1863 Russian involvement in the US Civil War

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,633
Likes
7,148
#1
Not many people in either country know that Russia helped the Union win the bloodiest conflict in US history. Under an agreement between President Abraham Lincoln and Russian Tsar Alexander II, Russia sent naval ships to the US to help Lincoln keep the country together.

A commemorative ceremony has been held by the grave of a Russian Navy sailor who died in Maryland during the American Civil War while helping the North fight the Confederates.
Grave of Russian sailor, Nikolay Demidoff, in Annapolis, MD
demidoff_grave_annapolis.jpg

Russian sailor killed in US Civil War commemorated in Maryland
"He wasn't some trouble-maker who got into a silly adventure and was killed in a drunken brawl. American newspapers described his funeral as having been extremely formal, they describe his chestnut casket and a group of officers and other crew members who attended the funeral. A church service which largely impressed local Americans was also described," said Maksim Alekseyev, the head of Russia's memorial work department in the US.

A "Bank Note"
alexander_lincoln_banknote_2.jpg
Russia and New York, ND (ca.1865-1870), Advertising card with Lincoln and Grant flanking Russian Military Notable with Gryphons at base, also with small busts of Franklin and Washington similar to the portraits used on the early postage stamps of the U.S. on the LL and LR corners.
Russian "Military Notable"
a.k.a. Russian Czar Alexander II
alexander_II.jpg

Alexander II of Russia

If you share my level of ignorance, the entire involvement of Russia in the United States Civil War of 1861-1865 will come as a surprise. Hopefully, I am the only one who was oblivious to the fact. For me this journey started with the above banknote which is, in my opinion, being downplayed from whatever angle you choose to look. It is not really listed anywhere, where in depth information on it could be obtained. The Russian Czar Alexander II is being presented as some insignificant "military notable" who apparently does not deserve to be mentioned by name. And, in general, this banknote is being portrayed as an "advertising note". Never mind that "AMERICAN" above the image of the Russian Czar (Caesar), as well as the relative proportions of the images, could open up a huge can of worms.

I do smell a rat in the official version, and offer the forum members to combine our investigative efforts. Something does not add up, and may be together we could discover a hidden fact, or two.
Imperial Russia supports the Union
At the point of maximum war danger between Great Britain and the United States, the London satirical publication Punch published a vicious caricature of US President Abraham Lincoln and Russian Tsar Alexander II, demonizing the two friends as bloody oppressors. From Punch, October 24, 1863

elexander II lincoln 1.jpg
This story is not a secret by any means, yet my history teacher chose not to mention it. In a nutshell, "Russia’s role in the Civil War was more palpable than just expressing diplomatic support. In September 1863, a Russian fleet of six warships headed to the East coast of North America and stayed there for seven months. Based in New York, they patrolled the surrounding area. A similar thing occurred in the West coast where a fleet of six warships was based in San Francisco. This helped to prevent sudden attacks of Southern raiders on these crucial Union port cities." Allegedly, the underlying purpose was to help dissuade Britain and France from siding with the Confederacy.
The below speech authored by a historian named Webster Griffin Tarpley, paints a slightly different picture of the Russian involvement.
Historian Webster Griffin Tarpley talked about the contribution of Russian Tsar Alexander II to a northern victory in the U.S. Civil War. He said that the Imperial Russian government had issued an ultimatum to Britain and France specifying that if those powers should intervene on the side of the Confederate States of America they would immediately find themselves at war with the Russian Empire. Mr. Tarpley marked the 150th anniversary of the arrival of the Russian Baltic Fleet in New York City on September 24, 1863, and of the Russian Pacific Squadron in San Francisco on October 12, 1863. He argued that it was the presence of those fleets that provided the final deterrence. Russia was the only country to extend direct military support to the Lincoln government.
Russia will support in every way possible, and aid to the fullest extent of its power its ancient ally, the United States of America, in its struggle against treason. Under no circumstances will the Czar permit, if his efforts can prevent it, the success of the lately inaugurated rebellion against the laws, and the government of a friendly country.
The above quote was mentioned in the above video. I did not find any independent sources of this quote. I think the original version of the quote was in Russian language, and that makes it a bit harder to find the source.

1863: Russian Fleet in NY and SF
remained in the US for seven months

New York
1863_russian_fleet_NY.jpg

russian_in_us_civil_war.jpg
Russia’s Atlantic Squadron, as the fleet was known, arrived in the New York harbor on September 24, 1863.

Commander
Admiral_Lesovskii_1863.jpg

Admiral Lesovsky
  • Alexander Newsky (flagship) - was a screw frigate mounting 51 smooth-bore cannons
  • Peresvet - was a screw frigate mounting 51 smooth-bore cannons
  • Varyag - was a screw corvette mounting 17 cannons
  • Oslyabya - was a screw frigate mounting 45 smooth-bore cannons
  • Vityaz - was a screw corvette mounting 17 cannons
  • Almaz - was a screw clipper mounting 7 cannons
Russia’s Pacific Squadron, as the fleet was known, arrived in San Francisco on October 12, 1863.

