Marriott New Orleans Hotel: Fill & Download for Free

We had reservations at the Marriott in New Orleans. There was a huge convention in town and when we checked in, the clerk couldn't find our reservations. Seems that we had been booked (accidentally) into the JW Marriott. By the time we found it and checked in there were no regular rooms available, so we were upgraded to a suite. Two floors of absolute comfort and great service for three nights.

I’ve had a few. Was once booted off the elevator at the Marriott in New Orleans by (I presume) Secret Service agents, who told my wife and I to find another elevator. No one to meekly do as I’m told by strangers, I told them we were guests and would be using that elevator, they flashed badges and spoke a little more directly. I later learned that candidate Ronald Regan was about to come down in that elevator.On another occasion I decided to take my mom, 8 year old daughter and 5 year old nephew to Disney World. We stopped at a Holiday Inn somewhere around Lake City, FL. Checked into the room and was lying on the bed with the kids watching cartoons, when another hotel guest unlocks our door and proceeds to enter. I’m not sure who was more startled, he or I; anyway he quickly apologized and backed out of the door, but not before showing me that the desk clerk had given him the key to our room. It caused me to wonder how many accidental injuries and deaths may occur because of desk clerk errors like that.Lastly, my wife and I were staying at the Grace Bay Club in the Turks & Caicos Islands. I snorkeled out one day to find a very large conch shell and brought it back ashore. A beach attendant at the hotel asked me if I collected conch shells and I told him yes, but didn’t have many nice ones. (I was expecting him to try and sell me shells). The next day on the beach, he had about six conch shells that he had laboriously cleaned and saved for me. They were beautiful and so large that I could only fit two in my luggage. I gave the rest away.

To the people claiming that the USA did not lose the War of 1812, let me clarify a few points, here:The USA has most definitely LOST some wars. And these wars I am mentioning don’t come in the form of the USA simply withdrawing because of some hippies protesting the government and the rest of the population chooses to agree to a withdrawal, despite potentially winning on the battlefield.Rather, you should imagine a war that was so lopsided in favour of the Americans, that their militia alone was nearly twice the size of the entire population (women, children and the elderly included) that they were fighting against…AND LOST!!!If this type of war sounds familiar to you, I introduce to you, the War of 1812.Contrary to popular belief, the War of 1812 was not fought only in 1812. In fact, if we count the November 7, 1811 Battle of Tippecanoe as part of the same war, then the war itself actually started in 1811 when American forces effectively waged war against the native population, who in turn decided to side with the Canadians and British.Quite ironically, despite the fact that even Thomas Jefferson — who was himself personally opposed to the war — said that “taking Canada will be just a matter of marching” and that even the approval to end naval impressment did not placate the Americans from commencing the invasion anyway, many modern Americans will insist that the reason they failed to annex Canada in the first place was because they never intended to.It is a convenient form of revision to suggest that the excuse for going to war in the first place had already been resolved before the first shots were ever fired, was used nonetheless, resulting in a three year war that saw a total of 50,000 deaths on both sides.From the archives: Montrealers anxiously followed fall of Fort DetroitThe issue of impressment was never even brought up during the Treaty of Ghent, despite being reintroduced once it became clear that the Americans intended to pursue the war nonetheless. Impressment simply ended later that year upon the final conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars.The War of 1812 was not the first time that the USA invaded Canada, and it most certainly would not be the last. In 1690, the USA — then under the influence of the British — besieged Quebec City under the command of future Massachusetts Governor William Phips.The Quest for QuebecIn 1711, a second failed invasion was repulsed when an American fleet was battered by a storm in the Saint Lawrence River, resulting in the destruction of most of the naval fleet.And finally, in 1775, two American forces were sent to annex Canada by capturing Montreal as well as nearly capturing Quebec City, after the Canadian population declined to partake in the American Revolutionary Wars. In order to pull off a successful invasion, the Americans went so far as to recruit Canadian inhabitants to join their army, forming the First Canadian Regiment, which would later take part in several campaigns in the American theatre in the aftermath of the failed 1775 invasion of Canada.1775-1781: Revolting People and Benedict Arnold & Other Quebec CuriosThere is a popular misconception amongst most Americans as well as many Canadians who are ignorant of the past that Canada did not exist during the War of 1812.However, Canada had been referenced as a recognisable identity in its own right since at least the days of Jacques Cartier and Samuel de Champlain. The Saint Lawrence was the main natural boundary, with Canada being the lands north of the river, while “America” was the natural terrain located south of the Saint Lawrence.In 1791, Canada was broken into lower and upper Canada, and in 1841, upper and lower Canada were morphed into the Dominion (Province) of Canada. It was not until 1867, when Canada’s political system became federal that the name was once again changed to simply Canada; a name that has since remained.The Canadas - WikipediaDespite many of their names being changed, most of Canada’s major military units were around during the eighteenth century, long before the War of 1812 ever made its way into the history books. Most of these military units would also see action during the War of 1812, as well as all the subsequent wars Canada would face in the decades and centuries to come.Canada’s timing in becoming a federal entity, was, quite ironically speaking from those claiming that the USA had no interest in annexing Canada, the result of the Americans attempting to justify an invasion before, during and even after the conclusion of the American Civil War.Canadian units of the War of 1812 - WikipediaSince it was customary for Canadians aspiring for a military career to serve in foreign armies, some 60,000 Canadians participated in the American Civil War in the event that these veterans would later be needed for the defence of their own country.A link to Canada’s forgotten involvement in the American Civil War can be found in another answer I have written, where Canadians were even blamed for the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, due to John Wilkes Booth plotting his assassination while he was living in Montreal. The fact that Jefferson Davis and his family fled to Canada as refugees also played a role in compiling “evidence” to support a renewed war against Canada.David Frigault's answer to What role did Canada play in the American Civil War?Even into the twentieth century, the USA had plotted several other invasions plans, including one infamous plan which is now nicknamed “War Plan Red.” Many historians also believe that had World War Two not commenced when it did, British and American relations would have deteriorated to the point that another war would have broken out in North America between the United States and its colonies versus the British Empire.Despite the fact that Americans defend the War of 1812 as a war to end British impressment, this dubious excuse is like claiming that the Trojan Wars was the result of Paris capturing Helen of Troy and angering Agamemnon, or the claim that the War of Jenkin’s war was the result of a sea captain getting his ear mutilated; or that the American Revolutionary War was the result of the Boston Tea Party; or that World War One was the result of the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand and his wife.Had the British declined to end impressment until after hostilities had started, then the proponents of the impressment theory would at least have had a half-decent argument to be made, as we could then have a debate regarding whether or not the British would have ended impressment on their own without the need to wage war.Nonetheless, despite the fact that news of the abolition of impressment was delayed, due to the unexpected assassination of British Prime Minister Spencer Perceval on May 11, 1812, the war itself — with the possible exception of a few individuals dying of disease or other natural causes — remained completely bloodless up until the Siege of Detroit in August 1812, two months after the United States has formally declared war against Britain.The Assassination of the Prime Minister, Spencer PercevalUltimately, the justification of war by means of ending impressment was just a convenient excuse made by the war hawks of the day who were egging for a new fight against Britain in the same way that the previous generation had done.This excuse is similar to those who today say that the American Civil War was fought over slavery, when in fact Abraham Lincoln made it clear in a presidential address that he was not willing to wage a war in order to abolish slavery. The Emancipation Proclamation also did not apply to states such as Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Delaware or any other area that was under union control at the time the proclamation came into effect, nor did it apply to certain confederate states, such as Tennessee, which were given immunity to the Emancipation Proclamation for economic reasons.Impressment Of American Sailors by Granger5 Things You May Not Know About Lincoln, Slavery and EmancipationIf the war was about freeing the slaves, the Emancipation alone should have ended it, as it clearly stated that territories or confederate states that surrendered before it came into effect would not lose their slaves. As General Grant of the Union once said himself: “If the war was about freeing the slaves, I would draw my sword for the other side.”Grant himself had a personal background history regarding slavery in his home state of Delaware — one of four union states that had slavery during the war, and also one of the few states which continued to practice it until it was formally abolished at the state level in 1868. Despite freeing his own slaves, Grant also believed that the Union Government would be acting out of proportion if it was willing to wage a war over the issues regarding slavery.The Shadow of a Shade: General Grant and Not Fighting for Abolition - This Cruel WarThe same myth about slavery in the civil war has now been used with impressment to justify a war against Canada.Another interesting myth is that Canada and Britain came down to Washington with the aim of destroying the White House for tyrannical purposes. What American “historians” seem to omit is the fact that the Americans, the year prior, sacked the city of York (modern Toronto), which was also the capital at the time of the war.Battle of York - WikipediaUnlike in the burning of the White House, where only government buildings were targeted, American soldiers at York razed the ENTIRE city, and an untold number of civilians who could not escape the fire were burned to death. During the actual looting of farmlands and personal belongings, some Canadian civilians were reportedly shot by American soldiers, and their behaviour is said to have been so vile during the two days of plundering