Comment

Comment by Diana on April 14, 2019 at 10:35pm

Comment by Raz Putin on April 14, 2019 at 9:58pm

Lincoln served the same master as Jefferson Davies and General Lee etc. The American Civil War was a contrived means of destroying America and bringing it under the complete control of the International Banksters of the City of London.

In the end Lincoln bit the hidden hand that fed him (the Rothschilds Banksters & Co) and paid for the issuance of his governments own currency with his life.

Comment by Diana on April 14, 2019 at 9:31pm

He was the founding father of big government. Some see Lincoln along with Lenin as joining the impulse to centralize government in the mid 1800's. The communist party USA used to hold “Lincoln- Lenin day” in celebration of the two great centralizers. 

Lincoln was described as selfish, manipulative, cold and said to use men like tools. Elizabeth Edwards Lincolns sister in law said Lincoln was “a cold man” with “no heart.” Law partner John Stuart said “there was no part of his nature which drew him to do acts of gratitude to his friends.” He would manipulate people and discard them when they offered him no more personal gain. Lincoln suffered with depression and took medicine for it. He was quick tempered, prone to ramblings and outburst of anger. Those who new him best such as his family never voted for him and he did not even carry his hometown in the 1860 election.  

Comment by Raz Putin on April 14, 2019 at 8:52pm

I agree Diana Lincoln was ruthless in his dealings with the South. Even the Emancipation Proclamation was intended as a major blow to the financial engine of the South (slavery). Lincoln didn't particularly care about the plight of Black slaves

Two faces of the same coin owned by the Banksters.

"The Illustrated University History, 1878, p. 504, tells us that the southern states swarmed with British agents. These conspired with local politicians to work against the best interests of the United States. Their carefully sown and nurtured propaganda developed into open rebellion and resulted in the secession of South Carolina on December 29, 1860. Within weeks another six states joined the conspiracy against the Union, and broke away to form the Confederate States of America, with Jefferson Davis as President.

The plotters raided armies, seized forts, arsenals, mints and other Union property. Even members of President Buchanan’s Cabinet conspired to destroy the Union by damaging the public credit and working to bankrupt the nation. Buchanan claimed to deplore secession but took no steps to check it, even when a U.S. ship was fired upon by South Carolina shore batteries.

Shortly thereafter Abraham Lincoln became President, being inaugurated on March 4, 1861. Lincoln immediately ordered a blockade on Southern ports, to cut off supplies that were pouring in from Europe. The ‘official’ date for the start of the Civil War is given as April 12, 1861, when Fort Sumter in South Carolina was bombarded by the Confederates, but it obviously began at a much earlier date.

In December, 1861, large numbers of European Troops (British, French and Spanish) poured into Mexico in defiance of the Monroe Doctrine. This, together with widespread European aid to the Confederacy strongly indicated that the Crown was preparing to enter the war. The outlook for the North, and the future of the Union, was bleak indeed.

CZAR ALEXANDER II

In this hour of extreme crisis, Lincoln appealed to the Crown’s perennial enemy, Russia, for assistance. When the envelope containing Lincoln’s urgent appeal was given to Czar Alexander II, he weighed it unopened in his hand and stated: “Before we open this paper or know its contents, we grant any request it may contain.”

Unannounced, a Russian fleet under Admiral Liviski, steamed into New York harbor on September 24, 1863, and anchored there, The Russian Pacific fleet, under Admiral Popov, arrived in San Francisco on October 12. Of this Russian act, Gideon Wells said: “They arrived at the high tide of the Confederacy and the low tide of the North, causing England and France to hesitate long enough to turn the tide for the North” (Empire of “The City,” p. 90).

History reveals that the Rothschilds were heavily involved in financing both sides in the Civil War.

Lincoln put a damper on their activities when, in 1862 and 1863, he refused to pay the exorbitant rates of interest demanded by the Rothschilds and issued constitutionally-authorized, interest free United States notes.

For this and other acts of patriotism Lincoln was shot down in cold-blood by John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865, just five days after Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House, Virginia"

source;: https://asweetdoseofreality.com/2015/06/12/the-rothschilds-the-civi...

Comment by Diana on April 14, 2019 at 8:04pm

Actually, Lincoln was not the man school history books tell us.  After researching him, reading what he wrote and what he did to initiate the civil war...I can understand why he was shot.  Some of his highlights:  In his first inaugural address on March 4, 1861, Abraham Lincoln threatened “invasion” and “bloodshed” (his exact words) in any state that refused to collect the federal tariff tax on imports, which had just been more than doubled two days earlier.  But of course the states of the lower South, having seceded, did not intend to “collect the duties and imposts” and send the money to Washington, D.C.  Lincoln committed treason (as defined by Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution) by levying war upon the free and independent states, which he always considered to be a part of the American union.  By his own admission (and his subsequent actions), he invaded his own country over tax collection.  He started the war with a false flag.  Quite a few Northern newspapers recognized the game Lincoln was playing.  On April 16, 1861 the Buffalo Daily Courier editorialized that “The affair at Fort Sumter . . has been planned as a means by which the war feeling at the North should be intensified” (Howard Cecil Perkis, Northern Editorials on Secession).  The New York Evening Day Book wrote on April 17, 1861, that the event at Fort Sumter was “a cunningly devised scheme” contrived “to arouse, and, if possible, exasperate the northern people against the South.”  “Look at the facts,” the Providence Daily Postwrote on April 13, 1861.  “For three weeks the [Lincoln] administration newspapers have been assuring us that Ford Sumter would be abandoned,” but “Mr. Lincoln saw an opportunity to inaugurate civil war without appearing in the character of an aggressor.”  The Jersey City American Standard editorialized that “there is a madness and ruthlessness” in Lincoln’s behavior, concluding that Lincolns sending of ships to Charleston Harbor was “a pretext for letting loose the horrors of war.”  He suspended the right of habeas corpus and impris­oned hordes of his political enemies—according to several authori­ties almost 40,000 people. These political prisoners were not charged. They were not tried. They were simply incarcerated and held incommunicado. In some instances their closest family mem­bers did not know if they were alive or dead until the end of the War.  He instituted a policy of total war—the first in our history—and saw to it that his troops burned homes, destroyed crops, and confis­cated property—all to make certain that civilians suffered the cruelest deprivations. He also refused to send needed medical supplies to the South, even when that refusal meant depriving Union soldiers of medicines needed to recover from their wounds. And finally, in the last year of the War, when Davis sent emissaries to negotiate a peace on Lincoln’s own terms, he ordered them out of Washington that the War might continue and the Republicans win re-election.  Good old Honest Abe!

Comment by Central Scrutinizer on April 14, 2019 at 7:04pm

Death by Greenbacks ;)

Comment by Raz Putin on April 14, 2019 at 3:59pm

"Lincoln warned the American people:"The money power preys upon the nation in time of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me, and causes me to tremble for the safety of our country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the republic is destroyed. ""