What do you think?
Rate this book
The Warren Commission Report: Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
President Lyndon B. Johnson, by Executive Order No. 11130 dated November 29, 1963, created this Commission to investigate the assassination on November 22,1963, of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States. The President directed the Commission to evaluate all the facts and circumstances surrounding the assassination and the subsequent killing of the alleged assassin and to report its findings and conclusions to him.
The subject of the Commission's inquiry was a chain of events which saddened and shocked the people of the United States and of the world. The assassination of President Kennedy and the simultaneous wounding of John B. Connally, Jr., Governor of Texas, has been followed within an hour by the slaying of Patrolman J.D. Tippit of the Dallas Police Department. In the United States and abroad, these events evoked universal demands for and explanation. --from the Foreward
Since its release in 1964, the Warren Commission Report has been at the heart of an ever-growing debate on the events surrounding the assassination of JFK. Long unavailable, this is perhaps one of the most important and controversial documents of the twentieth century. Now available again-complete and unabridged-this is the essential document of the Kennedy assassination.
The subject of the Commission's inquiry was a chain of events which saddened and shocked the people of the United States and of the world. The assassination of President Kennedy and the simultaneous wounding of John B. Connally, Jr., Governor of Texas, has been followed within an hour by the slaying of Patrolman J.D. Tippit of the Dallas Police Department. In the United States and abroad, these events evoked universal demands for and explanation. --from the Foreward
Since its release in 1964, the Warren Commission Report has been at the heart of an ever-growing debate on the events surrounding the assassination of JFK. Long unavailable, this is perhaps one of the most important and controversial documents of the twentieth century. Now available again-complete and unabridged-this is the essential document of the Kennedy assassination.
912 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 1964
152 people are currently reading
1226 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews
July 28, 2007
I'll save you a lot of time. Take a sheet of blank paper, and write the following phrase on it -- "The Wicked Witch swooped down on Dealey Plaza, waved her flaming broom and killed the president." That sentence is about as logical as 95% of the conclusions the Commission reached in a huge waste of taxpayer money. It's been more than 40 years since President Kennedy was killed, so the trail to his killers has gone cold. The conspirators may already be dead. If not, they are nearly 45 years older than they were. If one assumes that the killer or killers had to have some experience and maturity, they must have been at least in their mid-20s, perhaps 30, which means they would be in their 70s now. We'll never get to the bottom of this. And the Warren Commission only succeeded in getting things more muddled than they were before. I gave this one star because I could not give it half a star or one-quarter of a star. One star is as low as you can go, kind of like getting an F in a class in school. F is the worst you can get, even if you're entitled to worse. The Commission didn't have the nerve to ask the questions it should have asked or to explore angles it should have explored. A trip to Oz would have been more beneficial -- and more enlightening.
February 25, 2009
There is no grassy knoll in the Warren Commission Report. There are no mysterious "magic bullets" or recitations of "Back and to the left." There are but factual observations, known evidence, and legal depositions. Together, these pages formulate a strong case against Lee Harvey Oswald - and he alone - in the assassination of the 36th President of the United States.
Prefaced by the publishers as being "A Document Of Great Historical Importance," the Warren Commission Report contains great detail. Of itself, only the most pertinent evidence has been included in the text of the actual report, but is followed up with appendices describing the unique nature of fingerprints (as relevant to a criminal case), the barrel of firearms, and handwriting. The facts are contained within the report - but only insofar as to lead into the case against Oswald. The technical material follows, so as to not detract from the intent of the report itself.
This edition (amongst the first of many, published in 1964 by The New York Times) provides plates of photographic evidence as presented by the Warren Commission. Due to space limitations, many of the plates have no descriptive captions beneath, but are referenced to by a guide prior to the onset of the report's text.
And as a Document Of Great Historical Importance... this makes for a singularly horrifying read. President Kennedy's wounds have been described in great detail, alongside observations made from the infamous Zapruder film (along with two others), as well as the heart-wrenching statements attributed to Mrs. Kennedy, confined to watching the entire ordeal from mere inches away. Oswald's movements from the night before have been retraced to such an extent that the reader is given an almost step-for-step detail as to how he entered the Texas School Book Depository and eventually came to be assassinated himself (by the apparently lone killer Jack Ruby).
Speculation is dealt with by the report, and to a greater extend by an Appendix solely committed to such concerns made by observers and critics to the report. No solid evidence was given to support any "conspiracy theory," and the Warren Commission seemingly went through great pains to uncover the validity to any theory which prevailed at the time.
Prior to coming to conclusions on the Kennedy Assassination, this report proves to be essential reading. While it does not decisively answer all questions (such as how, exactly, Jack Ruby came to be amongst the gang of reporters for the shooting of Oswald), it does acknowledge such limitations to its scope, and present many valid answers to a mourning (and morbidly curious) public.
(*This particular book was borrowed from a local library, and was resplendent with penciled-in observations from one who was seemingly amongst the team of investigators immediately on the scene in Dallas, November 22nd, 1963. Such "corrections" to the text included adjustments to misspelled nomenclature, and addendum such as "After finding the window [from which Oswald was positioned:], we went to the 7th floor, then to the roof. Rifle was found on our way back down." Also, some of the photographs in included have been likewise annotated, drawing attention to such detail as a gentleman strongly resembling Oswald standing outside during the assassination itself. The unofficial - and uncredited - editor seems to suggest that "evidence" was placed after the fact. This serves to add to the conspiratorial nature to the mythos surrounding the assassination, but sadly no evidence as to the writer's claims has been provided.)
Prefaced by the publishers as being "A Document Of Great Historical Importance," the Warren Commission Report contains great detail. Of itself, only the most pertinent evidence has been included in the text of the actual report, but is followed up with appendices describing the unique nature of fingerprints (as relevant to a criminal case), the barrel of firearms, and handwriting. The facts are contained within the report - but only insofar as to lead into the case against Oswald. The technical material follows, so as to not detract from the intent of the report itself.
This edition (amongst the first of many, published in 1964 by The New York Times) provides plates of photographic evidence as presented by the Warren Commission. Due to space limitations, many of the plates have no descriptive captions beneath, but are referenced to by a guide prior to the onset of the report's text.
And as a Document Of Great Historical Importance... this makes for a singularly horrifying read. President Kennedy's wounds have been described in great detail, alongside observations made from the infamous Zapruder film (along with two others), as well as the heart-wrenching statements attributed to Mrs. Kennedy, confined to watching the entire ordeal from mere inches away. Oswald's movements from the night before have been retraced to such an extent that the reader is given an almost step-for-step detail as to how he entered the Texas School Book Depository and eventually came to be assassinated himself (by the apparently lone killer Jack Ruby).
Speculation is dealt with by the report, and to a greater extend by an Appendix solely committed to such concerns made by observers and critics to the report. No solid evidence was given to support any "conspiracy theory," and the Warren Commission seemingly went through great pains to uncover the validity to any theory which prevailed at the time.