Commander
Popov_Andr-Alex_Nagrady.jpg

Admiral Popov
  • Bogatyr - a screw corvette with 17 cannons (other sources mention 48 cannons)
  • Kalevala - a screw corvette with 15 cannons
  • Rynda - a screw corvette with 9 cannons
  • Novik - a screw corvette with 11 cannons
  • Abrek - a screw clipper with 5 cannons
  • Gaidamak - a screw clipper with 7 cannons
It is interesting that the list of San Francisco Events of 1863 provides no hype related to the arrival of the Russian ships. If anything, it appears to be as casual as it gets. Additionally, it provides significantly contradicting times of the ships' arrival.
  • June 28. The steamer Sierra Nevada arrived from the northern coast bringing treasure to the amount of $383,000. . . .An Englishman, named Wm. Sharn, committed suicide by taking strychnine. . . .The Russian corvette Rynda arrived from Japan via Sitka and Victoria.
  • Sept. 28. U. S. sloop of war Cyane sailed on cruise. . . .Russian corvette Novick lost off Point Reyes. . . .Howard Street M. E. Church dedicated.
  • Oct. 12. Russian corvette Bogatyre, 48 guns, 312 men arrived. . . .P. M. S. S. Constitution sailed with $1,183,327.
  • Oct. 16. Russian corvette Guidmack arrived.
  • Oct. 19. Dwelling house of Maurice Doyle, on Jones Street, was burned; two children lost their lives by the flames. . . .Lacari, Bruzzo, and Pizano were sentenced to imprisonment for life. . . .Calavala, Russian frigate, arrived.
  • Oct. 29. Abreck, Russian corvette, arrived. . . .Sierra Nevada, from North, brings $265,265.
  • Nov. 7. Russian corvette Rynda entered our harbor. . . .Liberty Hose Company housed their apparatus.
1863 Publications
Harper's Weekly, 17 October 1863
Harper's Weekly, 7 November 1863
Harper's Weekly, 21 November 1863

Strange Coincidences

  • Photography - where are the photographs?
russians_ny_1863.jpg

russian_sailors_ny_1.jpg

russian_sailors_ny.jpg

1863_russian_fleet_usa_4_4_1.jpg

THE GRAND PROCESSION OF OUR RUSSIAN VISITORS THROUGH BROADWAY, UNDER ESCORT OF THE MILITIA AND POLICE.

1863_russian_fleet_usa_4_1.jpg 1863_russian_fleet_usa_4.jpg 1863_russian_fleet_usa_4_3.jpg russian-frigate-osliaba.jpg

I wanted to remind, that some things do not change when we take certain "weirdly strange" 19th century practices into consideration. One of those is going to be an obvious lack of photographs. Don't get me wrong here, some photos do exist, but as you can see above, the majority of the "establishment" type photographs were replaced with sketches. I will always question this practice. Instead of publishing actual photographs, they choose to give us drawings. It is obvious that reproducing drawings is a time consuming affair.

As you already know, making photographs was an established business (photography history) as early as 1840s. Therefore, the reasons for Harper's Weekly to be using drawings, are suspicious at the very least. To be honest, I do start thinking, that those weekly magazines could be a post production meant to deliver a specific narrative. In other words the drawings accompanied contents of the 19th century weekly magazines could be nothing but a made up story line.

Of course, we had to have the infamous Mathew Brady involved in the photograph producing activities pertaining to the 1863 Russian visitation.

1863_russian_fleet_usa_1.jpg

A group of Russian soldiers, taken October 1863, courtesy Library of Congress

Just like I said above, there were some photographs made which do appear to be legit. At the same time those 5-6 (right) photographs give us nothing from the informational stand point.

1863_russian_fleet_usa_3.jpg 1863_russian_fleet_usa_6.jpg 1863_russian_fleet_usa_7.jpg
And then we have our normal "photoshop" game, where the history makers had to create a photographic event. Judging by the appearance of the below "photograph" a reasonable person should be asking questions. The below photograph is related to the sequence of the events.

"In order to prevent foreign interference on behalf of the South, Lincoln's Secretary of State, William Seward, invited the foreign ministers of seven world powers on a tour of the North in 1863. Those world powers were Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Italy, Sweden and Nicaragua." - source. Nicaragua, for Christ's sake? Nicaragua was the world power in 1863?

September_19_1863_Trenton_Falls_1.jpg

thumbs below are larger images
1863, Russian Ambassador Baron De Stoeckel attended Diplomatic party at Trenton Falls_32.jpg

1863, Russian Ambassador Baron De Stoeckel attended Diplomatic party at Trenton Falls_1.jpg 1863, Russian Ambassador Baron De Stoeckel attended Diplomatic party at Trenton Falls.jpg September_19_1863_Trenton_Falls_3.jpg

KD: I can not stress enough the importance of the lack of photographic evidence. These sketches, in my opinion, are meant to replace the actual photographs which, if used, would reveal something unwanted by the Rulers of this World. As demonstrated by the above example, the photographs did exist, but for whatever reason they had to be redrawn and presented as sketches. Why?
  • San Francisco fire of 1863 - what a coincidence!
The Russian Fleet allegedly arrived in San Francisco on October 12th. The Urban Fire of 1863 happened in San Francisco on October 23rd.

"Not for some years has there been witnessed in San Francisco a fire of the same extent as that which commenced this morning, at about half-part one o'clock, in the rag store of Charley Orley... As far as we can learn, up to the hour of going to press, there are no lives lost. "

1863_San_francisco_fire_1_3.jpg
We must not forget, however, to mention the noble spirit manifested by the Russian fleet now lying in the harbor, the commanding officers of which sent to the scene of conflagration nearly two hundred of their seamen, under the command, as we learned, of Lieut. Seraggen, Lieut Eholen and Lieut. Mackaoff. Each of these gallant " tars " came with a bucket; but our good firemen, whose appliances for combatting, with the destroying flame are of much more utility, urgently requested the sailors to throw aside their buckets and go to work on the engines. The Russian sailors responded with a good will, and continued until, like their competitors, they were, one by one, almost exhausted, when they took a few moments' rest and then again resumed their positions at the engines.
SF: Tremendous Fire this Morning
Friends in Peace and War: The Russian Navy's Landmark Visit to Civil War San Francisco
October 23, 1863 San Francisco Fire receives assistance of Russian officers and sailors
Interesting link: SF Events of 1863
Oct. 23. Block bounded California and Sacramento, Drumm and Davis streets, destroyed by fire; loss $300,000. . . .Steamer Sonora sailed with $793,555 22.
This SF "Fire" of 1863 is being portrayed as insignificant. It did not even get its own Wikipedia page. Yet there is something strange about this Fire, if it indeed was the fire.


