The Reason Lincoln Had to Die

[L Verge]

Having been exposed to Mr. Thomas's theories in the past, I thank you and Kate for attending his talk and outlining his points here on this forum. One word about the FBI report on the diary: It was not just the Park Service that requested the intense tudy of it. Tidwell, Hall, and Gaddy sought strong support in their request for the examination, and Vice President Walter Mondale gave that support. I would hope and think that their study of the diary would have detected any additional tampering in 1865 or later. Mr. Mondale would have expected such carefulness.

[Dave Taylor]

(11-11-2016 09:45 PM)Gene C Wrote:  Thanks Dave.

At one time in our forum discussion there was the theory that the author Mr. Thomas, and the editor Ian Wesley, might be the same person.
Do you recall if anything was said about the authors background?
How did the crowd seem to accept his presentation?

Gene,

I do not believe that Ian Wesley is the same person as Don Thomas, but I don't really know that for certain. Mr. Thomas was introduced as having a background in construction where he created two different construction companies. The economic downturn in 2008 hit him hard, but did give him the chance to research the assassination of Lincoln full time which resulted in his book.

The crowd seemed to enjoy his presentation, but since it went a bit longer than they expected and it was on the night of the election, there was only one question asked during the Q & A.

[JMadonna]

Reading through his website the author claims that half of O'Laughlin's statement to Carmichael,in The Evidence is missing. I checked and sure enough it ends in the middle of a sentence. Question: is this part of a conspiracy on the part of the publisher or is it true that O'Laughlin's statement really is partly missing?

[Gencor]

(07-18-2013 06:05 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I noticed that the author proudly proclaims himself a Virginian. Another attempt to throw the guilt on the Yankee government instead of the Confederacy, perhaps? Give me a break. After receiving the bad news of this book, I also saw that O'Reilly has now published Killing Jesus. Who's next on his kill list (that is making him a ton of money)? Don't tell me; I don't want to know.

It is so easy to see how so many people are misled by this stuff. They read this stuff in a book and they think that it must be true! Some of this stuff should come under the heading of historical fiction. Especially in the case of O'Reilly. He is a case in fiction, all of his own and you are right, Laurie, people buy this stuff and they read it and have no interest in even researching whether or not it is even true. It worries me how these people can distort history and get away with it.

[Gene C]

They're back.
Yes fans, if you liked "The Reason Lincoln Had to Die by Don Thomas, then you'll like his new book "The Reason Booth Had to Die".
https://www.amazon.com/Reason-Booth-Had-...bc?ie=UTF8

And at only $17.95 for 98 pages it's a steal, and guess who's been robbed?

I'd say "check out the authors new web site here", but why would I do that to you?
However, if you just can't control yourself, remember, I warned you.
https://reasonlincoln.com/

[L Verge]

(03-29-2018 08:44 PM)Gene C Wrote:  They're back.
Yes fans, if you liked "The Reason Lincoln Had to Die by Don Thomas, then you'll like his new book "The Reason Booth Had to Die".
https://www.amazon.com/Reason-Booth-Had-...bc?ie=UTF8

And at only $17.95 for 98 pages it's a steal, and guess who's been robbed?

I'd say "check out the authors new web site here", but why would I do that to you?
However, if you just can't control yourself, remember, I warned you.
https://reasonlincoln.com/

Couldn't control myself, so I went to the site and got irritated once again. As James O. Hall used to say when confronted with such material, "Oh, my."

On a more positive note, I rec'd word from the D.C. Historical Society that there will be a special program at Ford's Theatre from 5-6 pm on April 16th, based on a new publication of an old, but very worthy, book. Amazon Prime is selling it for $25+

Emancipation Day They Knew Lincoln Book Talk
April 16, 2018, 5:00 - 6:00 pm
at Ford's Theater

First published in 1942, They Knew Lincoln by John E. Washington sold out, never to be reprinted, until now. The combined memoir and biography focuses on the personal relationships of African American people with President Lincoln: those who served the Lincolns and those who shaped Lincoln’s view on slavery. Noted historian Kate Masur's introduction details author Washington’s life and the importance of life stories. Masur will discuss the book with journalist and founder of "The Race Card Project," Michele Norris. Presented in honor of Emancipation Day and co-sponsored by the Historical Society of Washington, D.C. Free. Registration required.

