Irrefutable legal arguments supporting the right of secession

[bripat9643]

He did not promise he stated if he had to save the union by keeping slavery he would because it would be his job . Well guess what didn't have to and freed the slaves. Lincoln was a great man and great president.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Yes, he was. Arguably perhaps our very best president, even.

Meaning he was our worst president.

 

[bripat9643]

In order to preserve the union. Once the South rebelled he changed his plan because it no longer made sense. He didn't hide his feelings towards slavery when he was campaigning, but he campaigned on a solution to slavery that didn't involve war. War was thrust upon him by the south.

Lincoln had incredible character. He was incredibly clear in his arguments which were often presented concisely and logically. This can be hard for people like yourself who are not logical thinkers but emotional ones.

So true.
Yes. Reading his words in the Lincoln Douglass debates or his Copper Union speech are a thing to behold.

He was exceptionally eloquent and unlike some 18th and 19th century statesmen, he reads very easy and fluidly.

The man was incredibly brilliant.

You mean these words?

I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause] ... I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. ​

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here it is folks. Now you Lincoln cult members can commence whining and blubbering:

Downsizing the U.S.A. - Thomas H. Naylor William H. Willimon - Google Books

First, no less than seven states had engaged in acts of nullification of the U.S. Constitution long before South Carolina announced its plans to secede on December 20 1960 – Kentucky (1799), Pennsylvania (1809), Georgia (1832), South Carolina (1832), Wisconsin (1854) Massachusetts (1855), and Vermont (1858), According to Professor H Newcomb Morse, “Nullification occurs when people of a state refuse to recognize the validity of an exercise of power by the national government which, in the state’s view, transcends the limited and enumerated delegated powers of the national constitution.” Those instances where national laws have been nullified by Northern states gave credence to the view that the compact forming the Union had already been breached and the Confederate states were morally and legally free to leave.

Second, and most importantly, the U.S. Constitution does not forbid secession. According to the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Stated alternatively, that which is not expressly prohibited by the Constitution is allowed.

Third, while the Confederate States were in the process of seceding, three amendments to the Constitution were presented to the U.S. Congress placing conditions on the rights of states to seceded. Then on March 2, 1861, after seven states had already seceded an amendment was proposed which would have outlawed secession entirely. Although none of these amendments were ever ratified, Professor Morse asked, “Why would Congress have considered proposed amendments to the Constitution forbidding or restricting the right of secession if any such right was already prohibited, limited or non-existent under the Constitution?”

Fourth, three of the original thirteen states – Virginia, New York and Rhode Island – ratified the U.S. Constitution only conditionally. Each explicitly retained the right to secede. By the time South Carolina seceded in 1860, a total of thirty three states had acceded to the Union. By accepting the right of Virginia, New York and Rhode Island to secede, had they not tacitly accepted the doctrine of secession for the nation as a whole?

Fifth, according to Professor Morse, after the Civil War the Union occupation armies were removed from Arkansas, North Carolina, Florida, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Virginia only after those former Confederate States had incorporated in their constitutions a clause surrendering the right to secede, Mr Morse has also noted that, “under this premise, all of the Northern States and ny other states required to relinquish the right to secede in their constitutions would still have the right to secede at present”​

Please do take up arms in your effort to secede from the union. You will be remembered like your alter ego Rusty, a once and former person who posted crazy opinions as do you.

 

[bripat9643]

What evidence is there that Lincoln gave a damn about the slaves?

Lincoln Douglas debates are a good place to start but there is plenty of other examples of his position. There is also the point of view of the South which is also very important.

The Lincoln-Douglass debates prove your claim is wrong. Please post an example that proves Lincoln gave a damn about the slaves.

"This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world—enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites—causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty—criticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest."

And yet he promised repeatedly not to abolish slavery, otherwise he would never have been elected. Herr Lincoln Uber Alles was first, last, and foremost a politician who ran for office several times until he found the magic words to win. Like Obama, he lacked even an ounce of geniune character. It's all a light show and suckers like you fall for it every time.

In order to preserve the union. Once the South rebelled he changed his plan because it no longer made sense. He didn't hide his feelings towards slavery when he was campaigning, but he campaigned on a solution to slavery that didn't involve war. War was thrust upon him by the south.

Lincoln had incredible character. He was incredibly clear in his arguments which were often presented concisely and logically. This can be hard for people like yourself who are not logical thinkers but emotional ones.

That's pure made up horseshit.

Lincoln was the Supreme liar and ultimate hypocrite. He was a mass murderer. He wiped his ass on the Constitution. He supported crony capitalism and doled out huge sums to his favorite business cronies.

That's the liberal conceptions "character."

 

[bripat9643]

For those of you who think secession is "illegal". Why didn't Lincoln just file suit against the confederacy? Thats how legal issues are resolved.

this whole thread is just foolish. Secession has nothing to do with legality.

It has nothing to do with 'think,' it is a fact of settled and accepted Constitutional law that 'secession' is un-Constitutional.

Otherwise, your 'question' exhibits the ignorance of the Constitution and its case law common to you and most others on the right.