A gesture by the Russian government to honor six of its sailors who were buried in a San Francisco Bay area cemetery nearly 150 years ago is not sitting well with preservationists. The visiting Russian sailors died in 1863 while helping to fight a massive fire near San Francisco's waterfront. They were buried at the Navy cemetery on Mare Island, where weathered, broken stone slabs marked their graves for decades. To honor their heroism, the Russian Consulate decided last year to buy new cross-shaped, granite headstones for the burial sites of A. Trapeznikov, K. Kort, Y. Bootorin and three unidentified sailors.
While locating any 1863 source pertaining to the death of six Russian Pacific Fleet sailors in San Francisco yielded no result, there was no shortage of the contemporary references.
So we have A. Trapeznikov, K. Kort, Y. Bootorin and three unidentified sailors who allegedly died in the SF Fire of 1863. Involved in their tombstones restorations was the Russian Consulate, which obviously represented the Russian Government. Yet, the findings of a certain Doctor of Historical Sciences VS Sobolev, allegedly demonstrate, that no Russian sailor died in 1863 due to the Urban Fire.

In the records we revealed about the death of sailors from diseases, deaths as a result of accidents, and about their burial on the shore or at sea, the time of each case is indicated. No evidence of the linkage of these deaths to the effects of the San Francisco fire was found in the documents. Of the three sailors, whose names and surnames are known to you, allegedly considered to be victims of the fire, one (A. Trapeznikov) died of typhoid fever. The cause of death of the other two in the journal entries, unfortunately, is not specified.

Their death is witnessed in the ship's journal "Bogatyr" with the following entries:
  • October 27 (November 8), 1863 at 9.30 am: "The sailor of the 1st article, Artemy Trapeznikov, died of typhoid fever";
  • November 20 (December 2), 1863 at 7.30: "The musician Kort died";
  • December 29, 1863 (January 10, 1864) at 9.30: "The sailor of the 1st article, Jacob Butorin, died".
On the clipper "Abrek":
  • October 24 (November 5), 1863 at 12 o'clock: "Sailor Salyukas who is in the hospital on the shore died";
  • 4 (16) December 1863 at 6 o'clock: "The sailor Dobrynin died from consumption";
On the corundum "Rynda" (in San Francisco from October 27 (November 8), 1863):
  • November 5 (17), 1863. "During the return salute to the American frigate Lancaster, the gun blew out while charging, throwing Fyodor Sharov, who was not found, and Vasily Kozlov was torn off by his left hand."
Russian sailors on fire in San Francisco: imaginary death

And of course, in the middle of the Civil War, there were luxurious Military Balls held left and right: A military ball at Union Hall on November 17, 1863, given to Admiral Popoff and thirty-five officers of the Russian fleet then anchored in the bay of San Francisco.
  • It was a military ball given to Admiral Popoff and thirty-five officers of the Russian fleet then anchored in the bay of San Francisco. The country was in the throes of civil war. The relations of the United States were, at best, strained with leading nations of Europe, except Russia. Russia had manifested the sincerest friendship to the Union. In recognition of its friendship New York made a great demonstration on the occasion of the visit of the Russian squadron to that harbor, and when the Pacific squadron under Admiral Popoff visited this bay it did not take long for patriotic San Franciscans to decide upon giving a similar friendly demonstration in Russia’s favor here.
  • Admission was obtainable only by special invitation, and, with the exception of the guests, it cost $100 a ticket. But money was plentiful in those days, and it was easier to get a subscription of $100 for any cause than it is to get $5 now. Nearly 1000 invitations were sent out. Colonel William C. Little, afterward the agent of Mayor Adolph Sutre, was the Captain of the City Guard and the leading spirit in the movement, and his family still retains in possession, as precious mementos of the event, the memorandum book containing the invitation list and photographs of many of the Russian officers, with whom he was on terms of the closest personal friendship.

Above is the highest quality image I was able to locate. It would be interesting to find out the names of the Lady, and the Gentleman. They were clearly important enough for some editor of the past to highlight them in such a manner.

KD: It appears we could have two contradicting "cover up" type stories which did not get properly coordinated. At least six Russian sailors died in San Francisco in 1863. One version attributed their death to some "insignificant" San Francisco "fire". The other version blames alcohol poisoning, typhoid and negligent cannon handling type reasons. What really happened in San Francisco in 1863?
  • New York City Draft Riots of July 1863 - probably unrelated to the Russian Fleet in NY!
It is impossible to conclusively tie in the Draft Riots which took place in July of 1863 with the arrival of the Russian Atlantic Squadron two months later in September of 1863. Yet, a hypothetical connection could not be entirely ruled out. As our prior discoveries demonstrate, dates are too easy to manipulate. What was the outcome of the Riots?
  • The most reliable estimates indicate at least 119 people killed, and 2,000 people were injured. Herbert Asbury, puts the figure much higher, at 2,000 killed and 8,000 wounded, a number that some dispute. Total property damage was about $1–5 million ($19.9 million – $99.4 million, adjusted for inflation). The city treasury later indemnified one-quarter of the amount.
There is a huge difference between 119 and 2,000 killed people. It is inconsistencies like this which make things uncertain. Why should we trust dates, when there could be a "cover up" involved.

