[Sample B: Approval/Signature Sheet] - George Mason University

In the end, a divided panel of politicians concluded there was a conspiracy, but
the defenders of the Warren Commission were not convinced. In his foreword to the
Bantam edition of the Committee’s report, New York Times journalist Tom Wicker
pounced on the panel’s schizophrenic findings. The House Committee had found,
Wicker noted, that “most of the Warren commission’s major conclusions were
unassailable” and that its panel of pathologists had upheld the “much disputed ‘single-
bullet’ theory.” 419 Wicker claimed the Committee’s report actually “blows away
virtually every conspiracy theory of real consequence” that he dismissively wrote had
been advanced by “hot eyed assassination buffs.” 420 The New York Times reporter
argued that the Committee also had failed to advance a believable theory about what
actually occurred in the alleged conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy.
Yet, the Committee did find troubling associations between the alleged assassin
and anti-Castro Cubans and underworld figures. The Congressmen raised new questions
about the assassination, not only through the controversial acoustical evidence, but also in
exploring some of the associations of Oswald that would become part of the assassination
culture. In many respects, the Committee accepted the Warren Commission’s version of
Oswald’s life: he was a Marxist loner with no connection to American or Soviet
intelligence. Unlike the Warren Commission, the Committee did not engage in any
speculation about his mental make-up and his psychological motivation for the crime and
focused on Oswald’s political beliefs. According to the report, Oswald's "actions and
419
Tom Wicker, “Forward,” House Report, xxii.
420
Wicker, xxiii-xxiv.
187