Prior to coming to conclusions on the Kennedy Assassination, this report proves to be essential reading. While it does not decisively answer all questions (such as how, exactly, Jack Ruby came to be amongst the gang of reporters for the shooting of Oswald), it does acknowledge such limitations to its scope, and present many valid answers to a mourning (and morbidly curious) public.
(*This particular book was borrowed from a local library, and was resplendent with penciled-in observations from one who was seemingly amongst the team of investigators immediately on the scene in Dallas, November 22nd, 1963. Such "corrections" to the text included adjustments to misspelled nomenclature, and addendum such as "After finding the window [from which Oswald was positioned:], we went to the 7th floor, then to the roof. Rifle was found on our way back down." Also, some of the photographs in included have been likewise annotated, drawing attention to such detail as a gentleman strongly resembling Oswald standing outside during the assassination itself. The unofficial - and uncredited - editor seems to suggest that "evidence" was placed after the fact. This serves to add to the conspiratorial nature to the mythos surrounding the assassination, but sadly no evidence as to the writer's claims has been provided.)
November 5, 2019
Reading the Warren Commission Report was the moment in which I suddenly see and understand things in a new and very clear way. Lee Harvey Oswald, O.H. Oswald or Mr. A. Hadel or whoever else he called himself- was the sole gunman in the Kennedy Assignation and I believe the evidence suggests, that there was no conspiracy. And Oliver Stones JFK is chock full of outright lies and deliberate misstatements.
The last time I had such an epiphany, I was on a jury deciding the fate of a county sheriff accused of purchasing stolen goods. Without having heard any evidence, I was certain the sheriff was guilty. After sitting thru a two day trial and critically evaluated all the pertinent evidence and I was forced to change my mind- not guilty.
I entered the deliberation room assured that my fellow jurors shared my sentiment. I found out that I was in agreement with only three others. After more than two hours of deliberation, the other three jurors changed their minds and I was the lone hold out. And I held out, ultimately to the exclusion of all other. Subsequently, we could not reach a unanimous decision and Sheriff Lawless [that’s was her real name]. The trial ended, and ultimately the state decided against a new trial and all charges were dropped.
Having read the full Warren Commission Report, I now am convinced that what I believed all these years was wrong. I have more faith in the Warren Commission in telling me what happened than I have with anyone who has not read the evidence. As a post script, while reading the report, I came across and recognized the name of a person whom I know, who was by all accounts “an extremely valuable eyewitness” to much of what happened.
After reading the report, now, if he had been still be alive- I would go back and apologize to Senator Arlen Specter for what I said to him about his Magic Bullet Theory.
The last time I had such an epiphany, I was on a jury deciding the fate of a county sheriff accused of purchasing stolen goods. Without having heard any evidence, I was certain the sheriff was guilty. After sitting thru a two day trial and critically evaluated all the pertinent evidence and I was forced to change my mind- not guilty.
I entered the deliberation room assured that my fellow jurors shared my sentiment. I found out that I was in agreement with only three others. After more than two hours of deliberation, the other three jurors changed their minds and I was the lone hold out. And I held out, ultimately to the exclusion of all other. Subsequently, we could not reach a unanimous decision and Sheriff Lawless [that’s was her real name]. The trial ended, and ultimately the state decided against a new trial and all charges were dropped.
Having read the full Warren Commission Report, I now am convinced that what I believed all these years was wrong. I have more faith in the Warren Commission in telling me what happened than I have with anyone who has not read the evidence. As a post script, while reading the report, I came across and recognized the name of a person whom I know, who was by all accounts “an extremely valuable eyewitness” to much of what happened.
After reading the report, now, if he had been still be alive- I would go back and apologize to Senator Arlen Specter for what I said to him about his Magic Bullet Theory.
January 20, 2018
I had to read this in spite of so many comments that this is pure fiction. I'm not convinced this report is full of s**t, but I do know, through recorded evidence, that the CIA and the FBI have been involved in many shady deals and nobody in their right mind would believe that either insitution gave up all the information in their possession regarding the assassination, whether either of them really had any direct involvement or not (the CIA is largely and conspicuously absent from the interviews the Commission conducted; the FBI and the Secret Service take center stage).
Since the Commission, with their limited access, concluded that Oswald was the killer and acted alone, more than half of this book is dedicated to Oswald, a frustrared and antisocial loser, whose apparent motivation was to go down in history any way he could.
Even so, I don't think this was a waste of time or that the report is useless and /or complete fabrication. For those who have also read the 9/11 Commission Report, it's eerie how both this and that one concluded that the two most tragic and public American tragedies happened because of a lack of efficient and transparent communication and cooperation between federal agencies, and also between these and local and state authorities.
Since the Commission, with their limited access, concluded that Oswald was the killer and acted alone, more than half of this book is dedicated to Oswald, a frustrared and antisocial loser, whose apparent motivation was to go down in history any way he could.
Even so, I don't think this was a waste of time or that the report is useless and /or complete fabrication. For those who have also read the 9/11 Commission Report, it's eerie how both this and that one concluded that the two most tragic and public American tragedies happened because of a lack of efficient and transparent communication and cooperation between federal agencies, and also between these and local and state authorities.
Read
March 5, 2014In reading the Warren Commission Report I drew the following conclusions:
1. The Report completely fails to identify a clear or convincing motive for Lee Harvey Oswald to have shot and killed the President. They dance around a lot of "facts" that supposedly indict him, but the biggest question - why - is never directly answered or satisfactorily confronted.
2. Even without examining the supporting documents or original testimony, the logic of many of the Commission's conclusions is dubious at best and more often entirely lacking.
3. I left the Report feeling, without having yet touched any of the mountain of contrary literature, that there was no possible way that the pieces of this assassination could fit together as cleanly as was presented.
4. Though it was clearly not the intention of the Committee there's obviously just no way to portray the Dallas Police Department in a favorable light. Their conduct was inexcusable and reckless from start to finish. It almost makes you hope for a conspiracy because the alternative is complete incompetence on their part.
1. The Report completely fails to identify a clear or convincing motive for Lee Harvey Oswald to have shot and killed the President. They dance around a lot of "facts" that supposedly indict him, but the biggest question - why - is never directly answered or satisfactorily confronted.
2. Even without examining the supporting documents or original testimony, the logic of many of the Commission's conclusions is dubious at best and more often entirely lacking.
3. I left the Report feeling, without having yet touched any of the mountain of contrary literature, that there was no possible way that the pieces of this assassination could fit together as cleanly as was presented.
4. Though it was clearly not the intention of the Committee there's obviously just no way to portray the Dallas Police Department in a favorable light. Their conduct was inexcusable and reckless from start to finish. It almost makes you hope for a conspiracy because the alternative is complete incompetence on their part.
February 26, 2021
Rehearsed and sanitized version of "the facts." No surprises here.
That Oswald was arrested in less than an hour sitting in a theater waiting around doesn't seem odd to this investigation is enough for me. Oswald was a patsy who was set up, and he was killed by a man who was terminally ill. This is the stuff of ancient Greek dramas, but the American people were fed pablum by the Warren Commission bc THAT is what they were supposed to be fed. This was the same era that produced the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that got us entrenched in the Vietnam War based on false facts supplied by our government about a supposed attack on a USN gunboat which never happened.