Rest assured, we do not have any definitive photographs pertaining to this historic 1863 event. There are a few attributed to the Riots, but with a different caption those photographs could pertain to just about anything. Instead we have hundreds of sketches; where are similar photos?

draft-riots-1863.jpg

While I strongly doubt that the arrival of the Russian Atlantic Squadron is directly related to the Draft Riots, do we really know that it was not. That said, I do think that the Draft Riots have some serious disinformation included in the official narrative. The New York Riots of 1863 could probably make up a forum thread of their own.

Meanwhile, two months later, the elite of the City of New York was indulging in multiple festivities held in honor of... the Russian Atlantic Squadron.

"Should this number of Harper's Weekly fall into the hands of some poor wounded fellow at Chattanooga, or some half-starved Union prisoner at Richmond, the contrast between his own condition and that of the scented and perfumed dancers who figure in the ball picture may not improve his temper. "They are fiddling while I am dying," is the remark which would not unnaturally occur to him, and it would leave a bitter taste behind". - source

1863_russian_fleet_usa_4_1_1.jpg

1863_menu_russian_us_civil_war_1.jpg 1863_menu_russian_us_civil_war_2.jpg 1863_menu_russian_us_civil_war_3.jpg 1863_menu_russian_us_civil_war_4.jpg 1863_menu_russian_us_civil_war_5.jpg 1863_menu_russian_us_civil_war_6.jpg

  • Taken on face value as a goodwill gesture by Czar Alexander II, the naval visit generated a lot of excitement in New York. People lined Broadway, cheering the Russians as they paraded by in carriages, the streets festooned with the flags of both nations; Tiffany’s went so far as to decorate their entire building with a huge banner. On October 12th, the first banquet for Admiral Lessofsky was held at the Astor House, hosted by five hundred “citizens” of New York. The menu shown below is printed on yellow silk and features the great seals of both nations.
  • A week later, there was another banquet at the Astor House for Admiral Lessofsky and his officers. Hosted by the City of New York, this dinner for two hundred gentlemen featured a particularly large number of ornamental centerpieces, the purely decorative sculptures made of confectionery. The menu shown below, surprisingly similar in appearance to the one from a week earlier, is printed on ribbed satin with a tighter weave, making it easier to read.
  • Three days later, having barely digested the second banquet at the Astor House, the Russian officers (numbering over a hundred), left the city on a sightseeing trip to Niagara Falls, provided courtesy of the Hudson River Steamboat Company and the New-York Central and Erie Railroads. By then, the unrestrained flow of American hospitality, which included many private dinner parties, was beginning to take its toll on Admiral Lessofsky who accepted the invitation only on the condition that there not be any parades, speeches, or banquets during their five-day excursion.
  • On November 5th, the much-anticipated ball for the Russians began at 9:00 in the evening, when the first carriages pulled up to the Academy of Music. Two thousand tickets were sold for the Soirée Russe, as this dance was called; the crowd of onlookers standing outside was estimated to be even larger, making the whole affair something of a mob scene. The Russians were astonished to learn that the theater had been converted to a ballroom in less than twenty four hours, the work beginning only after the opera closed at midnight the night before. “None but Americans could accomplish such a feat!,” they exclaimed when they saw the glittering scene.
Source: The American Menu: The Russians Are Coming!

KD: Here we have it - in the middle of the deadly Civil War, certain individuals are partying away in NYC. They do so to the point where the Russian Admiral Lessoffski can eat and drink no more.
  • By then, the unrestrained flow of American hospitality, which included many private dinner parties, was beginning to take its toll on Admiral Lessofsky who accepted the invitation (to the 3rd ball) only on the condition that there not be any parades, speeches, or banquets during their five-day excursion.
Meanwhile, prior to leaving New York, the Russian sailors chose to donate $4,760 for... Purchase of Coal for the poor New Yorkers. How about that?

lessoffsky_letter_0.jpg

lessoffsky_letter_1.jpg lessoffsky_letter_2.jpg lessoffsky_letter_3.jpg

* * * * * * *
KD Summary: I can not really make any sense out of the above non-sense. Sure enough, we have an official narrative of the events, but how does it account for the historical slippage of the Russian seaman Demidoff who died in Maryland in 1864? Where are all the photographs which allegedly do not exist? Where are the images of multiple Russian flags mentioned by Webster Griffin Tarpley in the above video?

Additionally, we have those bizarre coincidences where simultaneously the Russian Slavery, and the United States Serfdom come to an end. Was it the other way around, or was it exactly the same thing? Judging by the rights of the slaves vs. those of the serfs, the two were one and the same.

Of course we have the alleged purchase of Alaska in 1867. Did Russians actually get their hands on the money? Sounds like they did not. Was Alaska simply re-assigned?

Below is an image representing the advancement of the North American settlers to the West. There is no source for the below image. I snapped a picture of some youtube video a while back.

westward_1.jpg

Columbus set foot on Hispaniola in 1492. Cortez overthrew the entire Aztec Empire by 1521. Pizarro conquered Peru and defeated Incas by 1535. Yet the North American settlers barely made it to the Mississippi river by 1820. 300 year difference is bizarre. Did North American natives have better defensive equipment? Well, may be they did. May be they had an army to defend themselves. The one we will never be told about.