[mikegriffith1]

I just finished reading an incredible little book by Don Thomas titled The Reason Booth Had to Die, published just last year (2017). Relying mainly on primary sources, Thomas makes a strong case against the traditional story/the military commission's scenario. His most interesting section is his discussion on the 1977 FBI analysis of Booth's diary, which found that large chunks of the diary were tampered with, and much content removed from it, after the War Department obtained it. This is hard, physical evidence of the cover-up that followed Lincoln's murder.

Also, I was interested to read that Thomas found several accounts of the apparent signal whistles near Booth's escape route. Guttridge and Neff discussed these signal whistles as well.

Despite what the book's title might suggest to some, the book says very little about the controversy over Booth's fate. Thomas assumes Booth died at Garrett's farm. Thomas does not appear to have done much research on the issue, possibly because he indicates that he finds the theory to be far-fetched and wild.

Thomas shows that Stanton and his military commission did all they could to suppress and ignore any leads that led away from their version of the assassination and that involved investigating plausible suspects beyond the handful of direct accomplices they were willing to acknowledge.

Thomas examines Louis Weichmann's story and finds it to be severely lacking in credibility.

Thomas has an information-packed website on the Lincoln assassination. It includes numerous free articles on the case:

https://reasonlincoln.com/

[L Verge]

(11-02-2018 02:32 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote:  I just finished reading an incredible little book by Don Thomas titled The Reason Booth Had to Die, published just last year (2017). Relying mainly on primary sources, Thomas makes a strong case against the traditional story/the military commission's scenario. His most interesting section is his discussion on the 1977 FBI analysis of Booth's diary, which found that large chunks of the diary were tampered with, and much content removed from it, after the War Department obtained it. This is hard, physical evidence of the cover-up that followed Lincoln's murder.

Also, I was interested to read that Thomas found several accounts of the apparent signal whistles near Booth's escape route. Guttridge and Neff discussed these signal whistles as well.

Despite what the book's title might suggest to some, the book says very little about the controversy over Booth's fate. Thomas assumes Booth died at Garrett's farm. Thomas does not appear to have done much research on the issue, possibly because he indicates that he finds the theory to be far-fetched and wild.

Thomas shows that Stanton and his military commission did all they could to suppress and ignore any leads that led away from their version of the assassination and that involved investigating plausible suspects beyond the handful of direct accomplices they were willing to acknowledge.

Thomas examines Louis Weichmann's story and finds it to be severely lacking in credibility.

Thomas has an information-packed website on the Lincoln assassination. It includes numerous free articles on the case:

https://reasonlincoln.com/

Here we go again. This book is a sequel to the one Thomas published about five years ago entitled The Reason Lincoln Had To Die. Such books, mostly privately published, keep coming out of the woodwork.

As for the FBI's report on their inspection of the Booth diary, it used to be online. The Surratt Courier carried a further article by James O. Hall (who instigated the FBI's investigation in the first place) outlining the findings for our members. Of course, I'm sure that Mr. Griffith has already decided that the FBI and other great minds on the assassination subject didn't know what they were doing -- or continued to cover up the actions of the U.S. government in 1864-65.

[mikegriffith1]

(11-02-2018 03:08 PM)L Verge Wrote:  

(11-02-2018 02:32 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote:  I just finished reading an incredible little book by Don Thomas titled The Reason Booth Had to Die, published just last year (2017). Relying mainly on primary sources, Thomas makes a strong case against the traditional story/the military commission's scenario. His most interesting section is his discussion on the 1977 FBI analysis of Booth's diary, which found that large chunks of the diary were tampered with, and much content removed from it, after the War Department obtained it. This is hard, physical evidence of the cover-up that followed Lincoln's murder.