We had family friends (a military family that knew what weapons reports sounded like) who were in Dealey Plaza on that terrible day and they swore they heard a second shot COMING FROM THE GRASSY KNOLL. Of course, they were ignored and their sanity called into question, yet the father was an experienced, decorated Navy Captain. Odd, isn't it?
Too many unanswered or dismissed questions leave me completely dissatisfied with the Warren Report.
That Oswald was arrested in less than an hour sitting in a theater waiting around doesn't seem odd to this investigation is enough for me. Oswald was a patsy who was set up, and he was killed by a man who was terminally ill. This is the stuff of ancient Greek dramas, but the American people were fed pablum by the Warren Commission bc THAT is what they were supposed to be fed. This was the same era that produced the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that got us entrenched in the Vietnam War based on false facts supplied by our government about a supposed attack on a USN gunboat which never happened.
We had family friends (a military family that knew what weapons reports sounded like) who were in Dealey Plaza on that terrible day and they swore they heard a second shot COMING FROM THE GRASSY KNOLL. Of course, they were ignored and their sanity called into question, yet the father was an experienced, decorated Navy Captain. Odd, isn't it?
Too many unanswered or dismissed questions leave me completely dissatisfied with the Warren Report.
October 29, 2013
Sooner or later I just had to plough through LBJ's vaunted Commission report. Having studied almost everyone's take on the JFK assassination, it was back to the very beginning to peruse Earl Warren's version of events. Perversely, I have quite enjoyed the experience. (Not that I have any intention of following this up by the accumulation of the twenty six volumes.)
The original 'Official Report', which Chief Warren and his six fellow committee members delivered to President Johnson in 1964 took up almost nine hundred pages. My version, published by Important Books in 2013, runs to just under four hundred pages, being stripped of the original Commission Exhibits and Notes.
With a Foreword and eight chapters, this doughty band of legal beagles pronounced this 'case closed' in true 'Posneresque' style. I have managed to refrain from scribbling in the margins and have kept my copy in it's pristine condition, but only just.
The original 'Official Report', which Chief Warren and his six fellow committee members delivered to President Johnson in 1964 took up almost nine hundred pages. My version, published by Important Books in 2013, runs to just under four hundred pages, being stripped of the original Commission Exhibits and Notes.
With a Foreword and eight chapters, this doughty band of legal beagles pronounced this 'case closed' in true 'Posneresque' style. I have managed to refrain from scribbling in the margins and have kept my copy in it's pristine condition, but only just.
November 11, 2013
I must say I was highly disappointed. What was supposed to be the "complete" report of over 850 pages, turned out to be less than 400. I am a Kennedy assassination nut, to put it mildly, and was looking forward to reading the ENTIRE report, ALL exhibits and interviews, as originally published. Why were parts omitted? WHAT was omitted? American censorship again raises it's ugly head. I wanted to rate this five stars, but with over 400 pages of information missing I'm not even able to give it it two. Very disappointing. Unless one is able to obtain an original, multi-volume edition, it's a waste of time and money.
June 2, 2012
It's a judicial volume. It's not something you enjoy reading, especially in this case. Must be read along with all the many conspiracy books that have come out since. It is the official record of what happened, even if you don't believe it, and I don't. The part that is most unbelievable about it is the level of incompetence exercised by all the "professionals" that are connected to this even. Scary that this could happen in the "protector of freedom in the world." It stands only as an embarrassment.
August 2, 2020
The Warren Commission Report is full of holes.
Witnesses whom were originally designated to be on the stand, providing key testimony as to the interpreted number of shots fired on that day in Dallas, were suddenly removed off the stand. It has been claimed in other sources that such a move was done by means of blackmail against the witnesses, threatening them with communistic charges.
Experts in firearms from the Secret Service were also quickly removed from further consideration from being on the stand, using the statement of "emotional shock" on the part of the witness.
Witnesses whom were originally designated to be on the stand, providing key testimony as to the interpreted number of shots fired on that day in Dallas, were suddenly removed off the stand. It has been claimed in other sources that such a move was done by means of blackmail against the witnesses, threatening them with communistic charges.
Experts in firearms from the Secret Service were also quickly removed from further consideration from being on the stand, using the statement of "emotional shock" on the part of the witness.
July 5, 2010
I give this book the lowest rating because other than the title this book is filled with fabrication from start to finish. When it was published the 26 volumes didn't even come with an index! They make claims that are simply false, misleading, or just plain lies. This book is a slap in the face to the American people. I suggest reading it to see how our leaders truly feel about us asking questions.
June 6, 2010
I do find this to be a very interesting report. As time has passed and we come to understand what happened that day, one can really see the flaws in this report. The flaws the police made and the cover up of the autopsy are obvious. What a shame and a waste of money. No justice given to the President, the family, and our country in this report.
August 7, 2010
I will never be convinced that all this was done by a lone gunman. In my opinion it was just one big coverup. Was Johnson somehow involved. And I really thought that Gerald Ford would shed some light on this before he died (he was on the Warren Commission). But we will probably never know the real truth!
January 17, 2012
The Warren Report is the greatest work of fiction of the 20th century.
March 10, 2018
A fantastic work of fiction by the least creative political minds of the 20th century.
January 24, 2024
I never thought I would actually read this, but I'm glad that I finally did.
November 1, 2008
"The great masses of the people more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one”
----- “Mein Kampf” Adolph Hitler
Friday, November 22, 1963 --- Everyone can recall exactly where they were and what they were doing when they first learned of this tragedy --- I was reading Paul Horgan’s “A Distant Trumpet” when I decided to take a break and turn on my small 9 transistor radio. Once I did there was talk of an Assassination and it seemed odd but my mind easily conjured up perhaps a discussion about Abraham Lincoln. Suddenly in a few startling seconds those thoughts were dashed as reporters relayed the shocking news of an Assassination in Dealey Plaza in Dallas , Texas of President John F. Kennedy. At that point, the Networks were about 15 or 20 minutes into their coverage and information was coming in fast and sketchy. The world stopped!! As events unfolded and the reporting conveniently adjusted – it wasn’t called spin in those days – I was convinced of a well planned, executed and complex conspiracy even before that weekend ended. Everything was just too convenient and did not add up. Forty five minutes after the first shots were fired Dallas Patrolman J.D. Tippit was killed and Lee Harvey Oswald was apprehended and arrested. Around 7 pm Friday night Oswald was charged with Tippit’s murder and about 1 am Saturday charged with JFK’s. Sunday about midday my radio was on again and I heard the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby live while Oswald was still being held in Police custody.
I received my “Warren Commission Report“ -- light blue soft covered 879 pages $2.50 -- from The United State Government Printing Office in Washington D.C. in October, 1964. It was very interesting reading and the only source available at the time but its use as a resource flawed and its conclusions seriously flawed. The Commission was either incompetent or intentionally avoided the truth; unfortunately a complete whitewash from the very beginning!! Leads were not followed up and vital testimony not considered or witnesses ignored. Within days of the Assassination our Government declared that Oswald acted as the lone assassin, fired from the Texas School Book Depository, the only person involved and there was no conspiracy. To that predetermined end the Commission did its work and drew the inevitable conclusions. Chaired by Chief Justice Earl Warren and with future President Gerald Ford another member, the Commission completed this “definitive investigation” in less than 10 months! Hale Boggs, the only dissenter to the findings, disappeared over Southeastern Alaska in 1972 and neither he, three other passengers nor their plane have ever been found.
