on the enslavement, torture, and systematic RAPE of other human beings.
They did do something. They refused to recognize the Confederacy, and they developed alternate markets for cotton in India and Egypt.
In short, the British Empire, as completely immoral as it was in may cases, saw the continuation of slavery as a moral line even they couldn't cross.
gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 80,631
- 44,796
- 2,605
Too bad there isn’t any accountability for American leadership who’ve committed numerous war crimes for decades.
gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 80,631
- 44,796
- 2,605
Read the column dumb ass. I didn’t write it.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
I guess not. War Crimes Trials are for the losing side. Nothing wrong with a little "Victor's Justice". You usually owe it to the people who died.
That said, I think that most of America's wars were unjustifiable. The only ones I would consider morally justified are the Civil War (For the North), World War II, Korea, and Afghanistan.
The ones I consider morally questionable are the War of 1812, Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, Vietnam, and, of course, Iraq.
I did. It was stupid.
They didn't hang more because the Law was back in force. That way assholes like you couldn't get their way. Your opinion is just a shit statement.
And, what is your source for Davis in a womans dress?
Davis came back any time he was required to be in court. Whether he would have come back or not depending on the way the case was unfolding, no one knows. Just because he was in Canada wouldn't mean the U.S. wouldn't try and get him back. John Surratt was captured in Egypt and brought back to trial as conspirator in the Lincoln assassination.
It was the prosecutions lawyers and Chief Justice Chase who were wrestling with the legal facts of Davis case. Many issues were in play that made Davis acquittal a real possibility. It was the lawyers who recommended to Johnson that he issue a proclamation of amnesty for all Confederates under indictment. Evarts and Dana were the prosecution.
"Evarts waited more than a month before forwarding it to the president. He told Dana that he wanted to familiarize himself with the details of the present indictment pending against Davis before sending the letter to Johnson. When Evarts finally introduced Dana's letter in the cabinet in October, he informed the other officers that he shared Dana's misgivings. He was equally convinced, he said, that Davis's trial could easily result in acquittal and consequent humiliation for the government. (Secession On Trial, Cynthia Nicoletti, Cambridge University Press, p. 292)
"Along with Dana's letter, Evarts also presented a recommendation that the president issue a proclamation of amnesty that would cover all of the Confederates still under indictment, including Davis." (Nicoletti, p. 292)
Glory, glory....hallelujah!
Quantrill
JoeB131
Diamond Member
They didn't hang more because everyone wanted to put the war past them like a bad date.
They should have.
Instead, they got to promote the Lost Cause bullshit, impose Jim Crow, and spit on the graves of every brave man who fought to save the Union.
Surratt was part of the crew that murdered Lincoln. The fact is Cross-dressing Jeffy still fled the country the minute he could, and didn't come back until the coast was clear.
Again, that's because they weren't serious about it.
12 Union soldiers who lost arms and legs, and Cross-Dressing Jeffy was seeing the business end of a rope.
Bullshit statements. I showed you why they didn't hang more. The Law was in place. The courts were in place.
As far as 'should have', a host of yankees 'should have' been hung. But 'should have's' are like your b...s...history degree. They don't exist.
How about them yankee Jim Crow black codes before the war?
I see. You get your history from meme's. Cartoons. Bullshit. "T.H. Peabody, a member of the United States troops who captured Davis, gave his acccount of Davis's capture as follows: 'Besides the suit of men's clothing worn by Mr. Davis, he had on, when captured, Mrs. Davis's large water-proof cloak or robe, thrown on over his head and shoulders. This shawl and robe were finally deposited in the archives of the War Department at Washington by order of Secretary Stanton. The story of the hoop skirt, sun bonnet and calico wrapper had no real existence, and was started in the fertile brain of the reporters and in the illustrated papers of the day'" (Was Jefferson Davis Right, James & Walter Kennedy, Pelican Publishing Co., 1998, p. 93-94)
See? Only fertile brains believe your bullshit. Plenty of fertilizer on your brain. Keep playing with your toys.
Yes I know who John Surratt was. I just told you. My point was he was brought back from Egypt, dumbass. Meaning I doubt Jefferson Davis being in Canada would have stopped the U.S from going after him. Charges against Surratt were dropped, why? Because the Courts were back instead of the yankee mob rule tribunals. And Johns release is proof of the murder of Mary Surratt by the mob rule yankee military tribunals.
Another shit statement from a fertilized brain. It wasn't till 1869 that charges against Davis were dropped. They had been working on Davis case since 1866. They were coming to the time limit when they couldn't press charges against him. So, for three years they struggled with the case. They were very serious about it. And they were serious when they advised the President to take your military victory and be happy. Else it will be seen throughout the world that the yankee was the traitor. The yankee will be found guilty if Jeff Davis is found not guilty.
Oh yes, packing the jury is the only way the yankee could get a guilty verdict. But real courts now existed. Glory, glory...hallelujah.
Quantrill
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Naw, the problem was, the NOrth wanted reconcilation more than it wanted justice. We've been paying for it ever since.
You know why no one today yells, "Heil Hitler!" Because we hanged all the top Nazis and made sure everyone knew what they did was bad.
Yawn, there weren't any.
Point was, the sissy put on a lady's shawl and tried to hide.
He should have run out with a pistol in each hand yelling, "Die, Yankee dogs!!!" But he didn't have the balls for that after ordering hundreds of thousands to needless deaths.
Yes, because no one wants to shelter presidential assassins.
But failed presidents?
Uh-huh. And he fled to Canada in 1867 and hid there until the coast was clear.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
-
Swedish intelligence service Säpo has arrested a managing director from western Sweden for spying for FSB (putin)- Started by Litwin
- Replies: 0
-
Even after being caught w/ blatant lies, again and again,Tucker still goes on
- Started by Thethingsz
- Replies: 5