It's not a fact. If it was "settled," then why are we still debating it? The opinion of some hand picked political hacks may have the force of law, but they have no connection with the truth.

 

[bripat9643]

Here it is folks. Now you Lincoln cult members can commence whining and blubbering:

Downsizing the U.S.A. - Thomas H. Naylor William H. Willimon - Google Books

First, no less than seven states had engaged in acts of nullification of the U.S. Constitution long before South Carolina announced its plans to secede on December 20 1960 – Kentucky (1799), Pennsylvania (1809), Georgia (1832), South Carolina (1832), Wisconsin (1854) Massachusetts (1855), and Vermont (1858), According to Professor H Newcomb Morse, “Nullification occurs when people of a state refuse to recognize the validity of an exercise of power by the national government which, in the state’s view, transcends the limited and enumerated delegated powers of the national constitution.” Those instances where national laws have been nullified by Northern states gave credence to the view that the compact forming the Union had already been breached and the Confederate states were morally and legally free to leave.

Second, and most importantly, the U.S. Constitution does not forbid secession. According to the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Stated alternatively, that which is not expressly prohibited by the Constitution is allowed.

Third, while the Confederate States were in the process of seceding, three amendments to the Constitution were presented to the U.S. Congress placing conditions on the rights of states to seceded. Then on March 2, 1861, after seven states had already seceded an amendment was proposed which would have outlawed secession entirely. Although none of these amendments were ever ratified, Professor Morse asked, “Why would Congress have considered proposed amendments to the Constitution forbidding or restricting the right of secession if any such right was already prohibited, limited or non-existent under the Constitution?”

Fourth, three of the original thirteen states – Virginia, New York and Rhode Island – ratified the U.S. Constitution only conditionally. Each explicitly retained the right to secede. By the time South Carolina seceded in 1860, a total of thirty three states had acceded to the Union. By accepting the right of Virginia, New York and Rhode Island to secede, had they not tacitly accepted the doctrine of secession for the nation as a whole?

Fifth, according to Professor Morse, after the Civil War the Union occupation armies were removed from Arkansas, North Carolina, Florida, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Virginia only after those former Confederate States had incorporated in their constitutions a clause surrendering the right to secede, Mr Morse has also noted that, “under this premise, all of the Northern States and ny other states required to relinquish the right to secede in their constitutions would still have the right to secede at present”​

Please do take up arms in your effort to secede from the union. You will be remembered like your alter ego Rusty, a once and former person who posted crazy opinions as do you.

Was there a point to your screed?

I'm sure once the new fuhrer implements his coup that you will he shouting sig heil with the best of them.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Lincoln Douglas debates are a good place to start but there is plenty of other examples of his position. There is also the point of view of the South which is also very important.

The Lincoln-Douglass debates prove your claim is wrong. Please post an example that proves Lincoln gave a damn about the slaves.

"This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world—enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites—causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty—criticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest."

And yet he promised repeatedly not to abolish slavery, otherwise he would never have been elected. Herr Lincoln Uber Alles was first, last, and foremost a politician who ran for office several times until he found the magic words to win. Like Obama, he lacked even an ounce of geniune character. It's all a light show and suckers like you fall for it every time.

In order to preserve the union. Once the South rebelled he changed his plan because it no longer made sense. He didn't hide his feelings towards slavery when he was campaigning, but he campaigned on a solution to slavery that didn't involve war. War was thrust upon him by the south.

Lincoln had incredible character. He was incredibly clear in his arguments which were often presented concisely and logically. This can be hard for people like yourself who are not logical thinkers but emotional ones.

That's pure made up horseshit.

Lincoln was the Supreme liar and ultimate hypocrite. He was a mass murderer. He wiped his ass on the Constitution. He supported crony capitalism and doled out huge some to his favorite business cronies.

That's the liberal conceptions "character."

Thank you Rusty. How many roads, towns and schools are named after President Lincoln? How many for Burr or Arnold, two men someone like you must admire?

 

[bripat9643]

For those of you who think secession is "illegal". Why didn't Lincoln just file suit against the confederacy? Thats how legal issues are resolved.

this whole thread is just foolish. Secession has nothing to do with legality.

It has nothing to do with 'think,' it is a fact of settled and accepted Constitutional law that 'secession' is un-Constitutional.

Otherwise, your 'question' exhibits the ignorance of the Constitution and its case law common to you and most others on the right.

I love how you twats think that case law is absolute. The states can abolish the Supreme Court and every decision it ever made if they want to. Seceding states are not subject to Supreme Court decisions.

i love how braindeadidiots like you pretend that our constitution is supposed to protect your bigotry.

disgusting animals.

for the record, your sig has been reported, loser

The Constitution actually does protect bigotry, dingbat. Freedom means the freedom to be a bigot. It also means the freedom to post idiocies like you invariably do.

 

[bripat9643]

The Lincoln-Douglass debates prove your claim is wrong. Please post an example that proves Lincoln gave a damn about the slaves.

"This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world—enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites—causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty—criticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest."

And yet he promised repeatedly not to abolish slavery, otherwise he would never have been elected. Herr Lincoln Uber Alles was first, last, and foremost a politician who ran for office several times until he found the magic words to win. Like Obama, he lacked even an ounce of geniune character. It's all a light show and suckers like you fall for it every time.

