.MTM3NQ.MTE3MDk4: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
CastleCourt (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
CastleCourt (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
April 6, 1982 | April 6, 1982 | ||
Dear Fred Thompson | Dear Fred Thompson | ||
In your letter of March 20 of this year you tell us (to me and to Carl [[?]] ) that you are "shocked" by my letter of March 8 & [[?]]'s letter of the 17th Let me tell you two things. 1. You did not read my subsequent letter to [[?C. ?]] in which I advised against a law suit for what I consider good reason, i.e. it would only hurt the Ker Co without helping [[?]] 2. I am not only shocked but outraged, when I read that Fred Thompson of all people can be as cavalier to write "Sooner or later | In your letter of March 20 of this year you tell us (to me and to Carl [[?]] ) that you are "shocked" by my letter of March 8 & [[?]]'s letter of the 17th Let me tell you two things. 1. You did not read my subsequent letter to [[?C. ?]] in which I advised against a law suit for what I consider good reason, i.e. it would only hurt the Ker Co without helping [[?]] 2. I am not only shocked but outraged, when I read that Fred Thompson of all people can be as cavalier to write "Sooner or later Swabeck's money was used as collateral for the Amalgamated loan to finance the [[?B?]] book and that's where this is" | ||
All that I know about Fred Thompson, that does not sound like him. He I thought would disapprove such dishonesty and would not callously [[?]] his neutrality (if that it is ) towards immorality, even though that word sounds quite bourgeois. that | All that I know about Fred Thompson, that does not sound like him. He I thought would disapprove such dishonesty and would not callously [[?]] his neutrality (if that it is ) towards immorality, even though that word sounds quite bourgeois. that Swabeck's book is sectarian and "thus in conflict with our publishing plan". If that is so I would have expected the Kerr Co to tell that conclusion to Swabeck; give back his money and withall his manuscript and not [[?]] him and readers of Kerr publications that the Swabeck's book is in the work will be published | ||
Latest revision as of 05:12, 24 January 2022
Francis Heisler Rt 1 Box #215, Carmel, Ca, 93923
April 6, 1982 Dear Fred Thompson
In your letter of March 20 of this year you tell us (to me and to Carl ? ) that you are "shocked" by my letter of March 8 & ?'s letter of the 17th Let me tell you two things. 1. You did not read my subsequent letter to ?C. ? in which I advised against a law suit for what I consider good reason, i.e. it would only hurt the Ker Co without helping ? 2. I am not only shocked but outraged, when I read that Fred Thompson of all people can be as cavalier to write "Sooner or later Swabeck's money was used as collateral for the Amalgamated loan to finance the ?B? book and that's where this is" All that I know about Fred Thompson, that does not sound like him. He I thought would disapprove such dishonesty and would not callously ? his neutrality (if that it is ) towards immorality, even though that word sounds quite bourgeois. that Swabeck's book is sectarian and "thus in conflict with our publishing plan". If that is so I would have expected the Kerr Co to tell that conclusion to Swabeck; give back his money and withall his manuscript and not ? him and readers of Kerr publications that the Swabeck's book is in the work will be published