And if we factor in all the other Civil War, and 19th century US related shenanigans, we have a mystery on our hands.
May be we should keep in mind a possible North American Tartarian connection as well. Who were the Confederates, and what slowed down the westwardly advancement? Could it be a hypothetical Tartarian resistance? What is the real reason for the Confederate monuments becoming a target these days?
Meanwhile, historic documents keep on getting destroyed.
Flag of the Russian Empire 1858 - 1883. Did you know? What's up with the color scheme, as well as being upside down?

Flag of the Russian Empire 1858—1883.jpg

Color Symbolism in Flags
Colors within flags differ from country to country and state to state; the colors presented hold deep-seeded meaning and representation.
  • Black: Often used to represent determination, ethnic heritage and/or the defeat of enemies. It can also be used as a symbol of death or mourning.
  • White: Seen as a symbol of peace, purity and harmony, and has also been used to represent surrender in times of battle.
  • Red: Stands for power, revolution, vibrancy and war (symbolic of bloodshed). Other meanings include courage and domination, while it can also be viewed as an alert of danger.
  • Blue: Signifies determination, liberation, alertness and good fortune.
  • Green: Often seen as a symbol of agricultural influence, as well as prosperity and fertility. It can also be viewed as youthfulness and hope.
  • Yellow (or Gold): Has long been viewed as a symbol of wealth and energy, as in the sun. It can also be used to represent happiness.
  • Orange: Viewed as representation of courage and sacrifice.
 

CyborgNinja

Well-known member
Messages
184
Likes
637
#2
Wow this is very well researched. You truly have a talent for this field of study. So just from a general over view, Russia was allied with the North against the South. Making an assumption based on earlier articles, the South represents some kind of alliance between the original caucasian inhabitants( tartars) and new settlers from Europe.

Have I got the right so far? Then the entirety of Europe including Russia attack the South? Who is France helping at this time. Or is the French presence in North America a totally selfish endeavor?
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,633
Likes
7,148
#4
Wow this is very well researched. You truly have a talent for this field of study. So just from a general over view, Russia was allied with the North against the South. Making an assumption based on earlier articles, the South represents some kind of alliance between the original caucasian inhabitants (tartars) and new settlers from Europe.

Have I got the right so far? Then the entirety of Europe including Russia attack the South? Who is France helping at this time. Or is the French presence in North America a totally selfish endeavor?
I wish I knew my friend. It does look like the answer lies with the Confederates in this case. Primarily because they are the most obvious target to point out. Whatever photographic evidence of the Civil War we have, appears to have been either "re-created", or carefully "doctored". This website (I stumbled upon while putting together the OP) is very much indicative of what they turned photographs into. Could they alter the texts as well? I think we have enough indicators suggesting that they could.

May be we are dealing with the Old World Setup vs. the New World Order type of restructuring of the World. I think we need to be more critical in our examination of the so-called colonial "Independence Wars". Such activities were likely similar in their essence. Those newly emerged countries, in my opinion, represent the losses of the Old World Setup. We think they liberated themselves, when in reality their territories were restructured and made to comply with the New World Order.

From this perspective Tartars would be the remaining representatives of the Old World Setup. It is logical to suggest that Tartaria could spread their influence, and culture to the North American continent. I do not think that African, or South American (for example) territories were Tartarian in nature. Yet, I think all of the territories preceding what I called the "New World Order" used to be a part of the "Old World Setup".

As far as Russia and the United States go... the Alaska purchase points to a hidden relationship the knowledge of which we are not privy to. While the official history has everything explained, we could be way too gullible believing that Russia would sell Alaska with no additional strings attached.

Alaska_Purchase.jpg

The US $7.2 million check used to pay for Alaska (roughly $123 million in 2018).

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index, prices in 2018 are 1,605.67% higher than prices in 1867. The dollar experienced an average inflation rate of 2.28% per year during this period. In other words, $7,200,000 in 1867 is equivalent in purchasing power to $122,808,162.16 in 2018, a difference of $115,608,162.16 over 151 years.

What makes us think that Russia was dumb enough (in 1867) to sell 663,300 mi² for a price of a luxury yacht (it would not even make top 10)? It's besides the point, but Russian explorers discovered gold in the Kenai River in 1848.
Interesting that Russia never received the money for Alaska. What could this really mean? I think Alaska could have been simply re-assigned, and it was "properly" documented in history as purchased/sold.
  • The main secret of selling Alaska lies in the question: "Where is the money?". Glass received a check in the amount of 7 million 035 thousand dollars - from the original 7.2 million 21 thousand he kept for himself, and 144 thousand distributed as bribes to senators who had voted to ratify the treaty. 7 million were transferred to London by bank transfer, and already from London to St. Petersburg by sea they brought the gold bars bought for this amount.
  • When converting first to pounds, and then to gold, another 1.5 million were lost, but this was not the last loss. Bark "Orkney" (Orkney), on board which was a precious cargo, sank on July 16, 1868 on the approach to St. Petersburg. Whether gold was in it at that time, or whether it did not leave the limits of Albion at all, is unknown. The insurance company that insured the vessel and the cargo declared itself bankrupt, and the damage was only partially compensated.
  • Most likely, there was no gold at Orkney. During the search operation it was not found. Where it has gone - the main mystery of the sale of Alaska. There is a version that this money went for the purchase of materials for construction roads, but it is much more interesting to think that the money mysteriously disappeared, otherwise what is the secret?
Google translated source: What happened to the money from the sale of Alaska?
 