that even some of their own senior commanders — including Henry Dearborn — became outraged.Henry Dearborn - WikipediaNeedless to say, the destruction of Washington was quite tame on the part of the British and Canadians compared to what happened at York, and if not for the fact that a tornado came down that night and destroyed hundreds of homes (as well as killing five British soldiers who were stationed in the city that night) then the whole incident would be seen as hardly more than a footnote in the history of the War of 1812, as Washington itself would have remained far better preserved……Unlike York.The British Burn Washington, D.C., 200 Years Agohttps://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-tornado-that-saved-washington-33901211/Many Canadian artifacts have either never been returned, or have since been lost. The Canadian Mace, which was taken from the Legislative Assembly during the Burning of York, was only returned in 1934 by President Franklin Roosevelt in an effort to try and reconcile his country with the British Empire.Seeing as there is overwhelming evidence that the United States did try to annex Canada during the war and failed to do so, is as good of an indication as any that the United States did in fact LOSE the war.Treaty of Ghent - WikipediaPart of the Treaty of Ghent was that the United States would be allowed to retain Carleton Island (the only land change during the war) as the United States was not willing to give it up for free, and the British did not find the island valuable enough to continue fighting a war over it.Had the war not been about annexation, the question about regarding annexation of Carleton Island would never have been an issue brought up during the treaty, and the island would be part of Canadian soil today!One of the most mythical battles of the war, however, has to be the Battle of New Orleans. In American folklore, it is alleged that the British sustained such a crushing defeat, that in one afternoon alone, the Americans inflicted no fewer than 2,000 casualties on the advancing British.The reality, of course, is that number is more than the historical number of British who died during the ENTIRE war, including at sea and in the Canadian theatre. It is estimated that 1,600 British soldiers were killed in action, and that most of them were not sustained while fighting on American soil.Battle of New Orleans - WikipediaBattle of New OrleansThe “Battle of New Orleans” was actually a three week campaign, consisting of five separate battles, as well as dozens of engagements and skirmishes. The British never even arrived at New Orleans. The walls of Chalmette, located five kilometres from New Orleans, was the closest that the British got to, and the actual size of the attack was mild compared to the embellished version later promoted in American history books.Over a period of three weeks, the British took 316 dead and 700 injured over multiple battles and countless firefights consisting of squads or rearguard actions.Even Andrew Jackson at first rebuked the claim that the Kentucky militia had won him the campaign, even going so far as to refer to the militia as cowards in his diary by describing his militia in this manner: “Ingloriously fled from the scene of battle.”Andrew Jackson & the Battle of New OrleansThe Battle of New OrleansIt was only while he was running for president that he decided to play along with the more “heroic” version of New Orleans by singing the song of the Kentucky militia repelling the entire British army.The Battle of New Orleans Order of Battle and Scenario RulesContrary to what some people have to say regarding the January 8, 1815 assault that witnessed 2,000 British soldiers falling within a matter of minutes, the true bloodiest battle of the war was the Battle of Lundy’s Lane, fought on July 25, 1814, and the number of casualties sustained on both sides was still far less than what the British are alleged to have suffered in a single assault.It is estimated that each side took roughly 800 dead, wounded or captured, with the Americans possibly suffering slightly higher casualties. Aside from the Battle of Chippawa, fought only a few weeks earlier — the only battle which the Americans won in the war without vastly outnumbering their enemy — Lundy’s Lane was the closest that the Americans came to winning a battle on Canadian soil.Battle of Lundy's Lane | Marriott Niagara Falls HotelBattle of Lundy's Lane - WikipediaAmericans who took part in the campaign involving the battles of Chippawa and Lundy’s Lane were regarded as “the best of the best” and were recruited from multiple armies and placed into a single army and trained off the front lines for the better part of the year in hopes of having an army at the European level of quality.By no means, did they represent the average American in terms of combat skill, as the American forces relied far more on quantity than quality until the final stages of the war when it was becoming imminent that a ceasefire was inevitable, due to the unwinnable war the American government had thrust itself into without gaining any notable achievements.Winfield Scott: Defender of Irish Rights ... OnceBattle of Chippawa - WikipediaIn previous battles, such as at Queenston Heights, Chateauguay, Frenchtown, Beaver’s Dam and Crysler’s Farm, American armies were vanquished, despite vastly outnumbering their opponents. For instance, there were fewer than 800 Canadians and British present at Crysler’s Farm; meanwhile, the Americans — numbering as many as 8,000 — were completely routed from the battlefield, halting the invasion of Canada for yet another season.The Battle of Crysler’s FarmBattle of Crysler's Farm - WikipediaThe majority of artillery present during the New Orleans campaign were under the command of Jean Lafitte, a famous French pirate who was told by Andrew Jackson that he and his men would be compensated generously if they would agree