28-10-2010, 07:43 PM
Jack (and by logical extension, Jim),
Imagine this: mutual respect among honorable JFK scholars who yet harbor many significant differences of opinion and conclusions! Next thing you know, we'll be hooking up at the Lancer/Copa Joint Forum!
(And if you believe that, you've had too many joints and attended too few forums!)
I'll take issue with Jack on two points only:
You left out the most important aspect of the case that can be known (forgive me, Dr. Fetzer) to the degree of metaphysical certitude:
John Kennedy was killed by conspirators.
Jack, I NEVER held such a belief. What I have written and said many, many times is that we do not need proof of Z-film alteration to establish conspiracy beyond all doubt.
This distinction, I submit, is critical to a full understanding of whatever it is I bring to our common table.
Warm regards,
Charles
Imagine this: mutual respect among honorable JFK scholars who yet harbor many significant differences of opinion and conclusions! Next thing you know, we'll be hooking up at the Lancer/Copa Joint Forum!
(And if you believe that, you've had too many joints and attended too few forums!)
I'll take issue with Jack on two points only:
Jack White Wrote:5. All we know for certain about the case is that JFK was killed on Elm Street in Dallas at 12:30 on 11-22-63, and that on Sunday, Jack Ruby killed the accused patsy.
You left out the most important aspect of the case that can be known (forgive me, Dr. Fetzer) to the degree of metaphysical certitude:
John Kennedy was killed by conspirators.
Jack White Wrote:likewise, no disrespect for Charles' belief
that the faking of the Z film is totally irrelevant to identifying the killers.
Jack, I NEVER held such a belief. What I have written and said many, many times is that we do not need proof of Z-film alteration to establish conspiracy beyond all doubt.
This distinction, I submit, is critical to a full understanding of whatever it is I bring to our common table.
Warm regards,
Charles