GroundhogLfe

Active member
Messages
39
Likes
193
#5
This has been a topic of interest to me as well. I'm tying it up to something much larger that was going on in the world at the time and I believe you cannot understand it with looking only at what went on in the civil war. With this I just want to bring in more context to what was possibly going on in the civil war so we can make the correct deductions.

~1770 American Revolution: Break away from the bank, taxes & British grip
~18xx Napoleonic wars: British, Turks, Tartars? vs French & Russia
~1814 Congress of Vienna: Attempt to unify Europe, but refused by Alexander I of Russia.
~1830 Bank wars of America: Andrew Jackson and the abolishment of the "hydra of corruption"
~1853 Crimean war: British / banks, Turks, Tartars, French vs Russia
~1861 American Civil war: CSA, British / banks, Vatican vs USA (Greenbacks) & Russia
~1913 The Federal reserve system: American revolution neutralized
~1917 Bolshevik Revolution: Fall of Russia

A 50-100 year timescale around the event should be enough to get a good picture building up of the forces that were opposing each other in that era.

This is the hypothetical part. First we have Napoleon with the assistance of Russia attacking Moscow and beyond to blow a strike to 'Tartarian' powers. Why else would Russia celebrate this even in the early 20th century with a medal and why didn't Napoleon attack St.Petersburgh that was the capital. This has already been speculated here on another thread as well, it makes perfect sense when the official narrative does little. After this incident the French were to fall with the heavy cost blown to them in the war to the east.

In the aftermath of the Napoleonic wars in the Congress of Vienna, the European powers and the top class worked heavily upon trying to unify Europe. Russia however saw this as a threat and refused only to gain threats and promises about ending the Romanov dynasty, which would later come to happen only a little more than 100 years later.

Meanwhile in the USA in the ~1830's Andrew Jackson was making wars on the banks and won. Here we must remember why the American revolution had started in the first place. It was to break free from the financial chains of the British and the control of the banks. In the 19th century they would also see a lot of dead US presidents, even abnormally so. Any common sense mind would have to take in to option the chance of an agenda to take control of the nation or at least guide towards a policy wanted, it's been a "hidden" war of principals all along.

We would have the Crimean war in the ~1853 that would see the former allies the French being with the forces of the British and Turks.

For the Civil war, I tried to find about the letter that was sent to Alexander II by Lincoln as it has been said that even before opening the letter Alexander II had said prior to the man bringing the letter that "give that man everything he needs, the fate of the free world depends on it". On a quick look I couldn't find it now, but this has been heavily imprinted on my mind. We also know Pope Piux IX letters his support to the southern states, or Jefferson Davis at least in spirit. From the Vatican we can possibly make a link to the banking world and Lincoln was to break free from the grip of the banks with the introduction of greenbacks even though if the initial war would've been supported by the banking cartel. And whenever there is a possible link to the banks in the 19th century, there would be a link to the British. The north would win, with the assistance of Russian involvement which would lead to the takeover of the western part of the modern USA. A high speculation on that perhaps the west was also cleaned of the weakened Tartarian influence.

Only 50 years from the initial victory of the Civil war by the USA. The banks would finally have won over the rebellion / revolution that started in ~1770's with the introduction of the Federal Reserve system in 1913. From this point on it would seem that the USA that was founded on the revolution has been no more. Some talk about even another constitution being written in the latter 19th century so perhaps it happened already earlier, I have not read in to that much.

Also the Russians would soon be eliminated in the Bolshevik revolution. Their capital and intelligentsia destroyed with millions of people cleansed.

So if we look at the civil war it looks like the USA & Russians actually did win. But if we look at the aftermath only 50 years later we would see them both being defeated from within.

ps. As a citizen of the USA one should also ask when did the British become such a good friends of the USA, when they first were fighting with them for so long even and it looks like the existence from ~1770's to 1913 was a constant fight against the banking influence. The alliance with British only started to work together when the Federal reserve system was introduced. Before them it was Russia that was their ally.

pps. The common people everywhere have been victims and pawns, that is what unifies us all. I think we have a pretty good structural layout for society here, now the people can just let the banking cartel parasites and others a like fall where they belong. I also do not think the Tartars of late were the same as the earlier ones as we've seen a nation / kingdoms can easily be taken over by a 5th column with the lack of education and critical thinking. The future looks bright.
 
Last edited:

Aply1985

Active member
Messages
48
Likes
140
#8

milhaus

Well-known member
Messages
70
Likes
257
#9
This is information I can primarily find on mostly defunct blogs so I suggest taking it with a grain of salt, but I am reminded by this post that President McKinley proposed a railway system that would connect the United States and Russia in 1901.

As the last veteran of the American Civil War (1861-1965), President McKinley never forgot the debt the United States owed Russia for saving their entire nation during this dark period of history as British and French troops massed in Canada and Mexico to invade a war-torn US—but who were stopped in their tracks when Tsar Alexander II sent his entire naval fleet to the US threatening a global war against both Britain and France should they even dare set one foot upon American soil.

aarr2.jpg

On 14 September 1901, President McKinley’s dream for “the future of humanity” by the creation of this US-Russian rail system that would have destroyed the power of the British Empire was cut down by an assassins bullet--with his staunchly pro-British Vice President Theodore Roosevelt taking power and not only abandoning what could have been human history’s most uplifting and critical undertaking, but his, also, using the money allocated for it by the US Congress to, instead, build the Panama Canal (beginning in 1904) thus assuring the century long world wars and global economic upheaval that has followed, even to this present day.

Though McKinley’s dream died in 1901 with his assassination, in Russia, Tsar Nicholas II, in 1905, began to revive it with he too knowing its worth to humanity—but whose plans, like McKinley’s, were stopped when the British trained Japanese navy invaded Russia in 1905.