In order to preserve the union. Once the South rebelled he changed his plan because it no longer made sense. He didn't hide his feelings towards slavery when he was campaigning, but he campaigned on a solution to slavery that didn't involve war. War was thrust upon him by the south.

Lincoln had incredible character. He was incredibly clear in his arguments which were often presented concisely and logically. This can be hard for people like yourself who are not logical thinkers but emotional ones.

That's pure made up horseshit.

Lincoln was the Supreme liar and ultimate hypocrite. He was a mass murderer. He wiped his ass on the Constitution. He supported crony capitalism and doled out huge some to his favorite business cronies.

That's the liberal conceptions "character."

Thank you Rusty. How many roads, towns and schools are named after President Lincoln? How many for Burr or Arnold, two men someone like you must admire?

How many are named for Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Vladimir Lenin?

 

[bripat9643]

Image of what a coward with a firearm can accomplish.

Actually that's the image of a man who failed to escape the cycle of fraternal bloodshed he inflicted on the rest of the country. It's kinda like somebody who burns to death in a forest fire he started. You don't feel sorry for somebody like that.

You really are quite fucked in the head.

Seriously fucked.

You're through one who admires a mass murderer, but he's fucked in the head?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

And you're just as fucked in the head as he is.

In other words, we speak the truth.

 

[bripat9643]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

 

[Unkotare]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

 

[kaz]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave. The founding fathers called the States "sovereign" for a reason, a good one. At that point, the Union was an occupying army

 

[Unkotare]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

 

[paperview]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

You've been told a thousand times, doofus, it wasn't their land.

It was Federal property, belonging to all the US citizens, ceded to the Federal government by the SC legislature in 1836.

Also, even before that --
Castle Pinckney - which Confederates seized in Dec. 1860 - too, was ceded, in 1805, and reaffirmed in 1846.

Ceded. Free and clear.

From an earlier post:

December 27, 1860. The first Federal property to fall into South Carolina hands is the U.S. Revenue Cutter William Aiken, turned over to secessionists by its commander, Capt. N. l. Coste, who did not resign his commission and herefore was in violation of his oath of office. The crew left the ship and went North.

Castle Pinckney was seized by South Carolina militia and a problem arose: were the two Federal soldiers capture in the fort to be considered prisoners of war? If so, it would imply there was, in fact, a war. Following a lengthy discussion, the one Federal officer was allowed to go to Fort Sumter while a sergeant and his family were given safe conduct to remain in their quarters at the fort. What was significant was that the secessionists now held, for the first time, a U.S. fort. Union officer Abner Doubleday called it "...the first overt act of the Secessionists against the Sovereignty of the United States."


That same day Fort Moultrie was taken over by South Carolina militia.

A fort ceded to the US Government in 1805 - and reaffirmed in 1846.

 

[kaz]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

What does revisionism have to do with anything?

 

[paperview]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

 

[Wry Catcher]

I think it's time to designate Palmyra Atoll [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmyra_Atoll]
as the new home for those Libertarian leaning kooks, like bripat & Kaz, who hate America as it is, and Americans.

They can live free of the common and codified law, write their own history and live free and unencumbered of those Americans who believe in the social contract, and that our government has a role in their general Welfare.

Let each as they choose follow the COTUS as they choose to understand it; each can be armed with as many weapons of the kind they freely choose, and develop or not the land which is given to them simply because of the accident of their birth on American soil.

I'd bet we'd see an example of Lord of the Flies in months, if not in days.

 

[kaz]

In West Point, they teach the firing on the Union ship Star of the West as the real start of the war.


Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."

Sending supply ships into the territorial waters of South Carolina was an act of war, as was continuing to occupy Ft Sumter.

Foolish traitor. All your whining won't change the FACTS of history as have been pointed out to you again and again. You're just playing the clown now.

The US government had no right to be there once South Carolina told them to leave.

Wrong, revisionista.

These goofballs think it Kentucky, for example, decided to secede, they could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now.

Some bizarre notion these cons have -- that you can just steal Federal property, eh?

LOL, liberals are so slow.

The Union was told to leave Fort Sumpter
The didn't, they dug in
Four months later South Carolina fought to remove them

But do you follow that? Nope. You come back with "Kentucky, for example, ... could just take over Fort Knox, and say, hey, too bad fellas. It's ours now"

LOL, you didn't follow the point at all, Holmes

 

[kaz]

I think it's time to designate Palmyra Atoll [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmyra_Atoll]
as the new home for those Libertarian leaning kooks, like bripat & Kaz, who hate America as it is, and Americans.

They can live free of the common and codified law, write their own history and live free and unencumbered of those Americans who believe in the social contract, and that our government has a role in their general Welfare.

Let each as they choose follow the COTUS as they choose to understand it; each can be armed with as many weapons of the kind they freely choose, and develop or not the land which is given to them simply because of the accident of their birth on American soil.

I'd bet we'd see an example of Lord of the Flies in months, if not in days.

You love America like blood sucking leeches love their hosts. You're a parasite. We hate America ... what an idiot you are