ADKO

lincoln

9 min read

This paper argues that the assassination of Abraham Lincoln was a fabricated event, or a “fake hoax” orchestrated by hidden powers. The author, Miles Mathis, presents five “red flags” to support this claim: John Wilkes Booth being an actor, the assassination occurring in a theater, the lack of in-depth study by academic historians, the abundance of current propaganda surrounding the event, and contradictions in Walt Whitman’s account of the assassination.

Mathis contends that Booth’s acting background and the theater setting are significant because actors are used to staged events. He criticizes historians for not delving deeply into the assassination and suggests they are paid to uphold the official narrative. The author also points to the constant online re-telling and debunking of the Lincoln assassination story as evidence of a deliberate cover-up.

Whitman’s 1879 lecture is analyzed for inconsistencies, such as the muffled pistol shot, Booth’s improbable escape and actions on stage, and conflicting details about the weapons used. The author also questions Booth’s supposed Confederate sympathies given his life in the North and his family’s Union ties.

Further evidence presented includes the immediate government acquisition and renovation of Ford’s Theater, a tactic employed in other allegedly staged events like 11 and Sandy Hook. The author also questions why Booth was not drafted into the Civil War if he was able-bodied.

Mathis then delves into Booth’s presence at John Brown’s execution, suggesting it was part of his role as a Union Intelligence agent rather than a genuine act of Confederate sympathy. The author proposes that actors like Booth are ideal for intelligence operations due to their skills, mobility, and social connections.

The paper scrutinizes Whitman’s description of the chaotic aftermath of the assassination, highlighting the delayed reaction of Mrs. Lincoln and the late arrival of a large contingent of guards, suggesting foreknowledge and a planned event. The author dismisses the story of a single, derelict policeman guarding the Presidential box, citing Allan Pinkerton’s Union Intelligence Service as evidence of more robust security.

The owner of Ford’s Theater, John T. Ford, is also examined, with the author suggesting his connections to the Booth family were misconstrued as Confederate conspiracy rather than evidence of an inside job.

The author argues that the entire event, including the murder itself, was staged to ensure Andrew Johnson became President, as Lincoln was believed to be dying and unable to serve a full second term. The paper suggests that the “Continuance of Government” pledge signed by Lincoln in 1864 and the allegedly stolen election of 1864 are further evidence of extraordinary measures being taken by those in power.

The text questions the authenticity of Lincoln’s death mask, claiming it’s a composite of earlier life masks, and suggests that a diagnosis of multiple mucosal neuroma syndrome (a form of cancer) explains the need to fake Lincoln’s death, as he was likely to die soon anyway.

The paper then shifts to examining other alleged conspirators. Lewis Powell is presented as another actor, with staged photos and questionable accounts of his capture. John Surratt is also identified as a Union Intelligence operative, not a Confederate spy, citing his ability to escape and be protected. The author dismisses the idea of a Vatican conspiracy.

The author analyzes purported photographs of conspirators like George Atzerodt and David Herold, claiming they are fabricated. The military trial of civilians is deemed illegal and a means to manage fraud. The father of David Herold’s position at the Washington Navy Yard is highlighted as suspicious.

The identification of Booth’s body is challenged, with inconsistencies and the hasty burial on army grounds raising doubts. The author suggests the body was that of a deceased Confederate soldier. The absence of widely circulated photos of Booth’s corpse is also noted.

The paper further claims that Mary Todd Lincoln’s absence from her husband’s funeral and burial is suspicious, suggesting she knew the event was fake. The hasty transport of Lincoln’s body to a private home instead of a hospital is also questioned. The author debunks the idea that headshots were always fatal in 1865, citing the Derringer pistol’s capabilities and contradictory autopsy reports.

The author concludes that Lincoln’s death was faked, and that the entire narrative was constructed. Even the presence of John Wilkes Booth is questioned, with theories suggesting he was already dead or a Union agent. A forged photograph of the Booth brothers is presented as evidence of fakery. The author suggests that Booth may have been murdered by Southern agents before the event, and his name was used as a scapegoat.

The addenda introduce further claims:

  • Booth was Jewish, and so were many individuals involved in the event, including Lincoln himself.
  • Lincoln was gay, and his relationship with Joshua Fry Speed is presented as evidence.
  • The alleged conspirators Mary Surratt, Lewis Powell, George Atzerodt, and David Herold were also part of this fabricated event and possibly Jewish.
  • The author believes many prominent families, including the Todds, Surratts, Booths, Parkers, and Rathbones, were closely related and involved in orchestrating the hoax, making it a “family affair.”
  • The author argues that the Constitution’s vagueness, particularly regarding presidential disability and succession, created loopholes that allowed for such a staged event, and proposes amendments to prevent future “Cyrano gambits.”
  • The author suggests that financial motives, such as insurance fraud related to J.P. Morgan and Chase Co., may have been a factor in faking Lincoln’s death.

The central thesis is that the Lincoln assassination was a manufactured event, a “fake murder” executed with actors, staged scenes, and planted stories to serve the agenda of hidden powers.

Subjects, Names, References, Locations, Companies, etc:

Backlinks

Graph View