 

WildFire2000

Well-known member
Messages
72
Likes
334
#10
I read this last night before bed, and again, my mind is blown. I ... it's insane. The corporation control and the banking/money system being the driving force behind it all makes sense. We have speculated before about the Dutch East and West trading companies, their flags and their establishment of the US, especially when you tie in William of Orange and his infiltration and partial takeover of Britain in the beginnings of the 1700's (after the cataclysms of the late 1600's that practically sunk Holland).

Trying to unravel the mess that is history is both mind-boggling and immensely enjoyable to me. The rumors, mystery, speculation.. it's great. Another top quality post KD, and the contributions of everyone else too. Love it.
 

GroundhogLfe

Active member
Messages
39
Likes
193
#11
After reading all these posts over and over again and dwelling in thoughts on this fascinating subject I am actually starting to question the whole concept of the American revolution as being represented to us. I'll just post on the fly thoughts that could lead somewhere. This will tie in to an idea of the civil war.

-What if the constitution was just represented as means of negotiated peace between the fighting parties for the newly found country. What if it was the beginning of the banking cartel's influence arrival to the NA in the war of independence. The freemason and a member of the hellfire club Ben Franklin said "we gave you a republic, if you can keep it.".
-For the same time period and area who were fighting against the British invasion were the French & Mohawks even for an extended period starting way before.
-We have letters from an official US site between reverend Snyder and George Washington where Snyder tried to warn Washington of the doctrines of Illuminati arriving to the US and Washington welcoming them with satisfaction. It makes one question what Washington was really about.
-We have the purchase of Lousiana in 1803 within 20 years of that war, but perhaps it was not a purchase at all, but a continuation of conquest as we still have information of the British still fighting in the American soil in the ~1810's. Even if it was sold to the newly found country, it still does not change that there was a war going on.
-The Napoleonic wars in Europe would save the USA from the British being able to give their full attention there.
-Didn't the Russians also use French as their language at some point within the high class as a proof of the good relations of Russia & French?
-Perhaps the French and other people / nations representing the free people were there first to build a colony to escape the mess that had come to Europe. To have a pre-existing colony might make sense with all the older type European buildings that have seemed out of place and later destroyed as the banking cartel / British gained influence.
-It would also make sense that the French residing in the "new world" were on the side opposed to the British alliance / banking cartel as they were out of the jurisdiction of their mother country that had fallen to the hands of the British allied forces in the aftermath of Napoleonic wars.

This would tie in to a very messy situation in the USA. There's a lot of people wanting to live the life without the banking cartels influence and then we'd have the pro British / banking influence. What if this is the root for the civil war. This big picture ties in well to the previously written and it would explain a lot of this whole mess.

Ps. I must also add that I do not know where modern Russia lies in with it's affiliations. My question is that did the pre-Bolshevik Russia manage to survive within it's people and be able take the country back. I sure hope so. Sometimes it looks like this old struggle is still going on, but is it all a charade.

Pps. Must investigate the colonial era & piracy from new perspectives.
 
Last edited:

Dirigible

Well-known member
Messages
146
Likes
320
#12
I've read the OP twice, know what was a blinking neon sign to me both times?
Russia will support in every way possible, and aid to the fullest extent of its power its ancient ally, the United States of America
Ancient, not long time, not strong... The word ANCIENT was chosen... Pretty sure it had the same meaning back then as now.

How long does something have to be in existence for for it to be considered ancient? has a discussion on "ancient", between 400 years and 14 centuries?
 

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
168
Likes
485
#13
I find it interesting you mention the idea that the Russians were stopping the Europeans from helping out the south by protecting San Fransisco and New York.

I'm formulating a theory about the civil war, and how it relates to the Louisiana Purchase. I feel like it was always the mission to install a Monarchy in Atlantis and the War of Independence screwed that up big time.

The Louisiana Purchase wasn't Napoleans to sell because he only owned it because he tricked the Spanish when they were too weak to dispute it.

Perhaps part of the plan was to have either Spain or France reclaim the stolen land and restore a French Monarchy in America. Crazy?

Anyway, back to Russia... Could Russia have been somehow saving America against monarchy? Makes me wonder if Russia tipped the scales in the war of independence. We always here about the French help, but.. What if?

It wasn't too long after the Tsars were murdered and ended. Maybe that was retribution for saving America!

From Wikipedia
News of the Declaration of Independence's penning and signing finally reached Imperial Russia on August 13, 1776. In imperial correspondence, Vasilii Grigor'evich Lizakevich, a Russian ambassador in London wrote to Count Nikita Ivanovich Panin, a Russian statesmen, and praised the leadership, bravery, and virtue of colonial leaders as shown through the declaration. It is worth noting, though, that, in this same dispatch, Lizakevich never noted the "natural rights of man" mentioned in the document; and, instead only focused on the actions of the American forefathers. When Catherine the Great caught wind of the declaration's creation and adoption, the tsarina attributed the actions of Britain's former colonists to "personal fault" on the part of the British Crown in the form of its colonial policies. Moreover, the monarch believed "that the separation of the colonies from the mother country did not conflict with the interests of Russia and might even be advantageous to her."
More documentation of the Russian reception of the Declaration of Independence comes from the accounts of Pavel Petrovich Svinyin, a representative of the tsarist government to the United States. In his accounts from 1811–1813, Svinyin noted that it appeared that American civilians enjoyed almost all the enumerated liberties as outlined by the declaration and constitution. Despite the publication of Svinyin's observations of American life, the full text of the Declaration of Independence was outlawed in the Russian Empire until the reign and reform era of Tsar Alexander II ( 1855-1881 ). Historians attribute this absence of the document to the disconnect between the Declaration of Independence's values and the policies which the Russian monarchy enforced.
 
