BS: Was Abe Really All That Honest?

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 11:26 PM

"And let me remind you, Mr. Firth. I started this thread. You were never invited to contribute."

The only threads that are by invitation only are some specifically designated to be so. Usually the invitation is more of a request to stay on topic and avoid argument. Those threads are in a few places on Mudcat. Usually that means music threads, threads specific to certain artists to inform others where they will be playing. They usually have first sought and received the OK from management to have such a thread--perma threads are an example--and study threads to do with areas of song history or song provenance are another.

BS ain't one of those places. Going into BS is like going into a bar. One enters to have a beer and shoot the breeze. Sometimes one has the beer and stays or leaves, has the beer and shoots the breeze, has the beer and gets shot. Mr Firth has the same rights you do with regard to comments or views anywhere on Mudcat. The difference at present seems to be that Don has the respect of most if not all people here. Don't mean everyone always agrees with him, but it does mean he is treated with respect from the get-go even if there is disagreement. I have had more than a few arguments with him, but never to the point of denigrating his character or worth. He's one of a dozen or so folks here I admire very much and would turn to were I seeking advice about darned near anything. He's a good man.

I've been fortunate to have had some very pleasant exchanges with you, too. I look forward to more. Take that for what it's worth.

As for Abraham Lincoln: he reminds me of Sir John A Macdonald, Canada's (IMO) greatest Prime Minister. Were it not for Sir John A we would not have a country, such as it is. Sir John A drank too much, wheeled and dealed, threw up in our House of Commons and sent the North West Mounted Police out looking for Louis Riel while a few days later giving Riel the money to get out of the country because the political heat of Riel being caught would have divided us as a nation. Sir John A forced through the Canadian Pacific Railway so as to unite this place in name and in deed. Macdonald's personal life was tragic, but without him we'd be so far split among ourselves we'd today be easy pickings for conglomerates and multi-nationals. (I notice that the spell check underlines Macdonald's name, but when I capitalize the first 'd' it doesn't. The spell check is wrong. Sir John A Macdonald is spelled with two lower case d's.) I corrected the New York Times Almanac on that many years back by saying that MacDonald with reference to Sir John A was as shocking to me as Abraham Linkoln would be to an American. I trust they have amended the Almanac.

Anyway, I've rambled on enough. Have a good evening, Henry.

BM

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 09:59 PM

Yo, Greg! Suck ripe durians!

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 09:51 PM

I'm not in favor of slavery. I'm opposed to war. I'm opposed to crimes against humanity. Lincoln was another rich bastard that sent the poor bastards off to die. And he had them shot if they wouldn't. Unless you paid him off. Pig.
=(:-( P)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Joe_F
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 09:16 PM

You do not have to love Negroes or believe that they are equal to whites in all respects to believe that they are equal in human rights and that slavery is an evil institution worth getting rid of even at great expense. Those are separate issues. Lincoln was perfectly clear on that, and so was Harriet Beecher Stowe, and so was Thomas Jefferson.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 09:09 PM

Yo, Stinkle: blow me.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:51 PM

And let me remind you, Mr. Firth. I started this thread. You were never invited to contribute. You crashed this party. Just like you did to my Classical Guitar Strings? thread. You can't stay away from me. Some kind of schoolgirl crush, I think.
=(:-( I)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:26 PM

Here we go:

Sexy Abe

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:21 PM

If Hitler had conquered Europe he would be heralded for bringing order and civilisation to it. The winner writes the history. Abraham Lincoln was responsible for so much needless death.

And while this thread is about his honesty, let's discuss his secret, closet homosexuality. Not a very honest thing to be.
You did know about his gay lover? That military officer?
=(:-( o)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:52 PM

Small world indeed, Bruce. Hoka Hey.

I just wonder sometimes if we progress at all as a species or are condemned to repeat, Sisiphus-like, mistakes, absurdities, stupidities & atrocities ad infinitum.

The human species - or "The Goddamned Human Race" as our friend Sam Clemens referred to it - may simply not be susceptible of improvement.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:22 PM

You follow me around like a puppy dog, Mr. Firth. Yapping and growling and never contributing anything but insults. You throw stones, yet you live in a glass house.
=(:-( ))

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:10 PM

Greg, I met both Henry and Leonard back in 1967(?) at the Newport Folk Festival. This is indeed a small world.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 03:40 PM

By the way- in 1862 Abe may have been just a bit preoccupied with a little problem called The Civil War.