There are now several good and reliable books on the market that support the conspiracy theory. Most Americans, 8 out of 10, believe it too. Any reasonable person watching the 23 second Zapruder film and comparing it to the Commission findings would also be convinced of a conspiracy.
“In the three year period which followed the murder of Kennedy and Oswald, 18 material witnesses died -- 6 by gunfire, three in motor accidents, two by suicide, one from a cut throat, one from a karate chop to the neck, five from natural causes” “Crossfire” by Jim Marrs.
In 1976 The House Select Committee on Assassinations was created to re investigate the Kennedy Assassination. “The year 1977 produced a bumper crop of candidates for listing under convenient deaths connected to the JFK assassination including the deaths of six top FBI officials -- one, the former number 3 man in the FBI in a hunting accident whose shooter thought he was a deer -– and all of whom were scheduled to testify before the House Select Committee on Assassinations.” “Crossfire” by Jim Marrs. Still others died before they could testify but finally in 1979, the Committee affirmed the assassination was “probably the result of conspiracy” but then excluded every possible significant perpetrator. Also, a second gunman was officially acknowledged for the first time but “he fired one shot from the grassy knoll and missed” Missed???
In an article “Disappearing Witnesses” and the book “Forgive my Grief” Penn Jones Jr. states that over 100 people died mysteriously after the assassination.
The Warren Commission Report offered us so much promise but it miserably failed to deliver. In the absence of honest investigations by the Government and law enforcement organizations and with the sinister and mysterious deaths, all citizens were left without resolution, adrift and disillusioned.
“You can fool all the people some of the time,
And some of the people all the time,
But you cannot fool all the people all the time”
----- Abraham Lincoln
----- “Mein Kampf” Adolph Hitler
Friday, November 22, 1963 --- Everyone can recall exactly where they were and what they were doing when they first learned of this tragedy --- I was reading Paul Horgan’s “A Distant Trumpet” when I decided to take a break and turn on my small 9 transistor radio. Once I did there was talk of an Assassination and it seemed odd but my mind easily conjured up perhaps a discussion about Abraham Lincoln. Suddenly in a few startling seconds those thoughts were dashed as reporters relayed the shocking news of an Assassination in Dealey Plaza in Dallas , Texas of President John F. Kennedy. At that point, the Networks were about 15 or 20 minutes into their coverage and information was coming in fast and sketchy. The world stopped!! As events unfolded and the reporting conveniently adjusted – it wasn’t called spin in those days – I was convinced of a well planned, executed and complex conspiracy even before that weekend ended. Everything was just too convenient and did not add up. Forty five minutes after the first shots were fired Dallas Patrolman J.D. Tippit was killed and Lee Harvey Oswald was apprehended and arrested. Around 7 pm Friday night Oswald was charged with Tippit’s murder and about 1 am Saturday charged with JFK’s. Sunday about midday my radio was on again and I heard the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby live while Oswald was still being held in Police custody.
I received my “Warren Commission Report“ -- light blue soft covered 879 pages $2.50 -- from The United State Government Printing Office in Washington D.C. in October, 1964. It was very interesting reading and the only source available at the time but its use as a resource flawed and its conclusions seriously flawed. The Commission was either incompetent or intentionally avoided the truth; unfortunately a complete whitewash from the very beginning!! Leads were not followed up and vital testimony not considered or witnesses ignored. Within days of the Assassination our Government declared that Oswald acted as the lone assassin, fired from the Texas School Book Depository, the only person involved and there was no conspiracy. To that predetermined end the Commission did its work and drew the inevitable conclusions. Chaired by Chief Justice Earl Warren and with future President Gerald Ford another member, the Commission completed this “definitive investigation” in less than 10 months! Hale Boggs, the only dissenter to the findings, disappeared over Southeastern Alaska in 1972 and neither he, three other passengers nor their plane have ever been found.
There are now several good and reliable books on the market that support the conspiracy theory. Most Americans, 8 out of 10, believe it too. Any reasonable person watching the 23 second Zapruder film and comparing it to the Commission findings would also be convinced of a conspiracy.
“In the three year period which followed the murder of Kennedy and Oswald, 18 material witnesses died -- 6 by gunfire, three in motor accidents, two by suicide, one from a cut throat, one from a karate chop to the neck, five from natural causes” “Crossfire” by Jim Marrs.
In 1976 The House Select Committee on Assassinations was created to re investigate the Kennedy Assassination. “The year 1977 produced a bumper crop of candidates for listing under convenient deaths connected to the JFK assassination including the deaths of six top FBI officials -- one, the former number 3 man in the FBI in a hunting accident whose shooter thought he was a deer -– and all of whom were scheduled to testify before the House Select Committee on Assassinations.” “Crossfire” by Jim Marrs. Still others died before they could testify but finally in 1979, the Committee affirmed the assassination was “probably the result of conspiracy” but then excluded every possible significant perpetrator. Also, a second gunman was officially acknowledged for the first time but “he fired one shot from the grassy knoll and missed” Missed???
In an article “Disappearing Witnesses” and the book “Forgive my Grief” Penn Jones Jr. states that over 100 people died mysteriously after the assassination.
The Warren Commission Report offered us so much promise but it miserably failed to deliver. In the absence of honest investigations by the Government and law enforcement organizations and with the sinister and mysterious deaths, all citizens were left without resolution, adrift and disillusioned.
“You can fool all the people some of the time,
And some of the people all the time,
But you cannot fool all the people all the time”
----- Abraham Lincoln
Read
April 4, 2024JOHN F. KENNEDY
August 20, 2024
Before launching into this review, I ought to say why I read this infamous report in the first place. I have never been particularly interested in JFK or the assassination, and thus I knew just the bare basics of the official story and the conspiracy theories. My interest in the book was actually sparked by Werner Herzog, who named the Warren Commission Report as one of his favorite books. I read the report, then, mainly to appreciate how the story is told and the conclusions are reached, rather than to find any hidden truths of the assassination.
From the first pages, I could see what Herzog enjoyed about the book. In the guise of a bureaucratic, governmental document, we have an excellent true crime thriller. Unlike the overworked detectives of cop shows, the Commission had the nearly unlimited resources of the United States government at their disposal, and were able to perform any tests they wished. Expert riflemen attempted to replicate the shots; key witnesses were timed reenacting their movements; a car was driven at the exact speed as the presidential limo while pictures were taken through the scope on the rifle; the frame rate on the Zapruder film was used to determine the exact timings of the shots fired; and so on.
This way, the Commission closes in on the conclusion: it was Oswald—and only Oswald—from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Every minute is accounted for, every movement is traced, every alternative theory is considered and discarded. It is, in short, a tour de force in the prosecutorial arts.
