Where were US flags prior to the Civil War?

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,125
Likes
3,969
#1
I wanted to share an observation of mine. Primarily because it provides for a possibility of one very peculiar historical development. It I will sound as unrealistic as it gets.

I will present a hypothesis that there was no United States of America prior to the Civil War time frame. This hypothesis could be, and most likely is wrong, for we have tons of historical documents (Declaration of Independence, etc.) which suggest otherwise. Yet, we do have two hard to explain facts, which, at the very least, should persuade the reader to ask a few questions, and do some research on his/her own.

Photography
A few traditional facts...

Joseph_Nicéphore_Niépce.jpg

Nicéphore Niépce
1765-1833

The first permanent photoetching was an image produced in 1822 by the French inventor Nicéphore Niépce, but it was destroyed in a later attempt to make prints from it. Niépce was successful again in 1825. In 1826 or 1827, he made the View from the Window at Le Gras, the earliest surviving photograph from nature.

Niépce's camera photographs required an extremely long exposure - at least eight hours. Niépce died in 1833 and Daguerre then redirected the experiments toward the light-sensitive silver halides, which Niépce had abandoned many years earlier because of his inability to make the images he captured with them light-fast and permanent. Daguerre's efforts culminated in what would later be named the daguerreotype process.


The required exposure time was measured in minutes instead of hours. Daguerre took the earliest confirmed photograph of a person in 1838 while capturing a view of a Paris street: unlike the other pedestrian and horse-drawn traffic on the busy boulevard, which appears deserted, one man having his boots polished stood sufficiently still throughout the several-minutes-long exposure to be visible. The existence of Daguerre's process was publicly announced in 1839.

British chemist John Herschel made many contributions to the new field. He invented the cyanotype process, later familiar as the "blueprint". He was the first to use the terms "photography", "negative" and "positive". He had discovered in 1819 that sodium thiosulphate was a solvent of silver halides, and in 1839 he informed Talbot (and, indirectly, Daguerre) that it could be used to "fix" silver-halide-based photographs and make them completely light-fast. He made the first glass negative in late 1839.

daguerreotype_1.jpg

Daguerreotype

Very early daguerreotypes (those from 1839-1845) did take 60-90 seconds of sitting still to capture an image, but the majority of daguerreotypes we see today are from post-1845, when new technology (the addition of bromine fumes to the process) reduced exposure times to a few seconds.
In the March 1851 issue of The Chemist, Frederick Scott Archer published his wet plate collodion process. It became the most widely used photographic medium until the gelatin dry plate, introduced in the 1870s, eventually replaced it.
Some Photo Sources:
1830s-1840s Photography

Capitol1846.jpg

1846 - daguerreotype photo


1840-45 Photographs
Below is just a quick group of photographs I saved from the links below. All the below images are allegedly taken between 1840 and 1845. Some are of a better quality then others, but in general the situation is pretty obvious. We do have early 1840s photographs which include photos of people. It would be logical to suggest that with time, lets say between 1840 and 1860, the quality of the photography improved. At least this is what the official history of the photography is telling us.

800px-No._33_London_Street,_Reading,_c._1845.jpg 800px-Horeau,_Hector_-_Theben_1.jpg 800px-Bayard,_Hippolyte_-_Restauration_des_Blois_Schlosses_1843.jpg Horeau,_Hector_-_Luxor_1841.jpg The_Scott_Monument_1845.jpg Horeau,_Hector_-_Luxor_1841_1.jpg 800px-St._Laurence's_Church,_Reading,_c._1845.jpg Daggherrotipo_del_Palazzo_del_Quirinale_1840.jpg
Architectural_Study_(Old_Schools_Hall,_Oxford)_1843.jpg Talbot_Leiter_1843.jpg 1024px-Bayard,_Hippolyte_-_Stilleben_1840.jpg 1024px-Talbot_Atelier_1845.jpg 1280px-Talbot,_William_Henry_Fox_-_»Die_Obsthändler«,_Lacock_Abbey_1842.jpg 1280px-Talbot,_William_Henry_Fox_-_Boulevard_des_Capucines_1843.jpg
1280px-Bayard,_Hippolyte_-_Rue_Tholozé_mit_den_drei_Windmühlen_von_Montmartre_1843.jpg 1280px-Prangey,_Joseph-Philibert_Girault_de_-_Die_Kathedrale._Athen_(Detail)_1842.jpg 1280px-Bayard,_Hippolyte_-_Die_Madeleine_und_Umgebung_(Zeno_Fotografie)_B&W.jpg 1280px-Rospini_Graz_1840-10-02_02.jpg Calcot_Park,_Bath_Road,_Tilehurst,_c._1845.jpg Iglesia_Matriz_de_Jauja_-_1842.jpg Talbot_foto_1842.jpg
1830s-40s photo sources:
1850s Family Photographs
1850s yield hundreds of family pictures. Which means that photography is becoming more affordable and widespread.