This from someone who was atthe 1972 Sun Dance at Crow Dog's Paradise and at Wounded Knee in 73 on the side of the Native Americans.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 03:40 PM

If I had to qualify Lincoln's truthfullmess I would have to say He was expediciously honest.

He used personal humor which is one of the most powerful honesty tools in the world with great success.


He was psychologicly honest. One answers with kindness when ones wife asks if her butt looks too big in this dress.

He knew himself at the cost of much distress which allowed him to be honest with himself and speak honestly to kindred spirits who had the same feelings of loss and thankfullness that moved in his own heart.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Arkie
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 03:28 PM

When public figures of former times are judged by the standards of our own times we are generally certain to see many shortcomings. When we judge the standards of the common folk of former times we are also likely to find even more shortcomings. Imagine what the people 50 or 100 years in the future will say about us. I suspect that there will be noted acts of unbelievable bravery; acts of great compassion; and a record of incomprehensible hatred, prejudice, and unthinkable criticism. We can rant as much as we like about public figures and politicians, but what is the saddest part of the whole thing is that they are trying to find a common thread with the voter.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 03:01 PM

No, Lizzie, you don't get me at all.

Several people here have pointed out that Lincoln, Jefferson, and a number of other historical figures, many of whom are considered icons, were only human, and as such, had their flaws. Yet—they are icons because of the good they accomplished. In Lincoln's case, initiating amd overseeing the events that led to the end of slavery and the slave trade in this country.

I believe that the vast majority of African-Americans feel that he left the world far better than he found it.

And it is both historically inaccurate and mean-spirited to blanketly condemn these historical icons as evil because, being human, they had their flaws and may have done some other things that, today—and in retrospect—we may regard as reprehensible.

As you have undoubtedly noticed, there are a couple of people bouncing from thread to thread on Mudcat recently who do not add anything of value to serious discussions, but do everything they can to disrupt them by resorting to extreme statements and hurling personal insults, hoping to end any serious discussion of issues and turn the thread into a mud-slinging contest.

You are a person who is obviously concerned with important issues. For this, I respect you. If I have any objection to some of the things you say, it's your tendency, as I mentioned once before, of assigning collective guilt to whole groups of people, often for things they are not involved in and were not even aware were happening.

You would do a bit better if, instead of attacking people for not being concerned with an issue, you focus on alerting them to the issue, and lay off the gratuitous accusations.

Just a touch of friendly advice from someone who, for the most part, agrees with what you are trying to do.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 02:31 PM

Lincoln was a product of his time, as are we all.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 02:17 PM

Yes indeed. That man delivered the Gettyburg Address, without so much as a zip code.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 02:12 PM

"If Lincoln isn't worthy of admiration, who is?"


Patch Adams (and all who now work with him)
David Attenborough
Chief Raoni
Leonard Peltier
Floyd Redcrow Westerman
Russell Means
William Wilberforce
Dennis Banks
Jane Goodall
Polly Higgins
The Suffragettes

...to name but a very few......

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 01:57 PM

If Lincoln isn't worthy of admiration, who is?

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 11:38 AM

Yo, Greg! DEFENESTRATE ME! (I can take it.)

- Chongo

;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 10:19 AM

Are ya off your meds again, Lizzie?

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 09:41 AM

Hear! Hear! You tell him!!!!! Good job, Lizzie!
=(:-( D)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 08:54 AM

Ah, right...got you now, Don...

What you mean is that no-one is permitted, in this thread, to mention 'the other side of Lincoln'

Silly me.
Didn't realize...
You carry on then and convince everyone he was a truly wonderful man and the fact he presided, in his presidency, over the biggest mass hanging in America, to this day, should remain unspoken of, un-written of, un-thought of.

Of course, it's what many of those in control of America have been hiding for way too long..and the amount of peopleelsewhere, FROM America, who have told me they had NO IDEA of much of the horrors wrought against The Native Americans, nor of the Covert Genocide which goes on TO THIS DAY has fair taken my breath away....

And whilst the TRUE history IS now getting out, much of it due to the Internet and the fact that many Native Americans are 'out there' telling their side of the story, this Holocaust against the Native Americans still remains belittled and forgotten about in the minds of most people.

And if any of you bother to WATCH the film I linked to, above 'Dakota 38' you will see and hear the Native Americans who made this long trek, against fearsome weather, talking about reconcilliation, apologizing for their ancestors part in it, whilst also understanding how they were driven to implode as they did.

