← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · vytis
Thread ID: 16132 | Posts: 26 | Started: 2004-12-31
2004-12-31 15:50 | User Profile
As a member of the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, I found the following especially interesting.
General Ulysses S. Grant issued this expulsion order against minority Jews after posting warnings that were ignored:
Headquarters, 13th A.C., Department of the Tennessee, No.11 Holly Springs, December 17, 1862
The Jews as a class violating every regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department and also department orders, are hereby expelled from the department within twenty-four hours from the receipt of this order.
Post commanders will see that all of this class of people be furnished passes and required to leave, and anyone returning after such notification will be arrested and held in confinement until an opportunity occurs of sending them out as prisoners, unless furnished with permit from headquarters.
No passes will be given these people to visit headquarters for the purpose of making personal application for trade permits. By order of Major-General U.S. Grant.
J.A. Rawlins, Assistant Adjutant General
(I have to wonder what my great-grand pappy would have thought about this)
Now I don't know about you, but I never saw Grant's Order # 11 in any of my school history books.....I wonder why?????
vytis.
2004-12-31 17:49 | User Profile
The more that I read the more that I think and the more that I think the more that I analyze and therefore the more that I learn and by learning more I know who the Jews really are.
I wonder how long we have before those people close the door for us in order to hide the truth, the Internet is our last bastion of freedom for it is the only way to learn the truth.
I never new till now what Gen. Grand orders were in regards to the Jews.
2004-12-31 19:02 | User Profile
You can hide historic truth by burning a book. You can also hide the truth by simply eliminating certain facts, or adding false information to our history textbooks.
As you know Ponce, whoever wins a war writes the history books. Classic example....The history of World War Two.
Regards, vytis
2004-12-31 21:13 | User Profile
Well vytis that's why I accept what you posted only as a lead and now I am doing a web search on Gen. Grant and what he said about the Jews.
I always must have at least 3 confirmations of something before I do an analysis of what is going on or what I read and when ever possible I also go to the Jewish sites to see if they say anything on the subject.
"Because I say so does not mean that it is so",,, Ponce
2005-01-01 00:03 | User Profile
[color=black][font=Verdana]The Jewish people have a long history of changing history. Not just in [/font][/color]<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />
2005-01-01 14:33 | User Profile
Three confirmations....Ponce I commend you on your research guidelines.
Here's a few sources where I found my information. I have others, and I'm sure that Grant's Order #11 is somewhere on the internet. Let us know what you find.
United States Official Records Series I, Volume XVII, Pt, 11, 337
Grant: Personal Memoirs of U.S. Grant, Selected Letters 1839-1865, Library of America
Jews in American Wars, J. George Fredman & Louis A. Falk, 1942, Jewish War Vets of the United States
The Secret Relationship Between Blacks & Jews, Vol I, 1991, Historic Research Dept. of the Nation of Islam, Latimer Associates
2005-01-01 17:13 | User Profile
Here are three references:
[url]http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/loc/abe2.html[/url]
[url]http://www.mmcwrt.org/2001/default0104.htm[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Order_No.11[/url]
It is interesting to note that nothing has changed in that Grant and the government gave into jewish moaning and the was ordered rescinded.
2005-01-01 19:23 | User Profile
Thanks for the info OPERA96.
Yea, President Lincoln was pressured hard by money$$$bag minority Jews, so ole Abe did what any other (Past & Present) two-bit American politician would do....He caved in!
Life in the kingdom of the Jews. Ain't it wunnerful?
2005-01-01 19:31 | User Profile
After reading and reading about this subjet I have come to the conclusion that there is nothing new on this matter but only another nail in the so called Jewish coffin.
As usual the Jews are yelling ANTI-SEMITIC, ANTI-SEMITIC when ever they are found out, the world must learn the following ONE: that the so called Jews are only using their religion as a weapon TWO: That the majority of the so called Jews are not really Jews THREE: That when someone uses the word JEW they are not talking about a religion but of a race of people that has nothing to do with the Semites.
As you all know the "real" Semitic Jews are anti-Israeli and anti-Zionists.
Fool me once and shame on you, fool me twice and shame on me and me and me and me and me and me and me......... for how long are the American people going to be a "fool" at the hands of the so called Jews?