Last edited:

CyborgNinja

Well-known member
Messages
184
Likes
637
#14
feel like it was always the mission to install a Monarchy in Atlantis
Atlantis?
Ancient, not long time, not strong... The word ANCIENT was chosen... Pretty sure it had the same meaning back then as now.
Is the United states actually a term coined to describe a bunch of European countries uniting on the new continent, France, Germany, Russia, Spain and England. Only England tried to take a more dominant role and was pushed out of the union by the other parties? That would explain the concept of independent state system america has.
 
Last edited:

BStankman

Well-known member
Messages
327
Likes
1,240
#15
Perhaps part of the plan was to have either Spain or France reclaim the stolen land and restore a French Monarchy in America. Crazy?

Anyway, back to Russia... Could Russia have been somehow saving America against monarchy? Makes me wonder if Russia tipped the scales in the war of independence. We always here about the French help, but.. What if?

It wasn't too long after the Tsars were murdered and ended. Maybe that was retribution for saving America!

From Wikipedia
No not crazy at all. There is a parallel between the French aid during the US revolution and the French revolt in 1789.

During this time we see aristocracy being attacked throughout Europe.
Revolutions of 1848 - Wikipedia

Maybe this is what the US civil war started as. An attack on the US aristocracy.
All U.S. Presidents But One Descended From King John Of England?

There is so very little to find on this topic. Can it really be explained away by the cold war?
Flag of the Russian-American Company.

russian america company.jpg
 

GroundhogLfe

Active member
Messages
39
Likes
193
#16
I find it interesting you mention the idea that the Russians were stopping the Europeans from helping out the south by protecting San Fransisco and New York.

I'm formulating a theory about the civil war, and how it relates to the Louisiana Purchase. I feel like it was always the mission to install a Monarchy in Atlantis and the War of Independence screwed that up big time.

The Louisiana Purchase wasn't Napoleans to sell because he only owned it because he tricked the Spanish when they were too weak to dispute it.

Perhaps part of the plan was to have either Spain or France reclaim the stolen land and restore a French Monarchy in America. Crazy?

Anyway, back to Russia... Could Russia have been somehow saving America against monarchy? Makes me wonder if Russia tipped the scales in the war of independence. We always here about the French help, but.. What if?

It wasn't too long after the Tsars were murdered and ended. Maybe that was retribution for saving America!

From Wikipedia
I think it's been entirely possible that a new French monarchy had been planned up in the NA at some point, that doesn't sound crazy at all.

Regarding the Russians on French you could think it this way that being in their shoes they'd likely want to help "Quebec" / "new France", but not care about the European puppet France of what it became of after the loss of Napoleon unless it's people rose up for it. In the end of 19th century, 80 years after the end of the Napoleonic wars Tolstoy would condemn the latter Franco-Russian alliance as a French trick to entangle Russia in a future war against France’s enemy Germany. Tolstoy described the suddenly friendly French as “people who, without reason, suddenly professed such spontaneous and exceptional love for Russia”. I'm speculating this that Russia would fall for this in honor of the old alliance and in dire need of friends.

The Tsars were promised that retribution in the Congress of Vienna already ~50 years before the civil war happened. I'm trying to find a good source for that.

I'm repeating here, but in the congress of Vienna Alexander I refused to go with the European plan, that would side with the doctrine of abolishing monarchy. Later that decade, around ~30 years+ we would see the European landscape changed with the rise of the nations through revolutions, the spring of nations. I think Alexander I saw this plan and movement as a threat for nations and the people as it could've make it easier for the banks to have control by taking away monarchial interest in upholding the best interest of your lineage rather having changing puppets that could allow corruption more easily. Everything lines up with that they would've rather supported monarchy, if it just was against the banking cartel when the cartel would leave monarchies stay that were with their plan.

I'm fairly sure that Russia had it's interest in the civil war to oppose the same "hydra of corruption" that Andrew Jackson fought in the 1830's and the colonies even prior to that. If the colonies would've fallen Russia would've been pretty much alone to face the interests of the cartel.

As a recent edit and addition I found out that instead of just loving the truth you might fall sick for pursuing it and becoming more blinded when you're getting ecstatic about something. I think I've given everything I have to offer for this thread, time for others to shine and take it farther and to more details. I know which way I'll head from here.

Ps. Must remember that being proven wrong also is a thing to be thankful for as you have acquired new knowledge.
 
Last edited:

mythstifieD

Well-known member
Messages
168
Likes
485
#19
Atlantis?

Is the United states actually a term coined to describe a bunch of European countries uniting on the new continent, France, Germany, Russia, Spain and England. Only England tried to take a more dominant role and was pushed out of the union by the other parties? That would explain the concept of independent state system america has.
Many writers of yore referred to the new world as Atlantis
 

LordAverage

Active member
Messages
78
Likes
227
#20
I've read the OP twice, know what was a blinking neon sign to me both times?

Ancient, not long time, not strong... The word ANCIENT was chosen... Pretty sure it had the same meaning back then as now.

How long does something have to be in existence for for it to be considered ancient? has a discussion on "ancient", between 400 years and 14 centuries?
Exactly what I was going to comment, I'd be interested in finding the original russian version and seeing what someone else translates it as, it could be possible that translating between russian and english gives the word ancient for some weird reason. I don't have a bunch of Russian friends aha but i'll see what I find.
 

Similar threads

Top