Yet I think this does not fully explain the report’s appeal to Herzog. Speaking purely in terms of aesthetic appreciation, what is especially compelling about the book is how grand, potentially historic conclusions follow from tiny questions of fact. Could the rifle be operated fast enough? Was the shot too difficult? How many shots were heard? Among the delights of Herzog’s best documentaries is the sensation of a profound abyss of mystery opening up in unexpected places. And the report certainly provides that sensation.
Now, I think it would be remiss of me if I did not at least attempt to comment on the plausibility of the report’s conclusions. I should say that, going into it, I was highly disposed to accept Oswald as the lone gunman. After all, we live in the era of mass shootings, most often carried out by loners with inscrutable motives. Indeed, Lee Harvey Oswald—a 24-year old white guy, a misfit with few friends—seems like the textbook example of a mass shooter. As a case in point, the would-be assassin of Donald Trump, Thomas Matthew Crooks, seems to have had a similar profile.
And the evidence linking Oswald to the crime is quite strong. There is the picture of him with the rifle, the fact that the rifle was found in his place of work, the visit to his wife the day before to pick up the rifle, the fact that he immediately fled the scene, his history of impulsive decision-making, his interest in left-wing movements, the total lack of an alibi, the multiple witnesses linking him to the subsequent murder of officer Tippit, resisting arrest shortly thereafter with a gun on his person… The list goes on.
What is more, in addition to the (apparent) lack of evidence linking Oswald to a conspiracy, several considerations seem to make such a link unlikely. For one, it is not as if JFK was a highly unusual president in terms of his politics. If Kennedy had been proposing something truly radical—provoking a nuclear war with the USSR, say, or instigating a communist revolution in the USA—then I could imagine a sizable contingent of disloyal personnel who might want him dead. But the fact is that JFK was a liberal anti-communist, and he was succeeded by… LBJ, a liberal anti-communist.
As for the Soviet Union, they would appear to have had little to gain and much to lose by getting involved in an assassination attempt, since discovery could provoke a massive war, and success did not materially benefit them in any way. The connection with Cuba is admittedly more plausible, if only because of Kennedy’s many dealings with the country (the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Missile Crisis, attempted CIA assassinations of Castro…).
As for LBJ, though he was as power-hungry as they come, and had a penchant for unscrupulous behavior, it is frankly difficult for me to believe that, as Vice-President, he could have wooed away enough government agents, and sworn them all to absolute secrecy, in the service of his personal ambition. A single whistle-blower would have toppled the plan—and humans are bad at keeping secrets.
This is all to say that I found the report extremely believable. But in the interest of fairness, I decided to watch the first major documentary questioning the conclusions of the report: Rush to Judgment. This is the film version of a 1966 book by Mark Lane, a lawyer. And its premise is, I think, a fair one. If the Warren Commission was the posthumous prosecution, Oswald also deserved a posthumous defense, which Lane intended to provide.
To start, I think it is only fair to point out some considerations that undermine the report’s conclusions. The most conspicuous one is that LBJ created the Commission to prove to the public that Oswald was the lone gunman, in order, in his words, to avoid a war that could “kill 40 million Americans in an hour.” That is to say that the Commission worked to prove a foregone conclusion, ostensibly to avoid a crisis in international relations. And, of course, the killing of Oswald by Jack Ruby before he could be tried cannot help but raise eyebrows.
In his documentary, Mark Lane interviews several witnesses whose testimony does not conform with the official story. Many people from different vantage points recall hearing the shots from—you guessed it—the grassy knoll, and some even said they saw smoke in the air. Mark Lane also probes potential connections between Jack Ruby and the Dallas Police Department, including officer Tippit; and he portrays the so-called “magic bullet” theory (namely, that a single bullet pierced Kennedy’s neck and wounded Governor Connally) as being inconsistent with the evidence.
For me, the contrary eye- and earwitness testimony is fairly easy to discount. In such a chaotic environment, with people running everywhere, several vehicles on the road, and many hard surfaces for sounds to reflect from, I think it would be difficult for an unprepared observer to localize the source of a sound or even to make a precise count of the shots. In any case, given the somewhat contradictory testimony, many people simply must be mistaken.
The argument that Oswald was not a good enough marksman also strikes me as weak. Oswald had military training, an accurate weapon, and in any case there’s always an element of luck involved. (Thomas Matthew Crooks missed by a fraction of an inch—the difference between a historic turning point and a footnote.)
Many conspiracy theories rely on a close examination of the Zapruder film. Among the arguments made are that Kennedy jerks back instead of forward in response to the lethal shot to his head (indicating it came from in front and not behind), and that Connally seems to react the first shot—the “magic bullet”—a couple seconds after Kennedy clutches his throat.
For what it’s worth, to my eyes it does look like the president is shot in the head from behind (it’s gruesome to watch). But the timing problem between Kennedy’s and Connally’s initial reactions is harder to explain if they were, indeed, struck by the same bullet. In fact, what the film apparently shows does correspond with how Connally remembered the event: hearing a shot, turning to his right to check on Kennedy, and then getting shot himself before the final, fatal shot to the president.
This would seem to indicate three shots: the first hitting Kennedy in the neck, the second hitting Connally in the back, and the third lethally wounding Kennedy in the head. The problem with that sequence is that the bullet exiting Kennedy’s neck would have caused substantial damage to the inside of the car, had it not hit another person. What’s more, given the constraints of the bolt-action Carcano rifle used in the attack, it seems almost impossible that three shots could have been gotten off in such quick succession. Thus the single-bullet theory.
I think it would be dishonest of me to say that I know enough about ballistics, marksmanship, firearms, traumatic wounds, or any other pertinent subject to venture my own explanation. (And I think I will probably regret even touching my toes into this vast reservoir of fevered speculation.) I will say, however, that the popular theory of a second shooter wouldn’t explain the lack of damage to the inside of the car—not to mention requiring the supposed second shooter to fire in such close coordination with Oswald as to be basically indistinguishable.
To round out this review, I should mention the bevy of documents made available to the public, starting in the 90s and as recently as last year. One of the strangest findings concerns a trip that Oswald made in late September and early October of 1963—in other words, shortly before the assassination—to Mexico City, in order to obtain a visa to either the Soviet Union or Cuba. Both of those embassies were being closely monitored by the CIA, and apparently somebody was caught on tape impersonating Oswald in phone calls. This was subsequently denied and covered up by the CIA. I really have no idea what that might mean.
There are approximately one million other stories and rumors—involving the Mafia, Jack Ruby, Officer Tippit, failed assassination attempts, murdered witnesses, and so on—which no single person could summarize or evaluate.
For me, I come back to my general skepticism of conspiracy theories, which is founded on my unshakable belief in human incompetence. Any task that requires a large number of people to work together and keep absolute secrecy arouses my suspicion. Aside from that, it seems that Oswald would be a uniquely bad co-conspirator. As the report points out, he attracted the notice of law enforcement everywhere he went; and his arrogance and impulsiveness made him difficult to work with. Given what is known about Oswald, he doesn’t seem to be the sort of person to be recruited for a secret operation.