You will also find them singing and dancing up on Mount Rushmore, as The White Men call it, The Six Grandfathers, as they prefer it to be known, again calling for reconcilliation.....

Strangely, I don't hear too many White Folks calling for the same thing, organizing *their* concerts to try to bring Peace and Friendship, Understand and Love, to a place where there has been much Hatred and Torture...

We have much to learn from The Native Americans...and it's a great shame that Lincoln did not use this terrible massacre to try to bring reconciliation himself, telling his people of the brutality of some of their own who chose to let the Native Americans starve to death, then cracked their 'let them eat grass' jokes about it....

Geez, Marie Antoinette brought on the French Revolution with her similar remark...

You stand by and watch people starve, whilst feeding yourselves? then do NOT be surprised if those people, whomsoever they may be, rise up and slay those whom they regard...and quite rightly so...as being Beyond Evil....

Brule - Reconciliation of Cultures Concert - The Six Grandfathers/Mount Rushmore

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:38 AM

Like George Washington and that stupid cherry tree.
Hogwash and balderdash!
=(:-( P)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:23 AM

There again, Henry - put it into its historical context.

Both Lincoln and Robert Louis Stevenson had wives (widows) who consciously worked on the after death reputation of their deceased husbands and tried to work up up a Christ like cult around them.

seems to have been a 19th century thing.

One man left us with Treasure Island and Kidnapped and poems, and stoies and legends like Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Lincoln left us with an America without slavery.

There have been less productive lives, less deserving of agrandisement.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Will Fly
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 07:11 AM

Lincoln is presented to us from birth as some kind of Messiah.

Ah... so was the Messiah - but you don't have to believe it. Surely a rational view of Lincoln would be that, like other people who had a hand in the course of history, he was a mixture of what we consider good and evil? No-one's perfect - the only question is whether you think what you consider the good outweighs what you consider to be the evil. Or vice versa.

Or you could speculate: what would America have been like without Lincoln - or Roosevelt - or Washington - or Taft - or whoever? Consider the alternative to each or any of these and ponder the consequences.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:42 AM

Endless arguments entertain endlessly.


Lincoln is presented to us from birth as some kind of Messiah.

But it's all so hypocritical.


=(:-( D)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Will Fly
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 06:08 AM

Just two observations:

1. Asserting that someone was or wasn't "X" or was or wasn't "Y", over and over again, without a comprehensive range of citations, is fairly pointless. You have a point of view - others have a different point of view. So what? Result? Endless arguments in Mudcat style with no conclusion being agreed or even reached.

2. From our modern, 21st century viewpoint, thousands of people in history committed crimes and atrocities as bad as, and probably far worse than Lincoln - and did them from their standpoint and with motives they probably considered quite valid We don't consider them valid now, of course, and rightly so - but what's the big deal with Lincoln?

I should add that, personally, I don't give a rat's ass for Lincoln or any other President or Prime Minister.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 05:54 AM

I can't think of anyone less like Bush.

What surely marks out Lincoln is his idealism - his belief in the importance of the Union - despite all the pressure on him, from every quarter of the establishment to take a more flexible view.

Compare and contrast to the man who led his party into its long term dalliance with what John McCain called 'the dark side of American populism'.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 04:15 AM

I noticed, sweetcheeks.
Abraham Lincoln was an imperialist land grabbing genocidal maniac who, in typical Republican style, gussied his crimes against humanity up with lies about freedom and liberty. Not much difference between him and Criminal Junior Bush.
=(:-( P)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 01:41 AM

"--obviously--"

Before Hinkle tries to correct my spelling.

If he even noticed.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 01:38 AM

Pissing in the punch bowl is an analogy for one of the ways that non-entities attempt to garner attention for themselves at a social gathering. Uncivilized behavior, but it does draw attention to themselves.

Which is what you guys are obviusly after. Not content to discuss things rationally (or not having the intelligence to do so), you feel you need to name-call and insult. Are you sure that being regarded as an idiot and a boor is the kind of attention you really want?

Grow up.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Nov 12 - 01:07 AM

Its very easy to judge people in different and difficult historical contests.

Wars - Indian Wars, Civil Wars, International wars - are surprisingly violent affairs. Its only the lucky leaders like Thatcher that come out of them smelling of roses.

Apparently another mass hanging that we were all pretty gung ho about was when we hanged all the Japanese war criminals after WW2. Some of them apparently on the grounds that one Japanese name was pretty much like any other Japanese name.

