Thomas F. Harney

[Rick Smith]

(08-04-2015 06:30 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  

(08-04-2015 05:39 PM)Rick Smith Wrote:  

(08-04-2015 03:29 PM)John Fazio Wrote:  

(08-04-2015 11:36 AM)Rick Smith Wrote:  

(08-04-2015 11:13 AM)John Fazio Wrote:  Rick:

Then there isn't much difference in our opinions, except, perhaps, as to timing and the breadth of the conspiracy. I maintain that assassination was Booth's goal from at least the time he met with the four Confederate Secret Service agents in Boston's Parker House. They didn't meet with him to discuss theater, for sure, nor, in my opinon, to discuss kidnapping, exept as a ruse to conceal the more sinister purpose and to facilitate the recruitment of his action team. Further, I maintain that Booth ultimately decided to take out at least five government leaders, though when he made the decision to try to accomplish that goal, or when it was made for him by his handlers, is hard to say. I believe it is probable that Booth's handlers intended to take out as many as possible, but that they could not realistically expect Booth to take out more than four, leaving Stanton and other leaders to others under their control. There is a telling quote in the National Intelligencer that appears in the April 18, 1865, edition of the New York Times, as follows: "We can state on the highest authority that it has been ascertained that there was a regular conspiracy to assassinate every member of the cabinet, together with the Vice President." This dovetails perfectly with the "Johnston" letter contained on p. 260 of my book.

John

John,

I do believe that the conspiracy was very broad, not only as regards Booth's action team, members of the Confederate government and their known agents, but also as it extends to lesser known and unknown individuals who acted as support structure for the operation.

I also believe that the simultaneous assassinations planned for the night of April 14 were to be actions directed at other targets apart from Lincoln, Johnson and Seward.

Rick

Rick:

Then there is no difference in our basic positions. We both agree that there was a general conspiracy to decapitate the government of the United States, or to at least get as many as they could. It was all that was left to them to avert what they considered to be the catastrophe that was then all but upon them.

John

John,

Agreed.

No question that Booth and his team had as their objective the decapitation of the federal government. A reflection of the Harney plan. If not all at one place, simultaneous assassination at different places would have to do.

Probably the difference in our positions is that I would have been with them.

But then, I am unreconstructed.

Rick

Rick:

No probablies about it. What will it take to reconstruct you? Two questions: Do you agree that acknowledgement of error is a mark of courage? Do you believe that slavery was desirable and therefore worth preserving even at the cost of war? Upon receipt of your answers, I will refer you to a document which I believe you will find interesting. I'll give you a hint: it is not Alexander Stephens's famous pre-war speech, nor his equally famous post-war speech.

John

John,

We may be delving into murky waters here. Although a Southerner and having many ancestors who were in General Lee's army, I do believe that if slavery was what the War was over, it was the worst reason for a fight. No slave was worth even one of the 700,000 casualties.

But there is more to it than this, and I cannot put it into words that anyone not of Southern heritage would understand. I do believe that the South was manipulated into firing the first shot; all part of Mr. Lincoln's and the radical Republicans' plan to bring on the war.

Bill Richter has written on this subject and can speak eloquently upon it; I cannot.

Rick