19-09-2009, 03:36 PM
When does the formulation of a hypothesis cease to assist in the pursuit of truth and instead become an impediment to that quest?
When said formulation is applied to a long-established truth that commonly is denied for sinister purposes by individuals who would suffer grave consequences should said truth gain "official" acceptance within the broader culture.
To hypothesize that LHO acted alone -- or ever discharged a firearm in Dallas, Texas on Friday, November 22, 1963 -- serves no useful purpose other than to keep open the long-settled "debate" on the "who" of the JFK assassination -- which was, is now, and shall remain the first and last line of defense for the assassins and their heirs and willing executioners.
To hypothesize that the Warren Commission was honestly mistaken in drawing its "no conspiracy" conclusion is to deny a body of evidence so painstakingly assembled, meticulously vetted, and eloquently presented as to establish the contrary position -- that the WC's brief was to concoct evidence to support the LN lie -- beyond reasonable doubt and to the degree of metaphysical certitude.
When said formulation is applied to a long-established truth that commonly is denied for sinister purposes by individuals who would suffer grave consequences should said truth gain "official" acceptance within the broader culture.
To hypothesize that LHO acted alone -- or ever discharged a firearm in Dallas, Texas on Friday, November 22, 1963 -- serves no useful purpose other than to keep open the long-settled "debate" on the "who" of the JFK assassination -- which was, is now, and shall remain the first and last line of defense for the assassins and their heirs and willing executioners.
To hypothesize that the Warren Commission was honestly mistaken in drawing its "no conspiracy" conclusion is to deny a body of evidence so painstakingly assembled, meticulously vetted, and eloquently presented as to establish the contrary position -- that the WC's brief was to concoct evidence to support the LN lie -- beyond reasonable doubt and to the degree of metaphysical certitude.
Charles Drago
Co-Founder, Deep Politics Forum
If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence: He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave.
-- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods
You can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity.
-- Graham Greene
Co-Founder, Deep Politics Forum
If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence: He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave.
-- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods
You can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity.
-- Graham Greene