Really the native Indians hangings were dwarfed in culpability compared to how many people the English hanged in Kenya at the time of of the Mau Mau uprising.

Perhaps I'm looking at it in a naively quantitative way. For cold blooded murder - how can you beat Henry VIII cutting the heads off two women he had slept with - can't understand that.

To the victims and their families, every murder is particular and stems from the worst part of human soul.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 11:55 PM

Yep. He just laps it up.
=(:-( P)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 10:41 PM

Lizzie Cornish 1: "Would you care to explain your remark, Don?"

He's thirsty.

gfS

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 08:52 PM

So, Hinkle, you think getting a good education merely fills one's mind with evil propaganda? Well, that's convenient excuse for not bothering to summon up the energy and ambition to try to learn anything.

You remind me of the person who, after displaying an immense level of ignorance, was asked, "Are you really that ignorant or are you just apathetic?" responded, "I don't know and I don't care!"

If everyone thought like you, the human race would still be living in caves and drooling a lot.

You might try explaining your views on education to a young woman named Malala Yousufzai.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Rapparee
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 07:04 PM

None of that stuff in the articles is news to me. You can find it in several sources. I notice that it does not mention Lincoln's military service, or that his suspension of habeas corpus was constitutional (Article I, Section 9: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.").

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 06:14 PM

The story of Native Americans in the USA is just one long saga of atrocity, theft, and betrayal. For a very complete account, read Dee Brown's book "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee". Similar accounts could be written regarding the bloody American occupation of the Phillipines following the Spanish-American War, and it doesn't end there. It's always been about enlarging empire, gaining resources, land, and money...not about any recognizable moral code.

But.....gnu - Your point is also a valid one. Native American war parties committed many terrible (and some almost unbelievable) atrocities against white civilians and white military and civilian prisoners during various conflicts between the Natives and the Whites...and this naturally led to violent retaliation by the Whites when they captured or defeated Natives.

There were many atrocities committed on both sides. Both sides were naturally outraged by these acts, and they both responded, often, with further dreadful atrocities.

It's about time we all did our best to forgive this terrible past, accept that it happened, and resolve that our shared future will NOT repeat it...or inflict the guilt and anger of it upon someone else in some other place entirely.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 05:58 PM

Perhaps, had Lincoln been the man so many think him to be, he might have had the guts to explain that when you watch your People starting to starve to death, something inside you 'snaps', especially when you've watched other horrific atrocities happening to them too, coupled with being told to eat grass by an inhumane human, making that combination lethal.

(please see film link above)..and images of the 38 hanged men ended up on an ornate tin of a brewery company(?!!?)(see link below)

Also, some of the bodies were dug up, very shortly after death and used for medical research by William Mayo, amongst others...

Below you can read what these 'civilized' people did to those they considered to be 'savages'

Taken from here:Wiki - The Dakota War of 1862


>>>Execution

One of the 39 condemned prisoners was granted a reprieve.[13]:252-259[17] The Army executed the 38 remaining prisoners by hanging on December 26, 1862, in Mankato, Minnesota. It remains the largest mass execution in American history.
Drawing of the 1862 mass hanging in Mankato, Minnesota.
Wa-kan-o-zhan-zhan (Medicine Bottle)

The mass execution was performed publicly on a single scaffold platform. After regimental surgeons pronounced the prisoners dead, they were buried en masse in a trench in the sand of the riverbank. Before they were buried, an unknown person nicknamed "Dr. Sheardown" possibly removed some of the prisoners' skin.[18] Small boxes purportedly containing the skin later were sold in Mankato.

At least two Sioux leaders, Little Six and Medicine Bottle, escaped to Canada. They were captured, drugged and returned to the United States. They were hanged at Fort Snelling in 1865.[19]
Medical aftermath

Because of high demand for cadavers for anatomical study, several doctors wanted to obtain the bodies after the execution. The grave was reopened in the night and the bodies were distributed among the doctors, a practice common in the era. The doctor who received the body of Mahpiya Okinajin (He Who Stands in Clouds), also known as "Cut Nose", was William Worrall Mayo.

