Another Lincoln Assassination Theory

An "agent of the bankers" shooting Lincoln?

An "agent of the bankers" shooting Lincoln?

I was handed this week an article from the American Free Press (October 12, 2009) entitled: “Bankers Don’t Like Interest-Free Money.” This brief article was wriiten by Melvin Sickler. The basic premise of the piece was that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by bankers because he had created a money system in the United States that was debt-free and interest-free to run the war. According to the article, the “only thing that is a threat to their (the bankers) power is sovereign governments printing interest-free and debt-free paper money. It would break the power of the international bankers.” So, they had Lincoln killed. Does anyone have any solid knowledge of this?
Now, as I’ve said before-any information regarding Lincoln is of interest to me and to other Lincoln fans I’m sure. That is also true of matters pertaining to the war itself. History is not a static thing. New information becomes available on things and, sometimes , changes our knowledge and/or concepts of history as we;ve known it. These kind of articles should be welcomed-if nothing else-to spark discussion at the very least. As far as the Lincoln assassination there have been at least a dozen theories offered ever since that time to the present to account for what happened that night on April 14th 1865. Some of the explanations have some element in truth to them. One can make a case for Mary Lincoln, herself, as being behind her husband’s murder. Another popular theory is that Secretary of War Stanton arranged it. Every student of the subject would do well to read the various theories and come to their own conclusions. As far as the “bankers theory” (my descriptor)-I don’t buy it. I, of course, cannot disprove it. However, I do object in particular to a statement the article makes when it says: “He (Lincoln) was assassinated by an agent of the bankers shortly after the war ended.” First of all, the statement was made without any documenting proofs. That kills it for me, right there. Secondly, if the “agent of the bankers” is meant to mean John Wilkes Booth-there is no documentary proof that Booth was ever an agent of the bankers.
Here’s what I think happened: Booth killed Lincoln. He acted with a chosen band of conspirators. He was an operative with the Confederate government (on some level). Apparently there was the plan to capture Lincoln. However, it is not proven whether Jefferson Davis knew or approved the plan to capture. Even if Davis did know and approve it- it didn’t equate to assassination. There is no shred of evidence that the Confederate government approved killing Lincoln. For that matter there is no evidence that any government approved of killing Lincoln. At any rate, Booth was not the agent of a banking system charged with killing Lincoln. At least- there is no evidence to that effect. Booth acted on his own. He gathered his “crew” together- and shot Lincoln out of a deep personal hatred for Lincoln and what “he had done to the country”- primarilly to the South.
Am I wrong on this? What do you think?
 Mail this post

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Tags: , , ,

One Response to “Another Lincoln Assassination Theory”

  1. Chris says:

    An interesting question that arises from this was did Lincoln actually “break the power of the international bankers” I believe that one of the criticisms at the time was that it created a depreciated currency for the people, whilst the banks who lent to the government got paid in gold?

Leave a Reply