I am also wary of the strong psychological pull of conspiracy theories. The idea that a lone gunman could change history—for the murkiest of motives—is inherently unsatisfying. Only connoisseurs of the absurd (like Herzog) could relish the fact that luck and chance can play such a defining role in our lives. I think it is significant that both Reagan’s and Trump’s attempted assassination have received far less attention from amateur sleuths, for the simple reason that their assailants failed while Oswald accomplished his grim task.
That being said, I also think that the members of the Warren Commission did not act as pure factfinders, but as prosecutors of the lone gunman theory. In so doing, they worked closely with the Secret Service, CIA, and FBI, rather than using their own investigators. And it seems clear that the FBI and CIA were not entirely truthful about what they knew about Oswald in the wake of the assassination.
If there was a cover-up, however, that does not necessarily mean there was a full-blown conspiracy. Governments can keep secrets simply to avoid looking incompetent, or to protect clandestine sources of information, or to avoid diplomatic crises, or simply out of a reflexive furtiveness, or for any number of reasons. As a case in point, the weather balloon explanation of the Roswell incident was, indeed, revealed to be a cover story—not of aliens, but of a top-secret balloon apparatus to detect atomic research.
Yet if there is a lesson to be learned from the Kennedy assassination, it is arguably the same rather boring lesson taught by the attempted Trump assassination: the need for better presidential protection.
From the first pages, I could see what Herzog enjoyed about the book. In the guise of a bureaucratic, governmental document, we have an excellent true crime thriller. Unlike the overworked detectives of cop shows, the Commission had the nearly unlimited resources of the United States government at their disposal, and were able to perform any tests they wished. Expert riflemen attempted to replicate the shots; key witnesses were timed reenacting their movements; a car was driven at the exact speed as the presidential limo while pictures were taken through the scope on the rifle; the frame rate on the Zapruder film was used to determine the exact timings of the shots fired; and so on.
This way, the Commission closes in on the conclusion: it was Oswald—and only Oswald—from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Every minute is accounted for, every movement is traced, every alternative theory is considered and discarded. It is, in short, a tour de force in the prosecutorial arts.
Yet I think this does not fully explain the report’s appeal to Herzog. Speaking purely in terms of aesthetic appreciation, what is especially compelling about the book is how grand, potentially historic conclusions follow from tiny questions of fact. Could the rifle be operated fast enough? Was the shot too difficult? How many shots were heard? Among the delights of Herzog’s best documentaries is the sensation of a profound abyss of mystery opening up in unexpected places. And the report certainly provides that sensation.
Now, I think it would be remiss of me if I did not at least attempt to comment on the plausibility of the report’s conclusions. I should say that, going into it, I was highly disposed to accept Oswald as the lone gunman. After all, we live in the era of mass shootings, most often carried out by loners with inscrutable motives. Indeed, Lee Harvey Oswald—a 24-year old white guy, a misfit with few friends—seems like the textbook example of a mass shooter. As a case in point, the would-be assassin of Donald Trump, Thomas Matthew Crooks, seems to have had a similar profile.
And the evidence linking Oswald to the crime is quite strong. There is the picture of him with the rifle, the fact that the rifle was found in his place of work, the visit to his wife the day before to pick up the rifle, the fact that he immediately fled the scene, his history of impulsive decision-making, his interest in left-wing movements, the total lack of an alibi, the multiple witnesses linking him to the subsequent murder of officer Tippit, resisting arrest shortly thereafter with a gun on his person… The list goes on.
What is more, in addition to the (apparent) lack of evidence linking Oswald to a conspiracy, several considerations seem to make such a link unlikely. For one, it is not as if JFK was a highly unusual president in terms of his politics. If Kennedy had been proposing something truly radical—provoking a nuclear war with the USSR, say, or instigating a communist revolution in the USA—then I could imagine a sizable contingent of disloyal personnel who might want him dead. But the fact is that JFK was a liberal anti-communist, and he was succeeded by… LBJ, a liberal anti-communist.
As for the Soviet Union, they would appear to have had little to gain and much to lose by getting involved in an assassination attempt, since discovery could provoke a massive war, and success did not materially benefit them in any way. The connection with Cuba is admittedly more plausible, if only because of Kennedy’s many dealings with the country (the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Missile Crisis, attempted CIA assassinations of Castro…).
As for LBJ, though he was as power-hungry as they come, and had a penchant for unscrupulous behavior, it is frankly difficult for me to believe that, as Vice-President, he could have wooed away enough government agents, and sworn them all to absolute secrecy, in the service of his personal ambition. A single whistle-blower would have toppled the plan—and humans are bad at keeping secrets.
This is all to say that I found the report extremely believable. But in the interest of fairness, I decided to watch the first major documentary questioning the conclusions of the report: Rush to Judgment. This is the film version of a 1966 book by Mark Lane, a lawyer. And its premise is, I think, a fair one. If the Warren Commission was the posthumous prosecution, Oswald also deserved a posthumous defense, which Lane intended to provide.
To start, I think it is only fair to point out some considerations that undermine the report’s conclusions. The most conspicuous one is that LBJ created the Commission to prove to the public that Oswald was the lone gunman, in order, in his words, to avoid a war that could “kill 40 million Americans in an hour.” That is to say that the Commission worked to prove a foregone conclusion, ostensibly to avoid a crisis in international relations. And, of course, the killing of Oswald by Jack Ruby before he could be tried cannot help but raise eyebrows.
In his documentary, Mark Lane interviews several witnesses whose testimony does not conform with the official story. Many people from different vantage points recall hearing the shots from—you guessed it—the grassy knoll, and some even said they saw smoke in the air. Mark Lane also probes potential connections between Jack Ruby and the Dallas Police Department, including officer Tippit; and he portrays the so-called “magic bullet” theory (namely, that a single bullet pierced Kennedy’s neck and wounded Governor Connally) as being inconsistent with the evidence.
For me, the contrary eye- and earwitness testimony is fairly easy to discount. In such a chaotic environment, with people running everywhere, several vehicles on the road, and many hard surfaces for sounds to reflect from, I think it would be difficult for an unprepared observer to localize the source of a sound or even to make a precise count of the shots. In any case, given the somewhat contradictory testimony, many people simply must be mistaken.
The argument that Oswald was not a good enough marksman also strikes me as weak. Oswald had military training, an accurate weapon, and in any case there’s always an element of luck involved. (Thomas Matthew Crooks missed by a fraction of an inch—the difference between a historic turning point and a footnote.)
Many conspiracy theories rely on a close examination of the Zapruder film. Among the arguments made are that Kennedy jerks back instead of forward in response to the lethal shot to his head (indicating it came from in front and not behind), and that Connally seems to react the first shot—the “magic bullet”—a couple seconds after Kennedy clutches his throat.
For what it’s worth, to my eyes it does look like the president is shot in the head from behind (it’s gruesome to watch). But the timing problem between Kennedy’s and Connally’s initial reactions is harder to explain if they were, indeed, struck by the same bullet. In fact, what the film apparently shows does correspond with how Connally remembered the event: hearing a shot, turning to his right to check on Kennedy, and then getting shot himself before the final, fatal shot to the president.