13Daguerreoptye-Family-Portrait_1850.jpg Davis family 1850.jpg jordanfa_1850.jpg Thomas_Ustick_Walter_&_family_c1850.jpg


United States Cities
where are they?
Armed with the above information, let us try to find some 1840-1860 photographs of the most prominent cities in the United States of America. The links below will take you to google image search results I linked to the 1840's dates. You are welcome to replace 1840 with 1850. The results are not going to change much.

We will look for:
I was going to post google image search results in here, but they show too many 1870s, 80s, 90s, and 1900s photographs in there. But the general idea is reflected in the images below. Even in the 1870s and 80s they were still putting out these photograph replacement drawings.

chicago_downtown-1870s.gif new york 1842.jpg retford-market-square-1848.jpg
Note: if in the search results you see a photograph, do not assume that it is from 1840s, or 1850s. Most likely it is going to be a much later years, which is not relevant for the purposes of this thread.

US Flags
1777-1860

First Official US Flag
RossBetsy_1.jpg

This 13-Star Flag became the Official United States Flag on June14th, 1777 and is the result of the congressional action that took place on that date. Much evidence exists pointing to Congressman Francis Hopkinson as the person responsible for its design. The only President to serve under this flag was George Washington (1789-1797). This Flag was to last for a period of 18 years.

RossBetsy.jpg

Obviously, as the number of member states grew, the flag was getting updated with additional stars. We will go up to 33 stars. The 34 star flag would get us into the 1860s.

33star.gif

Flag Source: USFlag.org: A website dedicated to the Flag of the United States of America

Obviously, we had an introduction of the Confederate Flag group in the 1860s. But it is taking us into the Civil War area, and this is an entirely different topic. Though there will be a little Civil War touch up below.

The Civil War
1861-1865
I do not really want to use the Civil War as any sort reference point here. There are too many "reenactment" photographs, and "shady" characters involved there. My personal opinion on the Civil war is not quite formed yet. One thing I do believe, it was not what we are lead to believe it was.

Battle of Fort Sumter_1861_2.jpg Battle of Fort Sumter_1861.jpg civil_war_flag_2.jpg civil_war_flag_3.jpg civil_war_flag_1.jpg
Are those US flags? They sure look like US flags. Dates of the photographs are supposed to be between 1861 and 1865, but who is to say that we are not experiencing another reenactment conducted at a later date? Even these were located after an extensive search.

William_Crawford_Smith_crop.jpg
@flameto (TY)
In general, even as late as the actual Civil War, we do not see any reasonable number of the United States of America, or Confederate flags in the photographs.

Once again, the Civil War is the cornerstone event of future developments in my opinion. Please do not base your replies to this thread topic on the Civil War materials alone.

* * * * *
KD: We have clear proof that photography was widely available, within the constraints of its time of course. Yet, with the abundance of 1840s family photographs, we are missing some very important photographic proof pertaining to the 1840s - 1859 time frame (and could be even later).

Photographs, which appear to be missing:
  • any photos of the US flag in the urban environment
  • any reasonable number of the major city photographs
  • any US Congress photographs
Instead for the period in question we are being fed drawings and paintings.

congress_1.jpg congress_2.jpg congress_3.jpg RossVotes.jpg

Eventually everything comes down to one simple question: where are the US photographs off the cities and the

KD summary: I believe the Congress of the United States could afford a photo or two, to preserve the legacy via the first photographed sessions. Same goes for the major cities.

What about any sort of the flag display by the United States government? Not even the Capitol Building, or the White House?

1846

Capitol1846.jpg WHc1846.jpg

I do not believe for a second that there were no city photographs, government in session or flag photographs for that matter. The question is why the actual photos were substituted with paintings and sketches. Could it be that photographs contained something we were not supposed to see? I don't know, may be something like a differently looking flag, or some technology which supposedly did not "exist".

uk_flag.png
east_india_flag.png
By 1803, at the height of its rule in India, the British East India company had a private army of about 260,000 - twice the size of the British Army.
US Army 1st General Order, “I will guard everything within the limits of my post and quit my post only when properly relieved.”
us_flag.png

District of Columbia Organic Act happens in 1871.
East India Company seizes to exist in 1874.

Grand Union Flag
American Flag under British control
Flag_of_the_United_States.png

Grand Union Flag

Flag of the East India Company
The flag between 1668 and 1801
Flag_of_the_British_East_India_Company_1.png

Flag of the East India Company
East India Company: Granted a Royal Charter by Queen Elizabeth in 1600, it became one of the most powerful mercantile organizations in the world by maintaining a monopoly on the importation of exotic goods (notably cotton, tea, and silk) from India into Britain. It also maintained a standing military, which was used in many cases to consolidate and enforce local authority in Indian territories.