Also, I was interested to read that Thomas found several accounts of the apparent signal whistles near Booth's escape route. Guttridge and Neff discussed these signal whistles as well.

Despite what the book's title might suggest to some, the book says very little about the controversy over Booth's fate. Thomas assumes Booth died at Garrett's farm. Thomas does not appear to have done much research on the issue, possibly because he indicates that he finds the theory to be far-fetched and wild.

Thomas shows that Stanton and his military commission did all they could to suppress and ignore any leads that led away from their version of the assassination and that involved investigating plausible suspects beyond the handful of direct accomplices they were willing to acknowledge.

Thomas examines Louis Weichmann's story and finds it to be severely lacking in credibility.

Thomas has an information-packed website on the Lincoln assassination. It includes numerous free articles on the case:

https://reasonlincoln.com/

Here we go again. This book is a sequel to the one Thomas published about five years ago entitled The Reason Lincoln Had To Die. Such books, mostly privately published, keep coming out of the woodwork.

"Here we go again"? Yes, because some people come to the subject with an open mind and are not prepared to just see the Emperor's New Clothes. Instead, they look at the traditional story and see that it is packed with impossible claims and implausible assumptions, and that it rests on coerced/bribed perjury and plainly phony evidence (such as the magical floating letter, the equally magical fireplace letter, etc.).

(11-02-2018 03:08 PM)L Verge Wrote:  As for the FBI's report on their inspection of the Booth diary, it used to be online. The Surratt Courier carried a further article by James O. Hall (who instigated the FBI's investigation in the first place) outlining the findings for our members. Of course, I'm sure that Mr. Griffith has already decided that the FBI and other great minds on the assassination subject didn't know what they were doing --

You have not even read Thomas's analysis of the FBI report, have you? If you had read it, you would know that Thomas does not claim that the FBI forensic lab experts "did not know what they were doing." Far from it. Rather, he proves that FBI Directly Kelly whitewashed his own experts' findings (Kelly probably never even read the report but received a briefing on it by staffers). Thomas shows that the FBI experts found undeniable evidence that the diary was substantially altered and shortened after the War Department obtained it (The Reason Booth Had to Die, pp. 65-80).

Unlike you, I made my decision about the FBI report after I read both sides. After I read Thomas's 15-page analysis in his book, I read five sources, including Steers' two-page treatment, that argue that the FBI experts found nothing that indicates fraud or cover-up. Those five sources all focus on the conclusion that the diary contained no invisible writing, and they say little or nothing about the other findings.

Kauffman, to his credit, does mention that the FBI experts found that 86 pages were missing from the diary, but he buries this fact in an endnote (American Brutas, p. 472). He says nothing about the FBI analysis in the text of his book.

Folks, by all means, compare Steers' two-page treatment of the FBI experts' findings with Thomas's 15-page discussion on those findings. I think you will see that Steers provides an incomplete and misleading picture of those findings. Steers does not even touch the most important findings that relate to the diary's content and length, whereas Thomas examines those key issues in detail and with extensive quotes from the FBI report.

(11-02-2018 03:08 PM)L Verge Wrote:  or continued to cover up the actions of the U.S. government in 1864-65.

Maybe the "scholars" who are on your list of "other great minds on the assassination" share your assumption that positing high-level government crimes and cover-ups is incredible and shocking, but most people would view that attitude as supremely outdated and untenable.

[L Verge]

Mr. Griffith - First, I did not say that Don Thomas "already decided" that the FBI was wrong, I said YOU likely did. Secondly, I've been around the block enough in this history that I can skim materials now and decide whether or not I want to read further. The only reason that I am sticking like a tick to you on this forum is because I truly believe that you have an agenda and will push it whether right or wrong. I don't want those who are just getting interested in our story to get scammed.