This would seem to indicate three shots: the first hitting Kennedy in the neck, the second hitting Connally in the back, and the third lethally wounding Kennedy in the head. The problem with that sequence is that the bullet exiting Kennedy’s neck would have caused substantial damage to the inside of the car, had it not hit another person. What’s more, given the constraints of the bolt-action Carcano rifle used in the attack, it seems almost impossible that three shots could have been gotten off in such quick succession. Thus the single-bullet theory.
I think it would be dishonest of me to say that I know enough about ballistics, marksmanship, firearms, traumatic wounds, or any other pertinent subject to venture my own explanation. (And I think I will probably regret even touching my toes into this vast reservoir of fevered speculation.) I will say, however, that the popular theory of a second shooter wouldn’t explain the lack of damage to the inside of the car—not to mention requiring the supposed second shooter to fire in such close coordination with Oswald as to be basically indistinguishable.
To round out this review, I should mention the bevy of documents made available to the public, starting in the 90s and as recently as last year. One of the strangest findings concerns a trip that Oswald made in late September and early October of 1963—in other words, shortly before the assassination—to Mexico City, in order to obtain a visa to either the Soviet Union or Cuba. Both of those embassies were being closely monitored by the CIA, and apparently somebody was caught on tape impersonating Oswald in phone calls. This was subsequently denied and covered up by the CIA. I really have no idea what that might mean.
There are approximately one million other stories and rumors—involving the Mafia, Jack Ruby, Officer Tippit, failed assassination attempts, murdered witnesses, and so on—which no single person could summarize or evaluate.
For me, I come back to my general skepticism of conspiracy theories, which is founded on my unshakable belief in human incompetence. Any task that requires a large number of people to work together and keep absolute secrecy arouses my suspicion. Aside from that, it seems that Oswald would be a uniquely bad co-conspirator. As the report points out, he attracted the notice of law enforcement everywhere he went; and his arrogance and impulsiveness made him difficult to work with. Given what is known about Oswald, he doesn’t seem to be the sort of person to be recruited for a secret operation.
I am also wary of the strong psychological pull of conspiracy theories. The idea that a lone gunman could change history—for the murkiest of motives—is inherently unsatisfying. Only connoisseurs of the absurd (like Herzog) could relish the fact that luck and chance can play such a defining role in our lives. I think it is significant that both Reagan’s and Trump’s attempted assassination have received far less attention from amateur sleuths, for the simple reason that their assailants failed while Oswald accomplished his grim task.
That being said, I also think that the members of the Warren Commission did not act as pure factfinders, but as prosecutors of the lone gunman theory. In so doing, they worked closely with the Secret Service, CIA, and FBI, rather than using their own investigators. And it seems clear that the FBI and CIA were not entirely truthful about what they knew about Oswald in the wake of the assassination.
If there was a cover-up, however, that does not necessarily mean there was a full-blown conspiracy. Governments can keep secrets simply to avoid looking incompetent, or to protect clandestine sources of information, or to avoid diplomatic crises, or simply out of a reflexive furtiveness, or for any number of reasons. As a case in point, the weather balloon explanation of the Roswell incident was, indeed, revealed to be a cover story—not of aliens, but of a top-secret balloon apparatus to detect atomic research.
Yet if there is a lesson to be learned from the Kennedy assassination, it is arguably the same rather boring lesson taught by the attempted Trump assassination: the need for better presidential protection.
January 13, 2020
Thoughts I had in 2011 musing upon reading this years earlier:
Then, I re-read it. I also at the same time read A Concise Compendium of the Warren Commission Report on the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, so I will let my thoughts on the Report itself reside in that review.
This edition from The New York Times including many more photographic displays of Commission exhibits and four introductory pieces:
1. Tom Wicker's Special to The New York Times of Nov. 23, 1963 including such early reporting as:
That makes it sound like JFK was hit twice from the front and the only shot that hit anyone from the Texas School Book Depository was the one that hit Connally. There are substantiated theories that Oswald wanted to kill Connally, not Kennedy.
2. An introduction from Harrison E. Salisbury that suggests this is the final word, but won't stop conspiracies from growing.
3. Same thing in a small piece from Anthony Lewis. Well, his adds fuel to the idea above that Kennedy was not Oswald's goal:
4. Finally, two pages from James Reston attempting to quickly summarize the inexplicable Oswald in the context of a panoply of other assassinations.
I read this a long time ago. So, I am left with impressions but rather than details. Well, there are two main impressions: First, it is a very dry read as one would expect for a government body investigation report. Secondly, so many bullets found at the scene and so many people shot (not just those in the car), that it is hard for me to believe it was a single gunmen that less loose all that ammo in six seconds. Still, I suppose it is possible....
Then, I re-read it. I also at the same time read A Concise Compendium of the Warren Commission Report on the Assassination of John F. Kennedy, so I will let my thoughts on the Report itself reside in that review.
This edition from The New York Times including many more photographic displays of Commission exhibits and four introductory pieces:
1. Tom Wicker's Special to The New York Times of Nov. 23, 1963 including such early reporting as:
Mr. Kennedy also had a massive, gaping wound in the back and one on the right side of the head. However, the doctors said it was impossible to determine immediately whether the wounds had been caused by on bullet or two.
That makes it sound like JFK was hit twice from the front and the only shot that hit anyone from the Texas School Book Depository was the one that hit Connally. There are substantiated theories that Oswald wanted to kill Connally, not Kennedy.
2. An introduction from Harrison E. Salisbury that suggests this is the final word, but won't stop conspiracies from growing.
3. Same thing in a small piece from Anthony Lewis. Well, his adds fuel to the idea above that Kennedy was not Oswald's goal:
After his arrest, he told the police that “My wife and I like the President's family. They are interesting people.” He said, “I am not a malcontent; nothing irritated me about the President."
4. Finally, two pages from James Reston attempting to quickly summarize the inexplicable Oswald in the context of a panoply of other assassinations.
January 17, 2016
The Warren Report!! The best novel I've read in years!
Still, what is left to be said about this marvelous work of fiction, which scholars and buffs have pored over since it was originally put between boards by the Government Printing Office in 1964, in a first edition more expensive than "Catcher in the Rye." the tale of one young psychopath in the making.
Like Doctorow's at best fiction (I put Billy Bathgate first, Ragtime second) the Warren Report is a hearty gumbo mixing real life with truthiness to unalloyed bullshit.
In the years since, everyone from JFK's Dallas limo driver, to Chloe Kardashian, to my Uncle Moe has been implicated. Perhaps it's time to it go? Like many authors whose first effort gets all the buzz, there never comes a second.
Best line in he novel? (A line backed up by the esteemed Gary Wills, in his book "Ruby")
In dialogue as realistic as, well, reaism as Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction" or "Inglorious Basterds [sic], the scene is set.