1600-1874
uk_take_over.jpg


* * * * *

Could it be that there were no United States of America prior to the Civil War?
 

Apollyon

Well-known member
Messages
99
Likes
353
#2
Good stuff man! Lotsa weird stuff ascribed to that date 1871. I say ascribed because if the civil war was the American cover story for something then how many other cover stories are we dealing with? One for each new country? Devide and conquer.

Single photo: The Paris Commune topples a statue of... Napoleon? "1871"


I made a comment in that post And shared a video about infrastructure and how basically it looks like we are maintaining infrastructure from before this seemingly corporate take over of the world. I find that video incredibly telling. At some point we ceased to have access to various construction techniques. I point to the inventions secrets act of 1951.

Which seems to be enacted to choke out whichever entity was and is causing these upheavals

I wonder if our situation would be much worse if hostiles had access to super technologies.

Maybe all those civil wars and revolutions were much closer together. Maybe they were organized using technology like the car phone which was invented way earlier than most people realize. Sure it takes a bit of abstract thinking and I can't prove it yet but that's where my heads at.

"On October 2, 1946, Motorolacommunications equipment carried the first calls on Illinois Bell Telephone Company's new car radiotelephone service in Chicago."

I just don't know how you can run a successful revolution without a phone.

Don't want to derail your great post wth my crazy talk but there it is.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,125
Likes
3,969
#3
Not sure if this is the topic for it. It appears so, though it could probably be a separate thread, but I guess we could incorporate it into this one. Appears related, anyways.

I think the below wars, conflicts and events of 1850-1875 are all steps of the same NWO indoctrination program. I would not even get surprised if they were much closer on the time scale to each other.
There are more, of course, but these are just to reflect on the idea.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,125
Likes
3,969
#5
This would be the true WWI imo.
I count it as WW3.

WWI I think was in 1773-1775. Russians call it: Pugachev's Rebellion. While in reality I think it was one of the last major Tartarian wars. After this war the Tartaria part of North America became for grabs.

Then in 1776 United States Declaration of Independence happens.

WW2 - everything 1812 related
WW3 - this thread

WW4 - traditional WWI

WW5 (may be) - traditional WW2, but I think there could have been some major things before that
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,125
Likes
3,969
#7
Well, one way or the other, I simply pointed out an observation. There could be hundreds of photos and US flags in those photos. I simply have not seen any. :sneaky:
 

BStankman

Well-known member
Messages
163
Likes
446
#8
Could it be that there were no United States of America prior to the Civil War?
That is the general feeling I have. The US was a loose confederation of free independent states in the Tartary tradition prior to the Civil war.
The bill of rights seems like it was a necessity for free independent people to accept a confederation.

Dutch East India was able to grab a foothold, but it took some time to build the machine required to fully conquer.
Civil War fully establishes the evil empire of the United States.

Fasci throne.jpg

Once public education is mandatory you can teach any fake history propaganda you want to.
Including a motivation for the war.
aboriginal american.jpg
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,125
Likes
3,969
#9

WildFire2000

Active member
Messages
38
Likes
110
#10
WildHeretic's investigation into maps and his discussion/ideas on the apocalypse that occurred which changed the world at the time suggests that the Dutch India Company moved from the Netherlands to England due to flooding and the geographical changes at the time. The Mud Flood and map discussion forum I was reading a while back went into a lot of detail on it. If that assertion is true, then maybe the companies are basically one and the same. The BEIC and the DEIC I mean. ( excuse my weird typing, I just woke up and am on medications.)
 

BStankman

Well-known member
Messages
163
Likes
446
#11
Yes, what WildFire2000 said. :sneaky:

Admittedly I just had the orange lion from here on my brain at the time. Lion + Eagle = Gryphon? Tartary?
The House of Orange from the Netherlands, moved into England through William of Orange. Another corporate takeover through glorious revolution.
You can probably think of the change from New Amsterdam to New York as just corporate rebranding.

I also think that there might be a clue that confederate money is not accepted at the ports, those would be the foothold of the corporation. Printing technology of the first half of the 19th century: banknotes
 

Glumlit

Member
Messages
28
Likes
76
#13
Ok we're all familiar with the American War Flag.

amwarflag.gif

According to this, the flags that we are not seeing in photos of America before the "Civil War" are those of each individual state.

And this

amcvlflag.gif

is the American Peace Flag that none of us are familiar with.