[Maybe the "scholars" who are on your list of "other great minds on the assassination" share your assumption that positing high-level government crimes and cover-ups is incredible and shocking, but most people would view that attitude as supremely outdated and untenable.]

Your comment above begs the question as to what we (meaning the American public) are supposed to do if we can even prove government cover-ups - not referring just to the alleged one here since I suspect that you have similar agendas related to other historical events? Some very good history has already been wiped out of books or "revised" by so-called historians; the American public is currently turned off by history because of these re-writes and conversations that only confuse things; it appears that American society and cultural values are being questioned (and sometimes wiped out).

If theorists were able to prove their points (and that's very unlikely) so well that the history books do need to be re-written, how do we address the giant cover-ups by our evil forefathers? Do we put them on public trial? Sentence them to imprisonment or death? Figure out how to totally rectify the evil cover-ups that they forced on future generations? Punish future historians who continue to believe old ideas?

What exactly is your purpose in all this?

[mikegriffith1]

(11-03-2018 01:02 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Mr. Griffith - First, I did not say that Don Thomas "already decided" that the FBI was wrong, I said YOU likely did.

Uh, and that's exactly what I thought you said and that's the argument to which I replied. You might wanna go back and read what you wrote and then read my reply.

(11-03-2018 01:02 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Secondly, I've been around the block enough in this history that I can skim materials now and decide whether or not I want to read further.

I'll take that as a "yes" answer to my question "You have not even read Thomas's analysis of the FBI report, have you?" Yes, it's quite apparent that you have "skimmed" many books, instead of reading and analyzing them with an open mind. Condemning and dismissing an analysis that you have not even bothered to read is not what open-minded, genuine researchers do.

Several times now you have referred me to sources that you touted very highly but that turned out to be superficial and incomplete, and in some cases laughably outdated.

(11-03-2018 01:02 PM)L Verge Wrote:  The only reason that I am sticking like a tick to you on this forum is because I truly believe that you have an agenda and will push it whether right or wrong. I don't want those who are just getting interested in our story to get scammed.

Uh. . . . Okay. . . . This is getting a little weird. Are you this paranoid about everyone who happens to come here and disagrees with your government-kool-aid version of the Lincoln assassination? Obviously, anyone who disagrees with you must have ulterior motives for being here, right? Maybe I'm a secret member of the Society That Will Not See the Emperor's New Clothes.

(11-03-2018 01:02 PM)L Verge Wrote:  [Maybe the "scholars" who are on your list of "other great minds on the assassination" share your assumption that positing high-level government crimes and cover-ups is incredible and shocking, but most people would view that attitude as supremely outdated and untenable.]

Your comment above begs the question as to what we (meaning the American public) are supposed to do if we can even prove government cover-ups - not referring just to the alleged one here since I suspect that you have similar agendas related to other historical events? Some very good history has already been wiped out of books or "revised" by so-called historians; the American public is currently turned off by history because of these re-writes and conversations that only confuse things; it appears that American society and cultural values are being questioned (and sometimes wiped out).

If theorists were able to prove their points (and that's very unlikely) so well that the history books do need to be re-written, how do we address the giant cover-ups by our evil forefathers? Do we put them on public trial? Sentence them to imprisonment or death? Figure out how to totally rectify the evil cover-ups that they forced on future generations? Punish future historians who continue to believe old ideas?

Wow. Just Wow. Did you just beam into this century from the 1950s? Do you have any clue how many long-standing historical interpretations have been overturned or seriously and widely challenged by subsequent research just in the last 40 years?

(11-03-2018 01:02 PM)L Verge Wrote:  What exactly is your purpose in all this?