Mayo brought the body of Mahpiya Okinajin to Le Sueur, Minnesota, where he dissected it in the presence of medical colleagues.[20]:77-78 Afterward, he had the skeleton cleaned, dried and varnished. Mayo kept it in an iron kettle in his home office. His sons received their first lessons in osteology from this skeleton[20]:167 In the late 20th century, the identifiable remains of Mahpiya Okinajin and other Native Americans were returned by the Mayo Clinic to a Dakota tribe for reburial per the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.[21][full citation needed]
Internment

The remaining convicted Indians stayed in prison that winter. The following spring they were transferred to Camp McClellan in Davenport, Iowa,[22] where they were held in prison for almost four years. By the time of their release, one third of the prisoners had died of disease. The survivors were sent with their families to Nebraska. Their families had already been expelled from Minnesota.
Pike Island internment
Dakota internment camp, Fort Snelling, winter 1862
Little Crow's wife and two children at Fort Snelling prison compound, 1864

During this time, more than 1600 Dakota women, children and old men were held in an internment camp on Pike Island, near Fort Snelling, Minnesota. Living conditions and sanitation were poor, and infectious disease struck the camp, killing more than three hundred.[23] In April 1863 the U.S. Congress abolished the reservation, declared all previous treaties with the Dakota null and void, and undertook proceedings to expel the Dakota people entirely from Minnesota. To this end, a bounty of $25 per scalp was placed on any Dakota found free within the boundaries of the state.[citation needed] The only exception to this legislation applied to 208 Mdewakanton, who remained neutral or assisted white settlers in the conflict.

In May 1863 Dakota survivors were forced aboard steamboats and relocated to the Crow Creek Reservation, in the southeastern Dakota Territory, a place stricken by drought at the time. Many of the survivors of Crow Creek moved three years later to the Niobrara Reservation in Nebraska...>>>

Standard Brewing Company 'commemorative'(?)tin of Mankato Hangings

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 05:01 PM

Yes Don. You are rather stupid. But you're just a victim of organized propaganda instilled in you by public education.
I pity the fool.
=(:-( D)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 04:30 PM

STOOPUD!!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 04:19 PM

We are discussing Lincoln's character. And I think he was murderous.
=(:-( 0)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 04:13 PM

I WOULD ask again, what does Sand Creek have to do with the hangings?

Are we to discuss ALL of the atrocities that happened in the world over written history? How do such discussions relate to the questions I ask?

But, never mind. I know nobody will discuss them and no good will ever come from my asking any more.

gnightgnu

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 04:07 PM

They commited so many atrocities that day. And Abe was the Commander in Chief.
I hold him just as responsible.
=(:-( 0)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 04:01 PM

During the Sand Creek massacre, Black Kettle called for his people to wrap themselves in a giant US flag that had been given to him by Lincoln. They were shot and bayonetted right through the flag...while (to add a musical aside) the military band played "Garry Owen".

Still, Chivington seems more to blame (directly at least) than Lincoln.

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 03:58 PM

What has Sand Creek got to do with the hangings?

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 03:51 PM

Just research the Massacre at Sand Creek. Those Indians were peaceful and friendly.
=(:-( O)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 03:46 PM

Imagine someone cutting a baby out of a pregnant woman and nailing it to a tree.

What our Native Brothers endured was horrific, but the ACCUSED actions of some (yes, I KNOW, nobody can prove the sickening "accounts" of the murder, rape and torture) had to be dealt with. Tell me if I understand why the hangings took place... over 800 non-military settlers were killed? The hangings were the miniumum Lincoln could do to avoid whites seeking revenge after the natives were "defeated". Had none of the natives been punished for the accused "crimes" against the settlers, far more would have died.

I know many will think that my questions are "disgusting" but I attempt to understand what white settlers were actually doing. They were surviving by developing land and hunting and fishing. That land, it's resources and the way of life it provided to the natives was taken from the natives by the whites... by the barrel of a gun. Right or wrong at this point is moot to me because the shitty end of the stick is still being stuck into our Native Brothers and THAT is what I find truly disgusting.

In other words, it's been done the whole world over for centuries. Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Henry Krinkle
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 02:33 PM

Imagine any world leader hanging 38 men at one time.
Disgusting.
=(:-( o)

Subject: RE: BS: Was He Really All That Honest?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 12 Nov 12 - 02:28 PM

Lincoln was a politician of his time. At first he didn't believe that black people were the equal of white. The Missouri Compromise was about keeping the slave state if the state would be a member of the Union.

Lincoln probably changed quite a bit in office, maybe not honoring equality, but at least alleviating the suffering and the continuance of slavery.

However, the American Civil War was fought over the issue of slavery despite the "Confederate" deniers. State's rights had to do with slavery, primarily.