I say to the American people, SHAME ON YOU FOR BEING A FOOLED BY THIS PEOPLE.
HAPPY NEW YEAR
2005-01-14 17:03 | User Profile
I found this bit of Civil War era info I wish to share on this post.
By the time the American Civil War broke out, six minority Jews had already been elected as United States senators or congressmen.
Judah P. Benjamin (Louisiana)
David L. Yulee (Florida)
Philip Phillips (Alabama)
Lewis C. Levin (Pennsylvania)
Henry M. Phillips (Pennsylvania)
Emmanuel B. Hart (New York)
Regards, vytis
2005-03-03 16:05 | User Profile
Addendum to Civil War Uncensored:
A Civil War soldier's (Union) newspaper 'The Corinth War Eagle' dated August 7, 1862, called Jews 'Sharks feeding upon the soldiers.' :caiphas:
2005-05-19 05:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Free The Truth][color=black][font=Verdana]The Jewish people have a long history of changing history. Not just in [/font][/color]<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />
If the Nazi's were financed by a Jew, that is a sweet irony, better than the Shickelgruber connection. :blow:
2005-05-19 17:01 | User Profile
I have noticed that Angel Eyes is going into the old folders and digging out only the bad comments about the Jews and then attaching her own comments, interesting.
And yes Angel Eyes the Jew of the red shield did give Herr Hitler five millions dollars in in 1932 order for him to succedd and then in March 23 of 1933 declared war against Germany....... do you really expect Herr Hitler to sit back and do nothing?
2005-05-21 18:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ponce]I have noticed that Angel Eyes is going into the old folders and digging out only the bad comments about the Jews and then attaching her own comments, interesting.
And yes Angel Eyes the Jew of the red shield did give Herr Hitler five millions dollars in in 1932 order for him to succedd and then in March 23 of 1933 declared war against Germany....... do you really expect Herr Hitler to sit back and do nothing?[/QUOTE] Poignant irony indeed. Thanks for the ref, I'll look into a bit more of Hitler's rise next time I am doing WW II stuff. Appreciate it. :smile:
2005-07-12 11:55 | User Profile
Going through my research papers I found the following bit of background info that I felt belonged in this post.
The minority Jew Seligman brothers of the 'J. & W. Seligman' banking firm, were also in the clothing business...They were one of the largest uniform suppliers for Abe Lincoln's Union Army.
And this: The two minority Jew founders (Abraham Kuhn & Solomon Loeb) of the banking firm 'Kuhn, Loeb,' also started their sizable bankroll with the fortune they made providing uniforms for the North.
"I regard the Jewish race as the born enemy of pure humanity and everything that is noble in it" Richard Wagner
2005-07-12 13:27 | User Profile
Though Grant authored this order, he was still a wilful particpant in the bankers' desire to crush the South, eliminate Constitutional government, and build a new nation based on an expansionist empire which has no use for government by the people.
2005-07-12 13:31 | User Profile
Grant was a brutal tyrant who more closely resembled a brutal Communist Russian field general, than a trained, thoughtful strategist. The sanctity of human life and ethical values was the last thing on Grant's mind. Drunken sot.
2005-07-12 17:47 | User Profile
Vytes? the Jews supported both sides in the civil war, that way they were asured to be on the winning side.
In the Napoleonic war the Jews were always two hours behind him in order to obtain the best deals on the conquering countries, those people (Jews) have done the same thing in Iraq......[B]we die and they profit[/B], but you don't hear about it in the American news, have you?
2005-07-12 18:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=CWRWinger]Grant was a brutal tyrant who more closely resembled a brutal Communist Russian field general, than a trained, thoughtful strategist. The sanctity of human life and ethical values was the last thing on Grant's mind. Drunken sot.[/QUOTE] In case yov've forgotten, Grant was [I][B]fighting a war,[/B][/I] he wasn't conducting a picnic. When fighting a war, you do what needs to be done to destroy the enemy and win the war. Victory is everything! Personally, I praise Grant and Sherman for their actions in bringing the war to it's inevitable conclusion and saving lives on [B]both[/B] sides.
