Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WhiskeyPapa
Bennett is not a reputable historian because he takes as a valid source a story that cannot possibly be confirmed.

Lincoln and Butler were to meet, that is a documented fact. Butler wrote what was discussed in the meeting, just like many people wrote what they discussed in meetings with Lincoln. You yourself have quoted many of them, I'm sure. No one disputed what Butler wrote back then. Disputing the meeting is a recent invention of revisionists. There is no reason to doubt Butler, other than you just don't like what Lincoln said. Applying your "Butler standard" to the Lincoln legacy eliminates more than it preserves. Just think, you would erase more of Lincoln than Booth could ever have hoped to do.

378 posted on 08/29/2003 7:11:41 AM PDT by thatdewd (Veritas Vos Liberabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies ]


To: thatdewd
No one disputed what Butler wrote back then.

You can't possibly prove that.

There is no proof that Butler even met with President Lincoln on the day in question.

Walt

382 posted on 08/29/2003 10:28:12 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson