General Discussion

DanTex

(20,709 posts)

69. That Warren passage is in Chapter 20 of the book.

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 09:34 PM

Nov 2013

Last edited Fri Nov 22, 2013, 09:49 AM - Edit history (1)

I have the Kindle version so I don't know the page number. It is not a quote by Warren, it is quote by the author of the book talking about how Warren felt.

The WC was in charged of investigating the JFK assassination. It was not a trial or a prosecution, and also Oswald was dead. There is not any evidence at all that they intentionally threw the investigation. Everything indicates that they were focused on fact-finding, and open to whatever conclusions came up.

I didn't say that anyone who questions the WC is a nut. I said that Mark Lane is a nut, and this is based on what I've read about him, both during the WC investigation, as well as later (e.g. Jim Jones). The point I was making is that if there were really an evidence-based case to make that the WC was wrong, then I should be able to find some non-nut author who presents this evidence without making spurious claims or basic factual or logical errors.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

154 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

My take on JFK Conspiracy Theories and Theorists. [View all] DanTex Nov 2013 OP

If I wanted to discredit a theory, I'd have nutjobs promote it. Scuba Nov 2013 #1

Maybe. But then where are the non-nutjobs? DanTex Nov 2013 #4

Someone once told me to trust in one who seeks the truth, and avoid any who claim to have found it. Scuba Nov 2013 #10

Not me. It is SOP for those convinced of the 'lone gunman' CT. Rex Nov 2013 #15

I've no idea what happened in Dallas that day .... Scuba Nov 2013 #16

That is why I catagorize it as a CT in and by itself. Rex Nov 2013 #21

Please show me why the USSR would want JFK dead. JackRiddler Nov 2013 #58

Oh sure, they just nearly walked into nuclear war Rex Nov 2013 #81

The Kremlin knew JFK was the one... JackRiddler Nov 2013 #82

Well maybe people should say a lone marxist killed the U.S. POTUS. Rex Nov 2013 #86

Other than that he was an intel asset JackRiddler Nov 2013 #89

How do we know he was a fake? Brainwashing Rex Nov 2013 #91

Lather, rinse, repeat. JackRiddler Nov 2013 #93

The Kremlin was the enemy back then, so we are supposed to take their word on it? Rex Nov 2013 #94

Oswald returned from Russia fairly distraught at the Soviet system. stopbush Nov 2013 #103

You have amazing psychic powers. JackRiddler Nov 2013 #106

Sigh... His passport was never taken away because he never returned to the Embassy to officially stopbush Nov 2013 #109

Congratulations for answering JackRiddler Nov 2013 #118

Yes, it's true. Who knows what a person is actually thinking? stopbush Nov 2013 #120

Non-nutjobs don't believe in conspiracy theories. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #60

what did oswald do in the texas theater before he was arrested tiny elvis Nov 2013 #75

You mean after he ducked in without buying a ticket? Despite having $13 in bills and some change? Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #80

You know that repeating and repeating a blanket statement doesn't make it true, right? GoneFishin Nov 2013 #92

Anything to contradict that? Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #97

They had to fake the evidence to support the lone gunman theory. GoneFishin Nov 2013 #100

No, there are autopsy photos. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #105

All film including unexposed rolls were confiscated by the FBI from everyone at the autopsy. n/t GoneFishin Nov 2013 #143

No, it wasn't Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #145

This proves your job is not about finding the truth. GoneFishin Nov 2013 #146

This is in the records of the HSCA investigation. It's quite easily confirmed. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #147

Not very discriminating if you think it supports your preconceived view. GoneFishin Nov 2013 #148

My view is based on the evidence. Not the other way round. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #149

One of the doctors at Parkland Hospital pangaia Nov 2013 #151

And he's not a forensic pathologist. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #152

Yeah. But he wasn't "interviewed" so he doesn't count. GoneFishin Nov 2013 #153

Let me try it and see if it works. GoneFishin Nov 2013 #95

you have discarded evidence tiny elvis Nov 2013 #98

Bullets, plural Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #101

Yeah, because no conspiracy ever happened. JackRiddler Nov 2013 #83

If they did they'd be supported by evidence, not contradicted by it. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #90

Yeah, because a group organized enough to kill the leader of the most powerful country in the GoneFishin Nov 2013 #96

Actually, they left plenty of trail. JackRiddler Nov 2013 #108

Agreed. But people who are constitutionally incapable of acknowledging that rich white guys with GoneFishin Nov 2013 #142

Mantra mantra mantra JackRiddler Nov 2013 #107

Conspiracies that happened: Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #110

Actually, among automotive historians... JackRiddler Nov 2013 #115

"hegemonic position" Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #116

That was fast and slick. JackRiddler Nov 2013 #119

I'd take you seriously if you could supply any evidence that supports your contentions. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #121

Constant invocations of "evidence" JackRiddler Nov 2013 #126

Evidence... DanTex Nov 2013 #128

Sure I do. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #133

DU REC! zappaman Nov 2013 #2

I have it, haven't finished it. It's very long. DanTex Nov 2013 #6

What was amazing to me is that I was told by all the books zappaman Nov 2013 #12

There seems to be some truth to the claim that the CIA and FBI weren't fully forthcoming. DanTex Nov 2013 #19

Not just because they like secrecy... zappaman Nov 2013 #20

"CYA had to have been the mandate." JackRiddler Nov 2013 #127

Who said Oswald was not the shooter? I believe he was. That is not the question, that is merely a sabrina 1 Nov 2013 #48

Uh huh. zappaman Nov 2013 #56

What they mostly got wrong was claiming Oswald acted alone according to the opinion of a majority sabrina 1 Nov 2013 #78

Not only do some think Oswald wasn't the shooter.... HooptieWagon Nov 2013 #66

Allow me to disabuse you easily: WinkyDink Nov 2013 #3

Except that conclusion was based on acoustical evidence that everyone knows was false. zappaman Nov 2013 #5

Right, but the acoustic evidence was later refuted. DanTex Nov 2013 #7

Just a little info on why I feel there was/is a cover-up at play zbdent Nov 2013 #8

Oh, didn't you know? Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #26

If Nixon was talking about being involved in any way in the assassination of Kennedy ... zbdent Nov 2013 #27

Whatever Nixon was talking about during those 18 1/2 minutes, Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #30

Interesting that you'd mention Nixon. nyquil_man Nov 2013 #74

Watergate also shows how journalism got into the ring better equipped than it was during the Kennedy ancianita Nov 2013 #111

Here's a few quotes from Nixon. roamer65 Nov 2013 #154

More Americans believe that Global Warming is not real than believe the WCR. KurtNYC Nov 2013 #9

I agree that most Americans believe in a conspiracy. DanTex Nov 2013 #13

Studies have shown that people seek out news and information they already agree with KurtNYC Nov 2013 #35

Sure, the majority is usually correct. DanTex Nov 2013 #51

A majority of Americans believe in a guardian angel that watches over them and keeps them safe. zappaman Nov 2013 #14

Are these the ones who doubt the WCR? JackRiddler Nov 2013 #84

Great answer! pacalo Nov 2013 #40

Are these the same Americans who are publicly JackRiddler Nov 2013 #61

Most Americans are completely ignorant of the evidence in the Kennedy assassinaton. Spider Jerusalem Nov 2013 #63

Here are questions I don't think are answered much upaloopa Nov 2013 #11

Evidence they achieved their ends? JackRiddler Nov 2013 #85

Historians will tell you that history's evidence gets killed and buried all the time, or else we ancianita Nov 2013 #17

You're a denier. I have no patience with people afraid to face the truth. duffyduff Nov 2013 #25

You're right about me, Stone and others being deniers. So be it. The truth will out. ancianita Nov 2013 #29

I didn't mean to imply that anyone who believes in a conspiracy was a nut. DanTex Nov 2013 #31

No harm no foul. However...All overturned evidence in any human arena is relevant. ancianita Nov 2013 #33

Fair Enough. And like I said in the OP, I've been reading about this for only a few weeks. DanTex Nov 2013 #49

No,we can't reject existing evidence. But it's not the whole truth.Thus, disputes that get dismissed ancianita Nov 2013 #68

Tell it, my sibling! JackRiddler Nov 2013 #87

Yup! The forensic evidence is fairly unequivocal. longship Nov 2013 #18

I have compared them with the creationists WRT evolution. duffyduff Nov 2013 #23

Yup! I was a Detroit News paperboy at the time. longship Nov 2013 #28

So who impersonated Oswald in the Mexico City phone call? Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #88

Mark Lane has done a lot of damage to the country. duffyduff Nov 2013 #22

Oswald.... RagAss Nov 2013 #24

Everything you have said is true. DanTex Nov 2013 #42

True. There is no evidence that he received support in any of the "stops" he had.... RagAss Nov 2013 #65

Everything you said also applies to the Warren Comm Conspiracy Theory BlueStreak Nov 2013 #32

The word "conspiracy" it is in wide use in this situation. DanTex Nov 2013 #34

He sure was the sole shooter...read my post above.... RagAss Nov 2013 #36

Even more reason why it is offensive BlueStreak Nov 2013 #37

I agree with you. The Warren Commission's mission was to come up with "official theory." ancianita Nov 2013 #39

Well, I didn't mean it to be offensive, only descriptive. DanTex Nov 2013 #41

I haven't seen anything I would call balanced BlueStreak Nov 2013 #70

There were no competing investigators to fight the evidence scrubbers of that analog time. There ancianita Nov 2013 #38

And considering that most of the principals are dead BlueStreak Nov 2013 #71

You're right. Vetting takes time, what with all the disinformation bot system at work digitally. ancianita Nov 2013 #72

You have only been looking at the assiassination for two weeks ... former9thward Nov 2013 #43

I don't claim to be an expert, but I have done some reading. DanTex Nov 2013 #47

Mark Lane has a fine history in the Civil Rights movement. former9thward Nov 2013 #54

It's not that just he was a lawyer for People's Temple, it's that he alleged that DanTex Nov 2013 #59

I didn't make the charge. former9thward Nov 2013 #62

Believing in a government conspiracy against the paradise of People's Temple makes a person a nut. DanTex Nov 2013 #64

Where is that Warren quote coming from? former9thward Nov 2013 #67

That Warren passage is in Chapter 20 of the book. DanTex Nov 2013 #69

With your mind frame any author who questions the WC is a nut. former9thward Nov 2013 #130

That's not true at all, and misrepresenting my argument doesn't help your case. DanTex Nov 2013 #131

JFK Conspiracy and the Case of Jim Garrison (1967) duffyduff Nov 2013 #44

Your ignoring Robbins Nov 2013 #144

Last night Newton Minow was on TV frazzled Nov 2013 #45

I wish I had seen it too. zappaman Nov 2013 #46

I just found the video of the interview! frazzled Nov 2013 #53

Bookmarked for later. zappaman Nov 2013 #57

K&R The Midway Rebel Nov 2013 #50

This is pretty much exactly how I feel. DanTex Nov 2013 #52

Yes, that leap of faith is akin to religion IMHO. The Midway Rebel Nov 2013 #55

I agree completely with your first sentence. However, there is plenty of room on the jerkwad train ScreamingMeemie Nov 2013 #76

I hate the term 'conspiracy theory'. A 'conspiracy guess' does not a theory make. Captain Stern Nov 2013 #73

then there is no good reason not to release all docs, unredacted scheming daemons Nov 2013 #102

Amen. That is something I've never expected to see in my lifetime. ancianita Nov 2013 #104

Maybe. Maybe not. Captain Stern Nov 2013 #132

if the CIA did illegal stuff 50 years ago, so what? scheming daemons Nov 2013 #134

I have spent fifty years following this. JimboBillyBubbaBob Nov 2013 #77

If you were objective about it, then how did you resolve all the inconsistencies? GoneFishin Nov 2013 #99

Honestly, there don't seem to be all that many inconsistencies. DanTex Nov 2013 #129

You accept the Warren Report. Oh well. A lot of your information is wrong though. n/t GoneFishin Nov 2013 #141

then explain the shit with Oswald and Mexico. Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #79

Oswald went to Mexico City to try and get a visa to go to Cuba. DanTex Nov 2013 #122

And who impersonated him on the phone to the Cuban & Soviet embassies? Why did the CIA cover it up? Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #137

From what I've read, the impersonation theory has been pretty soundly disproved. DanTex Nov 2013 #138

I think Oswald's story is bizarre, to say the least. Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #139

I agree completely. Bizarre is putting it mildly. DanTex Nov 2013 #140

Any public deprived of citizens' right to information of public concern is not in any way CT. This ancianita Nov 2013 #112

rev'rent tiny elvis Nov 2013 #114

So The House Committee Was Wrong I Guess colsohlibgal Nov 2013 #113

LBJ, Nixon, Gary Hart, William Cohen... JackRiddler Nov 2013 #117

The HSCA basically agreed with the WC about everything except the audio evidence. DanTex Nov 2013 #124

then releasing all docs, unredacted, should be no issue scheming daemons Nov 2013 #135

I would love to have the docs released. DanTex Nov 2013 #136

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #123

Well, not me. DanTex Nov 2013 #125

My Big Problem With Conspiracy Theories is This Wolf Frankula Nov 2013 #150