This is getting even weirder. Apparently you view yourself as the self-appointed guardian of all truth about the Lincoln assassination and feel entitled to question the motives of anyone who disagrees with your version of the event. I've never encountered anyone quite like you in any online forum. Anyway, I don't know about you, but I'm just here because I enjoy discussing and exchanging ideas about the Lincoln assassination.

What exactly is your purpose in all this? (You don't need to answer that, because I really could not care less why you post here or why you believe what you believe. I don't feel the need to "stick like a tick" to anyone, no matter how much they might disagree with my position.)

[Gene C]

(11-02-2018 02:32 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote:  I just finished reading an incredible little book by Don Thomas titled The Reason Booth Had to Die, published just last year (2017).

Despite what the book's title might suggest to some, the book says very little about the controversy over Booth's fate. Thomas assumes Booth died at Garrett's farm. Thomas does not appear to have done much research on the issue, possibly because he indicates that he finds the theory to be far-fetched and wild.

(11-06-2018 05:20 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote:  Uh. . . . Okay. . . . This is getting a little weird.

Wow. Just Wow.

This is getting even weirder.

I can agree with that

[L Verge]

And, Mr. Griffith, once again you refuse to answer a question put to you.

As for me, I am who I am, and I do not have to convert to your way of thinking or gain your acceptance. I believe that I have the experience, the knowledge, and the background in working with scores of very knowledgeable people in our field to express myself logically. I sense frustration on your part in having to deal with me, but live with it...

[mikegriffith1]

(11-06-2018 07:06 PM)L Verge Wrote:  And, Mr. Griffith, once again you refuse to answer a question put to you.

What question would that be?

Have you answered all of my arguments? No, you have ignored most of them. Most of the time, you've suggested that I would just read this or that source, I would get the correct picture, but so far every source you've touted has been either outdated or inadequate. I mean, in response to all of my observations about the problems with the alleged sighting of the JWB initials, you recommended that I read Kauffman, who does not address a single one of those problems and whose entire treatment of the issue consists of a very short paragraph.

(11-06-2018 07:06 PM)L Verge Wrote:  As for me, I am who I am, and I do not have to convert to your way of thinking or gain your acceptance. I believe that I have the experience, the knowledge, and the background in working with scores of very knowledgeable people in our field to express myself logically.

Then you might want to ask those "very knowledgeable people" about the credibility of dismissing a detailed analysis that you have not deigned to read.

And you might want to find some "very knowledgeable people" who will recommend sources to you that at least try to answer the objections and arguments raised by the other side.

(11-06-2018 07:06 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I sense frustration on your part in having to deal with me, but live with it...

Then your senses are way off.

By the way, just to clarify a point that we discussed in our previous exchange. In my first reply to your response on Thomas's analysis of the FBI report on Booth's diary, I knew that you were saying that I had assumed that the FBI experts did not know what they were doing. That's why I said that I, "unlike you," had not reached a conclusion on the issue until I had read both sides. However, I assumed that you were implying that Thomas did the same thing, since I was defending Thomas, and since Thomas makes no such claim. So when you accused me of having already decided that the FBI experts did not know what they were doing, I naturally assumed that you were implying that Thomas did the same thing.

[GustD45]

I just did a google search of Don Thomas and found nothing except a link to this thread and Amazon and Barnes & Noble links to buy the book. I just joined this list about a week or so ago and am jumping in to a fairly hot discussion I see. Ms Verge is, rightly so, jumping on this. I have not yet read anything that Mr. Thomas has written, but have seen a video on YouTube.

---

(11-06-2018 07:06 PM)L Verge Wrote:  And, Mr. Griffith, once again you refuse to answer a question put to you.

As for me, I am who I am, and I do not have to convert to your way of thinking or gain your acceptance. I believe that I have the experience, the knowledge, and the background in working with scores of very knowledgeable people in our field to express myself logically. I sense frustration on your part in having to deal with me, but live with it...

Ms Verge I will say I agree he will have to live with it as you have been with the Surratt Society for so long and have worked with many luminaries in this field.