2005-07-12 18:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=OPERA96]In case yov've forgotten, Grant was [I][B]fighting a war,[/B][/I] he wasn't conducting a picnic. When fighting a war, you do what needs to be done to destroy the enemy and win the war. Victory is everything! Personally, I praise Grant and Sherman for their actions in bringing the war to it's inevitable conclusion and saving lives on [B]both[/B] sides.[/QUOTE]
But more lives would have been saved if the Southern states were allowed to secede peacefully to begin with. You can thank Grant, Sherman, and Lincoln for breaking the Consititution and ushering in the centralized government that changed the US from being a republic and made it into an empire.
2005-07-12 18:44 | User Profile
John Wilkes Booth did the world a favor by taking out lincoln.
What if lincoln had survived and packaged his methods of ending slavery into a world vision? Lincoln would have gone trotting all over the globe "ending slavery" by killing hundreds of thousands in each country. (Sounds a lot like Bush and his forced "democracy". Why yes, if it's good enough for a filthy yankee, it's good enough for everyone, or else we'll kill 'em)
Every other country on earth ended slavery at a conference table. But not lincoln, Sherman and Grant. BTW, their goal was not to end slavery, but rather to institutionalise slavery under government control. Now everyone is a slave to the central fed'ral gov't.
2005-07-12 18:49 | User Profile
OPERA96:
In case yov've forgotten, Grant was fighting a war,
So shooting your own troops is normal in warfare? The Russians shot their own new recruits who tried to return to their lines after being whipped on the battlefield. The yankees also shot their own black troops when they tried to retreat. Many similarities between the yankees and the communists in their brutal methods.
2005-07-14 05:30 | User Profile
Not sure that is true. What I believe to be true, can't prove it, is that Lincoln's vision of Reconstruction was considerably less despicable than the policy enacted. No way to prove that, since it is speculation to consider if he'd have had the clout to force Congress and Governors from the North to play to his tune.
One of his early ideas, before the war, well documented, was the idea to buy all the slaves for X amount of gold each (in one account, I read it as 50 dollars) and send them back to Africa. No one up North would put money behind that idea of how to convert one form of capital (chattel) into another (cash). Gee, such brilliant capitalists.
The cost differential between that solution and war was, IIRC, about one tenth the cost, and one half a million young men not dead. [QUOTE=CWRWinger]John Wilkes Booth did the world a favor by taking out lincoln.
What if lincoln had survived and packaged his methods of ending slavery into a world vision? Lincoln would have gone trotting all over the globe "ending slavery" by killing hundreds of thousands in each country. (Sounds a lot like Bush and his forced "democracy". Why yes, if it's good enough for a filthy yankee, it's good enough for everyone, or else we'll kill 'em)
[/QUOTE]
2005-07-15 14:15 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ponce]Vytes? the Jews supported both sides in the civil war, that way they were asured to be on the winning side.
In the Napoleonic war the Jews were always two hours behind him in order to obtain the best deals on the conquering countries, those people (Jews) have done the same thing in Iraq......we die and they profit, but you don't hear about it in the American news, have you?[/QUOTE] Ponce...sooo true. :yes:
The jews are always playing both sides against the middle for their own benefit...
2005-07-15 15:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angeleyes]Not sure that is true. What I believe to be true, can't prove it, is that Lincoln's vision of Reconstruction was considerably less despicable than the policy enacted. No way to prove that, since it is speculation to consider if he'd have had the clout to force Congress and Governors from the North to play to his tune.[/QUOTE] Because of Lincoln's penchant for stating one thing, and doing another, I do not have as much faith as some that his Reconstruction policy would have been as loving and charitable as he liked to claim. However, it could not have been any worse (and would probably have been considerably better) than the one enacted by the radical Republican junta that took over after his assassination.
2005-07-15 15:58 | User Profile
I didn't start reading up on the Reconstuction until about the mid 1990's. The more I read, the more I felt I was reading the Great American Tragedy. An opportunity to heal a deep wound was irrevocably lost in a wave of sanctimonious greed.
I then understood the mud flaps and bumper stickers I saw in High School. Yosemite Sam, with a Confederate flag, and "Ferget Hell!"
[QUOTE=Quantrill]Because of Lincoln's penchant for stating one thing, and doing another, I do not have as much faith as some that his Reconstruction policy would have been as loving and charitable as he liked to claim. However, it could not have been any worse (and would probably have been considerably better) than the one enacted by the radical Republican junta that took over after his assassination.[/QUOTE]