I couldn't find any state flag or history of a state flag that has a white stripe all the way thru the center as the one in the phantom flag photo
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,125
Likes
3,969
#16
Here is an oddity.
If you go to 1:15 in the video, you will hear that this veteran enlisted in the war of rebellion in 1861 and fought the Dutch at Coal Gap.
The rest of the video is only interesting if you look for where it was edited.
I believe he is talking about Battle of Cole Camp (1861) - Wikipedia

Here is what the old guy is saying:
In 1861 I enlisted in the war of the Rebellion in Warsaw, Benton county, Missouri under colonel O'Kane, then a captain (Walter S. O'Kane not Dennis O'Kane). We went to Cole Camp, fought the Dutch, and cleaned them out completely. Lost only 7 of our men with over 250 of the dutch killed, no prisoners were taken on either side. From there we went to Springfield, Missouri, where we had a Battle of Wilson's Creek, where General Lyon was killed on the 10th of August. The bravest man I ever saw was General Lyon.
We have two issues here:
  • what rebellion? (could it be the Secession)
  • what dutch?
Wiki: A secessionist force was gathering nearby at Warsaw. Captain Walter S. O'Kane organized the Warsaw "Grays" and Captain Thomas W. Murray organized the "Blues." The combined force numbered about 350, with 100 of them mounted. two weeks after Cole Camp, just before the Battle of Carthage, O'Kane was elected lieutenant colonel of the battalion while Murray was elected major.

Secession, as it applies to the outbreak of the American Civil War, comprises the series of events that began on December 20, 1860, and extended through June 8 of the next year when eleven states in the Lower and Upper South severed their ties with the Union. The first seven seceding states of the Lower South set up a provisional government at Montgomery, Alabama. After hostilities began at Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor on April 12, 1861, the border states of Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, and North Carolina joined the new government, which then moved its capital to Richmond, Virginia. The Union was thus divided approximately on geographic lines. Twenty-one northern and border states retained the style and title of the United States, while the eleven slave states adopted the nomenclature of the Confederate States of America.

* * * * *
It appears our old gentleman is a Confederate army veteran. Now compare two versions of the events.

From the horse's mouth:
  • Lost only 7 of our men with over 250 of the dutch killed, no prisoners were taken on either side.
From Wikipedia:
  • Federal casualties were heavy with at least 34 killed or mortally wounded, 60 wounded, and 25 made prisoner. Perhaps most importantly, O'Kane's force captured 362 muskets with bayonets that would prove useful at the battles of Carthage and Wilson's Creek. Secessionist losses were around 7 killed and 25 wounded.
    Former Confederate President Jefferson Davis, in his 1890 book A Short History of the Confederate States of America, claimed that 206 Union soldiers were killed and wounded, and over 100 taken prisoner.
End result: The old guy said, "We went to Cole Camp, fought the Dutch, and cleaned them out completely".

Well, and here is where I totally agree with @SeekingWis's, post below. I do not think he means "Dutch" as immigrants of Netherlands. Only, I think that "the Dutch" is the Dutch West India Company. East or West in this case probably does not make much difference, for they are most likely one and the same. Besides, both probably were a part of East India Company under the British Crown.

Flag_of_the_Dutch_East_India_Company.png
Flag_of_the_Dutch_West_India_Company.png

Flag_of_the_British_East_India_Company_1.png

Of course, the "official narrative" partially has its grounds covered:
  • Commonly referred to as "Dutchmen" by other Union soldiers, and "lop eared Dutch" by Confederates, German-American units in general earned a reputation for discipline. Some of them had previously served in European armies, and they brought valuable experience to the Union Army.
Pretty sure the old gentleman says "the Dutch", not "the Deutsche".

Ridiculous enough but, in the minds of the historians it appeared logical that Germans would be ok with being called Dutch. Who cares if Germans are deprived of their heritage in the process. All the glory goes to the Dutch.
 
Messages
8
Likes
31
#17
I believe he is talking about Battle of Cole Camp (1861) - Wikipedia

We have two issues here:
  • what rebellion?
  • what dutch?
Sounds like war of the rebellion was the American Civil War, possibly against the Dutch East India Company, or EIC, or Vampire Squid. I would wager all of these major multinational corporations since the India Companies have been controlled by the same people at the highest levels.

Interesting how in the video he says no prisoners were taken on either side compared to Wikipedia's account which I'm always inclined to doubt.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,125
Likes
3,969
#20
Here is some "Dutch" Civil War connection with some devious explanation for the name of the place.

Dutch Gap is located on the James River in Chesterfield County, Virginia; it was started as a canal by Union forces during the American Civil War to cut off a curl of the river controlled by Confederate forts. The canal was completed after the war and is now the main channel of the James River in this area. It is north of the lost 17th-century town of Henricus. The name "Dutch Gap" may have a connection to the 1611 Cittie of Henricus. According to an unsubstantiated story, Sir Thomas Dale cut a ditch across the 500 yard wide neck of land behind the new fort, connecting the two parts of the James River. It became known as "Dale's Dutch Gap".

They do not show how the canal was dug, so it's quite interesting and questionable.

Finished Dutch Gap Canal April 1865
FinishedDutchGapCanalApril1865.jpg


Gun_over_DutchGapCanal.jpg
 
Top