One hundred fifty years ago the United States faced its own Civil War crisis, just as Syria does today. The American Civil War was not home grown. It did not just appear spontaneously here, but was fomented by European powers, especially by Britain. So too the Syrian civil war is neither home grown nor spontaneous, but was fomented from without by nations such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. (Further background: Trouble Follows Mr. Moto, Ersjdamoo’s Blog entry of January 27, 2012.)
About ten years before Abraham Lincoln took the helm in the midst of crisis, Millard Fillmore (image above) had also been suddenly propelled into an earlier version of the 1861 crisis. British agent provocateurs had even then been active in a “divide and conquer” plot, whereby the North and South were to be split apart and the British and French could more easily extend their influence into North America. When President Zachary Taylor was assassinated via the so-called “cherries and milk”, Vice President Millard Fillmore took over the executive branch of government. This happened during Compromise of 1850 negotiations. But at the moment Our Millard became President, those compromise attempts between North and South had failed. The British and French were salivating with glee about their improving imperialist prospects. What would Millard do? (See also my book, “What Would Millard Do?”. 2009. Published by Lulu.com)
What Millard did was he modularized the compromise problem. The omnibus compromise had failed, so President Fillmore worked upon individual elements of compromise rather than seeking it all in one fell swoop. And Millard’s modular approach, with assistance from Daniel Webster, succeeded! Civil war in 1850 was averted by the Compromise of 1850. If not for the efforts of Our Millard, civil war would likely have erupted in 1850, rather than 1861. And in 1850, the North was not quite so strong as it was later, during the Lincoln presidency. If not for Millard Fillmore, the United States might well have been split apart and the South could have become French-Catholic territory.
Lately there has been a mud-slinging campaign against Millard Fillmore. The “court historians” are working to defame Our Millard, by magnifying any blemishes which they can find. Millard is not liked in part because he came from the Anti-Masonic Party in New York, and in 1856 was the candidate of the “Know Nothings”, an ad hoc political party hostile to the Vatican.
Defamation of Bashar Assad, the Abraham Lincoln of Syria, has been underway ever since a so-called “Arab Spring” eruption in Syria. An Illinois congress person has, for example, called Dr. Assad a “genocidal maniac.” Was Abraham Lincoln also a “genocidal maniac”? Lincoln allowed mass arrests without trial of “dissidents” in the U.S. These people, many of them innocent, languished for months in cold, dirty prisons, without hope and with minimal food. Should Queen Victoria have “drawn a red line”? Should the British queen have said, “Look here, Mr. Lincoln, if you conduct mass arrests of your own people and allow them to rot in prison, then Britain will be forced to invade, for humanitarian purposes”?
The Friends Of Millard Fillmore (FOMF) are not fooled by “déjà vu all over again”, this time in Syria. Through our constant study of Millard Fillmore and his times we can easily see how outside interests have been seeking to destroy and take control of Syria, just as had been attempted in the Millard Fillmore/Abraham Lincoln times in America. The FOMF urges Americans to once more stand by Millard. The FOMF votes “no” on any U.S. intervention in Syria.