to help out in the fight against the British.Pirate Jean Lafitte Countered Governor's $500 Bounty for Him with a $5,000 Bounty for GovernorNot credited for the defence regarding the New Orleans campaign were some Native Americans living in the south, who were also promised by Jackson that he would grant them their own homeland if they agreed to help him expel the British.While he was initially true to his word, Jackson would later turn on the very warriors who had fought for him, by purging them from their homes and exiling them in an incident now known as “The Trail of Tears.”Trail of TearsOne of the main reasons why the assault on New Orleans itself never got underway, was because the British army that did engage the Americans under the command of Edward Pakenham were never assigned to the taking of the city.The Sad Fate of Wellington’s Brother-in-LawThat task was supposed to be left to the two northern armies, who received the message in time regarding the Treaty of Ghent, so they never partook in the campaign. Furthermore, disease withered down the British who did take part in the campaign, and it is estimated that no fewer than 1,000 of them died during these three weeks (more than three times the number killed in action), as the weather was also said to have been unusually grim, with rain and mud being a part of a soldier’s life during these harrowing weeks.By late 1814, the Americans were in such disarray, that they felt that the only adequate defence they could put up against the British was by placing their entire army in the south, as far away from the Canadian border as possible.James Madison Biography: Fourth President of the United StatesContrary to popular belief, the New Orleans campaign was also NOT the last engagement of the war. Because the Americans refused to honour the Treaty of Ghent after the British withdrew from the region (upon hearing of the news of the treaty) the surviving British of the New Orleans campaign continued to raid other American forts and settlements, including the capturing of Fort Bowyer, which is ubiquitously regarded as the last land battle of the war involving British and American soldiers (native Americans continued to fight amongst each other for several weeks afterwards).On this day in Alabama history: Second Battle of Fort Bowyer began - Alabama NewsCenterIt is very unlikely that the war would have ended in favour of the Americans had they decided to turn down the treaty offered, as James Madison himself was so desperate to ending the war that he told his diplomats to accept just about any condition, other than the annexation of the United States itself, as a condition for ending the war.The War of 1812 was also not a war that “unified” the Americans, but was in fact so unpopular and divisive that it is also regarded as the war that came closest to breaking the United States, with the possible exception of the American Civil War itself, half a century later. The controversy and disdain surrounding the war also outdid Vietnam, which actually saw far more favourable support from the American population than the War of 1812 did.Even though most American soldiers who saw action during the war were from the north, it was the northern states who were most opposed to it, and states such as Massachusetts outright refused to send their soldiers to war, even though William Hull — commander at the Siege of Detroit — was himself from Massachusetts.16 August 1812 - Siege of Detroit - Also known as the Surrender of Detroit, or the Battle of Fort Detroit, was an early engagement in the Wa… | pre ww1 | Pinterest | War of 1812, Military history and American warIt is, however, still worth noting that despite the discrepancy surrounding the number of citizens from northern states who took part in the war versus those from the south, it was the south that was generally more favourable to the war, while the north was less favourable. This line of division would play out almost the same in the American Civil War when those who had favoured the war in overwhelming numbers (the Confederacy) would be pitted against citizens from states that had not supported the war (the Union).All in all, I think that it is safe to conclude that the War of 1812 was a clear-cut American defeat:They failed to take Canada, even when they had more than sufficient manpower to do so (eight million Americans versus fewer than 300,000 Canadians at the time)And the Treaty of Ghent was largely decided while the war was on American soil, with James Madison being quite open to accepting any treaty in order to end the war as hastily as possibleArthur Wellesley, who would take part in the Waterloo campaign against Napoleon five months later, was himself personally offered the job of defeating the Americans in North America, along with his veteran army that had just concluded the Iberian Wars in Spain.Despite the fact that Wellesley was himself not too keen on going over to North America, it is very unlikely that he would have been able to turn down the offer if pressed to do so.Ultimately, he would never be compelled to make that decision to go, as the Americans eventually relented and agreed to uphold the terms of the Treaty of Ghent, despite initially declining to do so for a few weeks after the New Orleans campaign had ended.Fort Niagara War of 1812 EncampmentEven though the United States may have been able to keep Carleton Island as part of their prize, I still think that the fact that a population of fewer than 300,000 Canadians — more than half of whom were either first or second generation Americans — in an agricultural society were able to defeat a population of eight million Americans from an industrial society — even when their two best commanders, Isaac Brock and Tecumseh were killed early on — is quite a feat, even by today’s standards.The evidence and history speaks for itself. And the evidence is that the War of 1812 was an American defeat.