Jack Ruby, who was actually pals with my Great Uncle Augie, guts-shoots Lee Harvey with great acumen, and is immediately wrestled to the ground in the basement parking lot of the Dallas Police Department
All of the cops had long known Ruby,a a pathological glad-hander who liked having the thin blue line around his "Carousel" strip club. For over a decade he'd given free admission and drinks to virtually eveny one on the force.
And what dialogue!
(Ruby is wrestled to ground. The first words come from a Dallas police officer:)
Officer: "Jack, why'd you do it?"
Ribu" "To show Jews have balls," the Warren Report has as Ruby's first words after he sent just one bullet fatally ricochetting around Lee Harvey innards like a pinball. Jack was we Jews own Yiddish Lone Ranger, as Lenny Bruce called Ruby, HIS lantzman too.
Sadly. Jack Ruby also happened to be a psychopath, the first lantzman I've ever met or seen on a home entertainment center burdened with that particular mental illness. A shanda, that Jacob Rubinstein, a shanda!
"To show Jews have balls?" C''mon Jack, you should have been reading the sports pages. Sandy Koufax had already begun the greatest five year streak of any pitcher ever, and was throwing the fastest, hardest fastball that's ever been seen. Who sat out the first game of the World Series because of Yom Kippur in MY town!
Jack, what you did wasn't necessary. But this novel certainly is: never before have I read prose that simultaneously showed truth is stanger than fiction, AND fiction is stranger than truth.
A grand Balzacian cast of cuckoos and social disorder, as well as the first ever instance of a nation "binging" on tv shows, as they would on "The Wire" and now "Making a Murderer."
My Uncle Moe did it.
Still, what is left to be said about this marvelous work of fiction, which scholars and buffs have pored over since it was originally put between boards by the Government Printing Office in 1964, in a first edition more expensive than "Catcher in the Rye." the tale of one young psychopath in the making.
Like Doctorow's at best fiction (I put Billy Bathgate first, Ragtime second) the Warren Report is a hearty gumbo mixing real life with truthiness to unalloyed bullshit.
In the years since, everyone from JFK's Dallas limo driver, to Chloe Kardashian, to my Uncle Moe has been implicated. Perhaps it's time to it go? Like many authors whose first effort gets all the buzz, there never comes a second.
Best line in he novel? (A line backed up by the esteemed Gary Wills, in his book "Ruby")
In dialogue as realistic as, well, reaism as Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction" or "Inglorious Basterds [sic], the scene is set.
Jack Ruby, who was actually pals with my Great Uncle Augie, guts-shoots Lee Harvey with great acumen, and is immediately wrestled to the ground in the basement parking lot of the Dallas Police Department
All of the cops had long known Ruby,a a pathological glad-hander who liked having the thin blue line around his "Carousel" strip club. For over a decade he'd given free admission and drinks to virtually eveny one on the force.
And what dialogue!
(Ruby is wrestled to ground. The first words come from a Dallas police officer:)
Officer: "Jack, why'd you do it?"
Ribu" "To show Jews have balls," the Warren Report has as Ruby's first words after he sent just one bullet fatally ricochetting around Lee Harvey innards like a pinball. Jack was we Jews own Yiddish Lone Ranger, as Lenny Bruce called Ruby, HIS lantzman too.
Sadly. Jack Ruby also happened to be a psychopath, the first lantzman I've ever met or seen on a home entertainment center burdened with that particular mental illness. A shanda, that Jacob Rubinstein, a shanda!
"To show Jews have balls?" C''mon Jack, you should have been reading the sports pages. Sandy Koufax had already begun the greatest five year streak of any pitcher ever, and was throwing the fastest, hardest fastball that's ever been seen. Who sat out the first game of the World Series because of Yom Kippur in MY town!
Jack, what you did wasn't necessary. But this novel certainly is: never before have I read prose that simultaneously showed truth is stanger than fiction, AND fiction is stranger than truth.
A grand Balzacian cast of cuckoos and social disorder, as well as the first ever instance of a nation "binging" on tv shows, as they would on "The Wire" and now "Making a Murderer."
My Uncle Moe did it.
November 25, 2013
This edition of the Warren Commission's Report on the assassination of John F. Kennedy is a fascinating look at the events of that fateful day in Dallas fifty years ago. As interesting as the report is in general, the added bonus separating this edition from any others is the new introduction by the late Senator Arlen Specter, who served as assistant counsel to the commission. His lengthy look back at those days of the investigation is an unrepresented opportunity to read his thoughts and careful analysis of the commission, those involved, the investigation itself and, most important, the ultimate findings of the commission and the report. Whatever one's feelings are about the murder of our 35th President, any research into that moment in our history has to start with this Official Report - and that research is made all the easier to read and more informative, with this nicely produced, well formatted e-book edition and its excellent introduction by Senator Specter.
September 22, 2010
i read a copy of this, the cover was gone, it had been read, a lot. way back when....for congress...maybe it had to do w/the time, the issue, but it was an interesting read.
found some old congressional records in this house i remodelled. from 1935. i think the intent was insulation...all that hot air, documented, huey long and folk...course, that was 1935...and the wcr was the 60s. big thick book full of what they knew at the time...or what they told the public...in plain, easy to read language. just the facts, ma-am.
found some old congressional records in this house i remodelled. from 1935. i think the intent was insulation...all that hot air, documented, huey long and folk...course, that was 1935...and the wcr was the 60s. big thick book full of what they knew at the time...or what they told the public...in plain, easy to read language. just the facts, ma-am.
August 8, 2008
First I want to explain, a book written about the death of an amazing man will never get a 5. That being said, it was an very non enlightening book. I was flabbergasted with the applied science. I am not sure how others feel, I have a tendency to not look at other reviews when I do one, but for myself, the book was amusing.
March 10, 2009
Actually I bought this for someone else. But, I have started to read it. The introduction reads like an attorney giving his compelling final statements...It wont be too long before the 50 years mandatory sealed records will be opened. Then maybe we will know what the truth is.
Sadly, I parted with this before finishing it. But I know where to find it!
Sadly, I parted with this before finishing it. But I know where to find it!
July 13, 2013
Following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, a government commission was created to investigate the assassination. This abridged report contains information about the shooting but many details are missing. An interesting fact is that most of the witnesses died within five years and information that would indicate a plot or additional perpetrators are missing.
October 30, 2011
It is the government's version of the Kennedy assassination. It would be like Adolf Hitler writing a book on the Holocaust. Interesting only from the perspective to read the actual story the people behind the assassination sold to the public.
August 17, 2016
A large collection of evidence that does not prove its primary assertions. Both source and incomplete investigation this served as the only legal record of the JFK assassination case until later Congressional investigations.
August 16, 2018
this is about how one of our Loser Presidents couldn't dodge a bullet and his brains went all over Jackie's nice pink coat. she musta gone round the bend, wearing that fuckin' shit on Air Force One, stinkin up the whole plane. today we expect a lot more from our first ladies. not classy!
February 4, 2019
I feel like The Warren Report gets a horrible reputation. It's a wonderful and iconic testament to the American government's lack of creativity. It's certainly not their first (or last) foray into the world of fiction, but by far their most notorious and far reaching.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews