"Lincoln's Surveillance State" Op-Ed NYTimes July 6, 2013

[David Lockmiller]

(08-02-2013 10:49 AM)Liz Rosenthal Wrote:  David: I know that you wrote to the editors of the Times, but did you write a Letter to the Editor for publication? And/or submit your own essay on the subject for publicaton? A Letter to the Editor would have a much greater chance of being published, of course, although there's no guarantee. In any case, there are all sorts of things that appear in the Times, and other newspapers and magazines, every day, that need rebutting. To me, the best way to do it is not to ask for a retraction but to put the facts out there for your fellow readers to read.

Mr. Chan of the NY Times did offer the opportunity to submit a Letter to the Editor, with one specific limitation: "please just focus on the interpretive differences you have with this scholar instead of using words like hoax."

I have argued all along that the Op-Ed was a hoax (i.e., a mischievous trick by means of a made-up story). All my communications to the NY Times were in the form of a proof that it was a made-up story, based on Lincoln historical documentation.

In my last communication from Mr. Chan on Tuesday, July 16, he wrote:

“Mr. Lockmiller, email is a terrible way to communicate. I wish we could talk by phone but I'm in Paris. If you want to write a letter to the editor saying that Mindich's reading of history is totally wrong and an unfair besmirchment of Lincoln's reputation, I will absolutely forward it to our letters editor - we welcome alternate views. But please just focus on the interpretive differences you have with this scholar instead of using words like hoax."

The NY Times has specific limitations for publishing "Letters."

"Letters for publication should be no longer than 150 words, must refer to an article that has appeared within the last seven days."

The Op-Ed was published July 5; Mr. Chan's offer was made July 16.

The following is my best effort "Letter" without using the word "hoax" and it is exactly 150 words in length:

The author writes, “In 1862, after President Abraham Lincoln appointed him secretary of war, Edwin M. Stanton penned a letter to the president requesting sweeping powers, which would include total control of the telegraph lines.”

Here is what the Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln says Stanton actually wrote: "In my opinion the success of military operations and the safety of the country require some changes to be made in the Bureau of Ordnance, and perhaps some others, in order to secure more vigor and activity; and I desire to have your sanction for making them.'' [Letter from Stanton, January 24, 1862]

Lincoln's endorsement is on the letter from Stanton: “The Secretary of War has my authority to exercise his discretion in the matter within mentioned. A. LINCOLN”

Obviously, there is a huge difference between the implications of what was written in the Times and what is in the Collected Works.

Liz, do you think that this proposed Letter to the Editor adequately discredits the Op-Ed "Lincoln's Surveillance State" as written by Professor Mindich and published by the NY Times?